I was detained at school today (Aug 29 2007)

[10 Ring Tao]

I'm putting my money on their warrant being bogus. How convenient, a verbal warrant, with no paper trail. I'm sure they figured some dumb punk college kid wouldn't be able to tell the difference, or do anything about it.

Make sure you get some proof that the warrant was given and was legit. If they can't cough it up, raise hell.

 

[DRZinn]

This was not even a "man with a gun" call. It was a "man looking at electronic pictures of guns" call.

This is key. If someone said he had a gun, that would have warranted more or less exactly what happened. But this is just asinine.

 

[CWL]

I'm putting my money on their warrant being bogus.

Can't agree. You will not be able to make any arrest & prosecution stick if the evidence was obtained illegally. Illegal search & seizure will get any case thrown out. That'd really suck if you are trying to stop a real Cho copycat.

 

[ceetee]

"Verbal Warrant".

Harumph.

My understanding of the warrant process is this: An officer has PC to suspect that a search of a particular place will unearth solid evidence of a crime. THAT OFFICER is required to swear out an affidavit and appear in fron tof a judge to justify his PC. If the judge agrees, he signs the warrant prepared by the officer, and the world is all bunnies, rainbows, and cotton candy.

If that officer lacks the time to physically go to the judge, warrant application in hand, he can relay the facts of his PC to another SWORN officer, and that officer can go to the judge.

Either way, the judge must put his John Halfcrocked on the dotted line. That second officer can call the first officer back and say, "We have the warrant, go ahead and search", but the paper must exist. If I were the OP, I'd find the best attorney I could that will do the work for nothing up front, and take it to them, if for no other reason than to teach them about doing things the right way versus doing them the wrong way. We've already read that this one innocent incident may damage the student's reputation irreparably, causing vengeful liberal teachers to lower his grades and possibly hurt his future earning potential. Take it to them, just to teach them a lesson.

 

[Lucky]

Why not call the NRA legal fund? Membership has its privileges and all that?

 

[Soybomb]

Did you attempt to speak to any attorneys, including the free lawyers your campus probably offers, or 2nd amendment groups prior to posting all of this on the internet? The only way to turn this into anything more than stuff people talk about about on the internet is to hit 'em where it hurts with a wallet draining law suit.

 

[Cosmoline]

Welcome to Amerika, comrades. Good lord.

Well you did good refusing consent.

I’m not sure who reported me as a dangerous guy

You should care about this. I'd suggest doing a FOIA. The reason is simple--to obtain evidence in support of a cause of action. California sucks in most areas, but it's the plaintiff's paradise. Go see a lawyer and get things in gear. The tort isn't so much false reporting, I suspect, but defamation. Heck there are about a dozen causes of action in CA that might fit. Find out who did this, expose them in public and grind them into a pulp. Otherwise it's just going to keep happening more and more. Maybe to you, certainly to others.

 

[cassandrasdaddy]

as far as using the frree lawyers at school you may find that they won't handle any action against the school thats been my experience with georgetown law school

 

[Autolycus]

I agree with Cosmoline. Get a copy of your warrant and all the paperwork regarding this incident. Its time that people started stepping up when it comes to things like this.

 

[novaDAK]

I've been more careful with my laptop at school now. I've been visiting THR and TFL a little more than GT now mainly because the forum setup. Here and at TFL it's just a plain green/white (or blue) forum layout. At GT, they have the big glock at the top of every page, with many gun pics as people's (and my own) avatars.
Now, so far I've only used my laptop in my dorm, and my roommate isn't anti, but I don't want to give him the wrong impression (that I'm a nutjob or something) or take any risks like that at all. I still do visit GT frequently, but only when he's gone from the room.

I also am at many dodge sites so that also adds many car enthusiast forums into the mix for confusion (if someone sees THR they'll just think I'm on another car forum )

 

[ravencon]

In such "conversations" with LE it is best to say as little as possible and use lots of qualifiers (such as "to the best of my recollection...") when you do say anything.

The feds now prosecute people for lying to their agents (remember Martha Stewart). Of course, the feds can lie to you and that is legally permissible. Some have rights that are more equal than others.

It is always best to let your lawyer do your talking. If your lawyer isn't present, say very little and don't consent to anything.

 

[luzyfuerza]

This story illustrates why I cried for joy when I finally crossed the Nevada border on my move out of the PRK.

Beautiful state. Too many paranoid, nosey people who feel that they have the right to run your life for you.

 

[littlegator]

Luzyfuerza:

This story illustrates why I cried for joy when I finally crossed the Nevada border on my move out of the PRK.

Into or out of Nevada? I'm from Vegas - I'm sorry if your gone...

