My house was broken into..........

[Duke of Doubt]

Now THERE'S a recipe for a lasting marriage, Bosshoff.

An alarm system is not a security system, it is a neighborhood noise nuisance.

 

[TRGRHPY]

`Holy crap! That officer was there to investigate a possible burglary. There is no right on his part to force the owner to open anything, much less a locked safe. "In the interest of safety" is not a search warrant, which is exactly what he needs if he wants you to open something that is locked.

I honestly mean no offense to your police friend. However, average officers know little about Constitutional Law...basically enough to allow them to conduct their NORMAL duties (unless they have advanced education beyond the academy). This is a different situation that the average officer probably does not know the correct answer to. That doesn't necessarily mean that the officer here was being malicious in any way, but good intentions doesn't mean that he was right either.

Here is the catch. Is this something that is worth your time? Without saying so, I would imagine that the officers in the chain-of-command that you spoke with probably felt that it was wrong, but that there isn't much that can be done about it other than educating the officer involved and/or other officers as well. You can file a complaint...it will be looked into...but there isn't really a punishment that corresponds with what happened. It will possibly be looked at as a potential training opportunity. It just depends on whether or not you want to pursue it. NOBODY can stop you from making a complaint...period. It is just a personal decision that is up to you to make, and no one else. I'm not sure that there is a right or wrong answer here with regards to filing a complaint. I can tell you that officers will make mistakes at their job...all of us do. Good luck with what you decide, and sorry to hear that your home was broken into. Good job for keeping your firearms locked in a safe.

Your wife gave him permission AND a key to look inside the safe.

Once you consent, you can't take it back.

This is not a correct statement. You CAN at any moment for any reason revoke any permission that you have given the police and they have to listen (assuming that they did not find anything that would warrant probable cause during the initial consentual search. If you start to give a voluntary statement, you can stop at any time. If you give consent to search a vehicle and change your mind, you can at any time and they have to stop, unless they find PC and obtain a SW. YOU ALWAYS retain your rights.

 

[akodo]

IMHO, the officer did nothing wrong.

Your wife gave him permission AND a key to look inside the safe.

Once you consent, you can't take it back.

And THAT's why NOBODY else has the combo to my safe

WRONG.

Consent is just that, something you CAN take back.

You can give consent, and then think better of it and tell the cops to stop.

You can wave your right to a lawyer and start talking to the cops, and then think better of it and request a lawyer and the cops must stop questioning you.

However, the only 'stick' is that any evidence turned up after you tell the cop to stop looking or any statements you make once you tell the cop you want a lawyer become inadmissable in court. But as you aren't going to court, there is no 'stick'

 

[JWarren]

An alarm system is not a security system, it is a neighborhood noise nuisance.

Bull.

An alarm is the timer on the criminal. My alarm calls the police and has a cellular back-up in case my phone lines are cut.

When I am broken into, a criminal can expect that they have X minutes before the police OR *I* arrive (I work 5 miles from my house and the alarm company calls my cell phone if it goes off.)

The amount of time before the police, my dad, or I get there is nowhere near enough to get into my safe and get out. Even if they are fast, there is only one private road in and out. They aren't getting far in the amount of time they have.


If I have to be a bit of a nuisance to my neighbors when I get broken into, well... that is just something that they will have to live with.


You get broken into once and you will decide it's worth a bit of being a nuisance. I was broken into in 2006. No arrests, no property recovered.


-- John

 

[Duke of Doubt]

Heh-heh. So you can tell the cop to search all he wants, but when he gets to the trapdoor where your dope is hidden, you can throw him out of your house and flush like there's no tomorrow?

{S BUZZER

Wrong.

 

[JImbothefiveth]

An alarm system is not a security system, it is a neighborhood noise nuisance.

Some of them have monitoring, and will call the police. However, this usually takes a long time, maybe 80 seconds before they call you, and then they might call your cell phone if noone answers, and then they might call the cops. But, it should at least slow down a burglur.

 

[Duke of Doubt]

As to buzzer alarms, five minutes might as well be a year. Burglar will be gone in 30 seconds. He knows where to look, he's cased the place through the windows already.

 

[JWarren]

My alarm has a false alarm on Dec. 20. I was very happy with how fast they called me in relation to when my parents heard it go off.

As to buzzer alarms, five minutes might as well be a year. Burglar will be gone in 30 seconds. He knows where to look, he's cased the place through the windows already.

They can case all they want. Anything they can get in 30 seconds is replaceable by insurance. Anything I am REALLY worried about losing will take more than that.

Thus the alarm is still valuable. Alarms should be used in conjuction with other aspects of security such as safes.


-- John

 

[ravonaf]

You can file a complaint...it will be looked into...but there isn't really a punishment that corresponds with what happened.

Of course there is. Lawsuits are filed every day for citizens that have their constitutional rights abused. If it was me I would sue the individual officer and the department separately. People have rights and there should be consequences to breaking those rights. Even the smallest abuse should not be tollerated.

 

[TRGRHPY]

Heh-heh. So you can tell the cop to search all he wants, but when he gets to the trapdoor where your dope is hidden, you can throw him out of your house and flush like there's no tomorrow?

{S BUZZER

Wrong.

Actually, this is correct. You should educate yourself to your rights, otherwise someone will be willing to violate them.

 

[Duke of Doubt]

[I'm not going to give a switcheroo the satisfaction of leaving messages in reply up when the poster to whom I was responding edits his post after I post my reply, rendering my response an obnoxious appearing non-sequitur. However, the substance of the exchange was the poster's implication that all I had was an opinion, to which I responded that actually, I have a law license.]