In a nutshell (obviously not intended as legal advice - so don't take it as such ):
The "informant's tip" that the police received may or may not have provided sufficient probable cause for the police to obtain the warrant. It depends. Usually, the Court will look to whether the informant is one that was used before (has a history ratting out people) or has other corrorative indicia of reliability. I think it is safe to assume that your "informant" was only of transient nature (another student with no history giving evidence to police), and therefore, not historically reliable. The police would then have to corroborate the informant with evidence from your posts. Obviously, they didn't have time to look up the posts before they searched the bag.

The pragmatic problem herein, is that the police will most likely get the warrant (or not), search the bag, then find out later that their seizure was unconstitutional under the 4th Amend. Even there, I doubt very seriously that the lower courts, i.e. - the municiple, justice, or district courts in the local and county seats, would overturn the search and seizure. We're talking about elected judges who in some cases are barely out of law school or who have never practiced criminal or constitutional law before. These types of things don't get their fair constitutional consideration until they are looked at by the State Supremes at least. In other words, the police get what they want unless you are willing to take the case all the way baby.

The fact that you didn't give them consent to search the bag was a nice touch. Consent means waiver of your rights. I would not have consented to the search of my body though, either. Police could have done so anyway, but why make their harassment any easier. For the body search, otherwise known as a "stop and frisk", police only need "reasonable suspicion". In other words, not much. An uncorroborated informants tip would have been enough.

There may be claims against the department, school, and informant. I'm not sure what your nationality or ethnic origin is, but depending on your race, etc., your claims might be further legitimized. If you're interested in pursuing it, seek some local legal help from someone who practices in discrimination cases, police brutality, 1983 claims, etc.

 

[Pilgrim]

I’ve heard of telephone warrants, but who’s to say they didn’t lie about the telephone warrant. If they had told me that someone had reported me advocating illegal behavior on an online forum, I could have believed it. But when they said that such a report constituted PC when they didn’t even check to verify such a claim (OP stated that he did no such thing), then I would have probably pegged them as liars and not believed the “phone warrant” line. The OP even offered to show them the posts that initially spurred this incident.

My question is: do they have to show me the warrant?

It's been awhile since I've done these things, but my recollection of telephone warrants is they have to be transferred to paper, filed with the court, and a report made to the court of what was found in the course of the search.

If you want to have fun, check with the court and see if a paper copy of the affidavit and warrant was filed.

Pilgrim

 

[AJAX22]

I'm working on getting copies of all the information, I should have it by friday or monday at the latest.

I dont want to make any waves untill I have a copy of the report, I don't want it to be revised or adjusted prior to filing.

Once I have it, we'll see if there was a warrent issued and procede from there.

I will post copies of the report when I get it.

 

[kurtmax]

When I first came to my university, I hid my firearms enthusiasm. I had originally planned to start carrying when I got my permit (it's not illegal, just against school policy).

Since then I've become much more vocal about RKBA and such things. I wouldn't feel comfortable carrying now, since some yahoo cop might decide to do a terry stop because of 'crazy gun talk' (You must be crazy if you talk about guns, eh?) It wouldn't be illegal to carry, but I'm sure the cops would report it to the University in their infinite wisdom (can they even tell other people about stuff like that??!)

Anyhow, I do frequent firearms sites at school. Mostly thr, tfr, and oc.org. I also talk about firearms quite a bit when I hang out in the student union, although, not as much as computer games and programming I've started taking people to the range, but most of the people I know aren't anti-gun anyways. If anything they don't really care about the subject... We also talk about firearm politics as well, and generally most people agree with me, except for a Canadian guy (he doesn't count though.. right ).

But anyways, I don't think my character is all that questionable. I've already had people tell me, "It's a good thing someone like you owns all those guns rather than some crazy murderous nut!"

 

[davinci]

I'm going to add this to my list of reasons to avoid California.
I'm sorry that you got hassled, I'm sure the incident must have been very tramatic.

As a side note, even if they did find a weapon....you would only be violating concealed carry in a gun free zone. This is at most a misdemeanor in my state (when on state property) and I've never heard of anyone being prosecuted for carrying into a gun-free store or non-state property.

It takes 5 policeman at least an hour out of their day to make sure that you don't have a gun. Interesting. I guess they're all on edge after VT. If posting on an internet gun forum is considered "suspicious activity" then I guess I should probably go ahead and get a lawyer now.

 

[CDignition]

IF the LEO lied about the warrant, and you refused to consent to search, then anything they find is not admissible in court. You rights will EVENTUALLY be honored, but im sure you would have been arrested, and had some court dates, etc first.(ASSUMING they found a gun and lied about a warrant being issued)

 

[AJAX22]

I'm not having a nice day

I went in to pick up the report today.

I had been almost exactly 9 24 hour periods since the report was filed, so I had figured that it should be available. (they had told me to come back in 7-10 days and 9 days seems to be plenty.