 

[ravonaf]

Actually, I have a law license and practice criminal defense. Do you?

Where exactly did you get your degree?

http://goliath.ecnext.com/coms2/gi_0199-4052538/Revoking-consent-to-search-Legal.html

Unlike situations involving an individual limiting the scope of a consent search when the consent is first given, questions involving the withdrawal of consent arise after an individual already has consented to the search. The prevailing view (4) is that an individual may revoke a previously given consent to search at any time prior to the discovery of the items sought. (5) In United States v. Dyer, (6) the U. S. Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit stated that "[C]learly a person may limit or withdraw his consent to a search and the police must honor such limitations. But, where a suspect does not withdraw his valid consent to a search for illegal substances before they are discovered, the consent remains valid and the substances are admissible as evidence." (7)

 

[TRGRHPY]

Quote:
You can file a complaint...it will be looked into...but there isn't really a punishment that corresponds with what happened.

Of course there is. Lawsuits are filed every day for citizens that have their constitutional rights abused. If it was me I would sue the individual officer and the department separately. People have rights and there should be consequences to breaking those rights. Even the smallest abuse should not be tollerated.

Look, everyone wants to sue over something, especially when it isn't them that the incident involves. The simple fact is, what grounds do you have to sue? Anyone can sue, but that doesn't mean it will even get past the first step. There has to be damage done. Even thought civil courts are different, you still show that you are out something. Emotional distress is not gonna cut it. There are just too many reasons why a lawsuit wouldn't fly in this case. #1 being that in almost any instance, the department and especially individual officer is not liable when a crime has not been committed. If you think that you have the answers, then by all means, get with the OP and get retained as council. Let us know which way the money flows.

 

[Duke of Doubt]

I don't practice in the Seventh Circuit (I escaped Posner years ago -- hint).

Exceptions to revoked consent abound.

 

[ravonaf]

The simple fact is, what grounds do you have to sue?

Violation of the 4th amendment to the United States Constitution.

The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.

 

[sturmgewehr667]

cops, to serve and protect, what a load of bs, id have sued the department as soon as possible

 

[TRGRHPY]

You have a law license, practice criminal defense and don't know that a person can revoke permission at any time regardless of reason?

Don't have a license, and last time I checked, I didn't need one to be correct.

I graduate this summer with a BS in CJ. Search is a very interesting topic that I have enjoyed studying.

 

[orionengnr]

Of course there is. Lawsuits are filed every day for citizens that have their constitutional rights abused. If it was me I would sue the individual officer and the department separately. People have rights and there should be consequences to breaking those rights. Even the smallest abuse should not be tollerated.

I'll go along with that, for starters. If you are an NRA member I would contact them--they are known for taking on cases that establish or reinforce precedent (New Orleans, anyone?).

If you are not an NRA member, 1) shame on you and 2) contact them anyway, they are pro-gun owners' rights.

 

[TRGRHPY]

Ayone can rant off the Const. What case law do you have, Mr. Attorney? That is what the Judge is gonna ask for. Btw, give both sides of the argument for the sake of honesty.

And what exactly are you going to ask for?

 

[Duke of Doubt]

I don't know what your undergraduate instructors have taught you, but revocation of consent is not as cut and dried, trust me, as saying, "Oops! Too close, John Jacob Jungleheimer Schmidt. Get out!" That doesn't work, at least in state and federal courts around here. Maybe it does in Posner's World.

 

[JWarren]

You have a law license, practice criminal defense and don't know that a person can revoke permission at any time regardless of reason?

Don't have a license, and last time I checked, I didn't need one to be correct.

Note to self:

RESEARCH your attorney's qualifications and record before paying the retainer.


-- John

 

[Duke of Doubt]

This forum needs a better "quote" system, or at least one we can use more often. I can't tell who is responding to whom.

 

[ravonaf]

Ayone can rant off the Const. What case law do you have, Mr. Attorney? That is what the Judge is gonna ask for. Btw, give both sides of the argument for the sake of honesty.

Case law already stated above. The wife gave the consent. Then the consent was revoked. Yet the LEO continued to perform an illegal search. There are literally thousands of cases of departments being sued for similar violations. They aren't hard to find.

 

[DeathByCactus]

File a lawsuit, don't expect to make friends on the next burglary. Dunno.

 

[TRGRHPY]

Of course there is. Lawsuits are filed every day for citizens that have their constitutional rights abused. If it was me I would sue the individual officer and the department separately. People have rights and there should be consequences to breaking those rights. Even the smallest abuse should not be tollerated.

I'll go along with that, for starters. If you are an NRA member I would contact them--they are known for taking on cases that establish or reinforce precedent (New Orleans, anyone?).

If you are not an NRA member, 1) shame on you and 2) contact them anyway, they are pro-gun owners' rights.

Lawsuits are filed...and dismissed. Some are taken and won..or lost. The ones that are won have actual damages of some sort. Having your feeling hurt is not a winnable case. I didn't say that the officer was right,,,in fact I stated the opposite.

Seriously, and I don't mean this to be curt, will you please contact the NRA and then report back what they tell you.

The fact of the matter is that we don't want our rights violated. You can either be one of the problems with this country and try to sue for millions, or you can try work in some way with police (especially if they have some sort of COPS program) to educate them as to what is and isn't a valid search. You can be part of the problem or part of the solution.