Well guess what.... I show up today and they don't want to give me the report. In the words of the people in the back room "He's not getting it today" I don't know if they think I'm deaf or stupid, but a sickly sweet smile doesn't cover up the feeling of being jerked around. And it doesn't mean that I can't hear the conversations you're having a few yards away from me (the glass is bulletproof, not soundproof)

Apparently it should be ready on the 12th (mind you this was originally filed last wednesday the 29th. Apparently I have to wait 10 SCHOOL days (the receptionists words not mine) for a copy of the report....

If I show up on wednesday (TWO WEEKS after the report was initiated) and find out that I have to wait an extra day because a federal holiday occurred during my "10 school day" wait I believe I will be mildly upset.

I made a special trip to school today to get the report (I don't have class on friday) so I'm not happy about this turn of events.

I remained polite and didn't make waves, but its getting ridiculous.

Does anyone know if it is actually 7-10 business days you have to wait for a report or 7-10 24 hour periods? I'd like to know if I am just being paranoid or if I'm getting jerked around. (you think that they'd have mentioned it to me when they explained it the first time if I had to wait a full 10 business days)

 

[sacp81170a]

I don't know about their (campus police) procedures, but I can't go home after my shift until I file all my incident and contact reports, let alone search warrants and arrest reports. Something smells here. Verbal notification of a warrant is okay if you receive it from another sworn officer, but the warrant has to exist and be signed by a judge in the first place. 20 minutes to get a warrant to search a student's bag? I get reamed if I take more than 15 minutes on a traffic stop unless I have good PC. The fact that someone told them you 'might' have a gun without a positive report that they had seen one just isn't enough. It rises to reasonable suspicion, but not probable cause. Lawyer up.

 

[poor_richard]

I don't know about their (campus police) procedures, but I can't go home after my shift until I file all my incident and contact reports, let alone search warrants and arrest reports. Something smells here. Verbal notification of a warrant is okay if you receive it from another sworn officer, but the warrant has to exist and be signed by a judge in the first place. 20 minutes to get a warrant to search a student's bag? I get reamed if I take more than 15 minutes on a traffic stop unless I have good PC. The fact that someone told them you 'might' have a gun without a positive report that they had seen one just isn't enough. It rises to reasonable suspicion, but not probable cause. Lawyer up.

I never did buy the line that they had a warrant based on their described behavior. However, I also understand that my knowledge is quite limited on this type of situation. It's just they're word that there is actually an issued warrant to search the bag, just as it was they're word that someone reported him for making statements that he supposedly didn't' make.

Does a phone warrant mean they can just search his bag without/or before showing him the the warrant or, some proof of an actual warrant existing?



He obviously can't stop 5-6 armed men from taking possession of his bag and searching it (with or without the warrant). But are they required to show the warrant, upon request of the suspect before the search?

 

[sacp81170a]

duplicate post

 

[sacp81170a]

Does a phone warrant mean they can just search his bag without/or before showing him the the warrant or, some proof of an actual warrant existing?

Warrants are pretty much all alike in the procedures for notification. If, for instance, I'm notified by a dispatcher that there is a warrant for your arrest, that constitutes good faith in me taking you into custody. I'm trusting the dispatcher to give me good information. Same thing from another sworn officer for a search warrant. I don't need to have it in hand, I just have to be notified by another law enforcement agency that it exists and that I know the particulars(i.e., the time, place, object of the search, etc.).

If there was a warrant, it's okay to make the notification by phone (there really is no such thing as a 'phone' warrant) or by radio. That's part of what makes it sound fishy to me. Every piece of official documentation such as incident reports, complaints, warrants, etc., is a matter of public record as long as they aren't part of an ongoing investigation or an undercover operation. Sounds like a little CYA going on here.

 

[princewally]

If it ever happens again, remember, if you're not 'free to go', you ARE under arrest.

 

[ceetee]

As I'm not sure about the policies of the campus police, yo might want to take this as worth just what you paid for it...

That 7-10 days nonsense is just so the officer has time to handwrite the report, turn it in to a transcriptionist who types it up and gives it back to the officer for his signature, who gives it to a supervisor for his scrutiny, who gives it to a supervisor for his approval, etc, etc. Eventually, if there are no more supervisors who need to scrawl their initials on the report, it gets filed in a cabinet somewhere. Once it's been approved for filing, you can request a copy (and usually have to pay a per-page fee for the copies made). If any of the supervisors up the line reject the report for any reason (improper language, or grammar, or spelling, or maybe they just think the first officer need to "do it over", they route it back down the chain until it eventually reaches the officer and starts up the chain again. Usually, that only happens if the officer wrote something so pigheaded that it amounts to a confession of violating someone's rights...

That's been my experence, anyway.