On police searches of cars

[Deanimator]

The handlers dont carry illegal drugs to fool the dogs, and the dogs are walked around the outside of the car, if the dog indicated on your door it would be the closest door to the illegal substance.

I suppose cops never do this either:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kathryn_Johnston

Saying that police NEVER frame innocent people or invent evidence is just as much of a lie as saying they ALWAYS do.

Memorize:
When the police stop you they are NOT your friends.
NEVER consent to ANYTHING.
Provide whatever verbal or written (driver's license, insurance, registration, CCW credential, etc.) ID is REQUIRED by LAW. Do NOT provide anything NOT required BY LAW.
"Am I free to leave officer?"
"No? I have nothing further to say without my lawyer present."
Keep your mouth SHUT until you have a lawyer present.

Cops not only lie, they are allowed BY LAW to lie when questioning a suspect... whether he KNOWS he's a suspect or not.

Unless you've got so much experience with the cops that you can unerringly tell whether you're a suspect or are being lied to, just keep your mouth shut and don't consent to ANYTHING.

 

[rc109a]

Of course someone is always going to go to another topic to continue bashing cops. This is becoming typical. The question was about searching vehicles and not how police are going to frame you in your house.

 

[Deanimator]

Of course someone is always going to go to another topic to continue bashing cops. This is becoming typical. The question was about searching vehicles and not how police are going to frame you in your house.

So what you're saying is that police would plant evidence in a house but NOT in or on a vehicle?

That's "reasoning" in the same sense that the plastic display meals that Japanese restaurants use as menus are "food".

Somebody made a COMPLETELY unsupportable assertion. Just admit it and move on.

Smart people make sure that they minimize their exposure to police misconduct to the greatest degree possible by not EVER consenting to ANYTHING and keeping their mouths shut until they have a lawyer present.

 

[mljdeckard]

Deepsouth, that's the reason for dash cams. These days an officer doesn't want to be in court with your word against his. HONEST COPS DON'T MIND THIS. They LIKE having their butt covered.

Terry is the most abused decision by cops. As was stated above, if a cop uses Terry v Ohio to frisk you, he must have an articulable reason. "I had a hunch" is NOT an articulable reason. "I search everyone because I am in fear for my safety" is not an articulable reason. The infuriating part is, they get away with it often enough to keep doing it anyway.

 

[coloradokevin]

Yes, there is the Terry exception for acticuable reasonable suspicion but this is not typically seen in a traffic situation.

And, if the officer is conducting himself within the bounds of Terry, it will be a search limited to that which is necessary to determine whether or not the subject is carrying a weapon.

Honestly, when I've had situations where I've been worried about a weapon on a person, I will remove them from the vehicle and conduct a pat-down on the person (outermost clothing, searching for weapons only). Once I've done that, I see no reason to put that person back into a place where I haven't searched, which may contain weapons I might not easily find. In other words, if I pull them out of a car to search them, I don't put them back in the car during the stop. I'll often have them sit on the curb during this time. As such, I personally don't ever try to articulate a search of a vehicle by the Terry decision alone.

 

[ultramag44]

Deanimater said:

Cops not only lie, they are allowed BY LAW to lie when questioning a suspect... whether he KNOWS he's a suspect or not.

When the police knowly make an untrue statement to a suspect, the legal term is 'Suterfuge'. It's reconized by the courts as a lawful tactic.

The vast, overwelming majority of law enforcement personnel are great men and women. I just don't see them as looking to frame you for 'kicks & grins'.

Granted, law enforcement will treat persons different depending on the neighborhood they are called to. The ONLY time you see police in my area, the ONLY question is: "Was it a heart attack or a stroke?" Do the police feel safe in my neighborhood? You bet.

In the case of traffic stops, 'profiling' does come into play. The police can tell you statistically who is most likely to threaten their safety (of course this info is never in the papers or on the news, some folks might get their feelings hurt, the truth doesn't count, being PC does).

IMHO, the only time you need to refuse the resonable request of a law enforcement officer, or get behind a lawer is if you committed, or are in the act of commiting a criminal act.

 

[Deanimator]

IMHO, the only time you need to refuse the resonable request of a law enforcement officer, or get behind a lawer is if you committed, or are in the act of commiting a criminal act.

Your opinion may be humble, but it's neither wise nor well informed.

Tell everyone again what crimes Richard Jewell and the Duke lacrosse team committed?

Don't EVER consent to ANYTHING.

Keep your mouth shut until you have a lawyer present.

Advise to the contrary is either erroneous or malicious.

 

[yenchisks]

buck snort said:if a dog indicates positive for drugs,guns or explosives,they have a right to search. when were having guns illegal ,and give them the right to search..

 

[Deanimator]

buck snort said:if a dog indicates positive for drugs,guns or explosives,they have a right to search. when were having guns illegal ,and give them the right to search..

Depends upon where you are.

There's damned near no way to legally have a gun in your car in Chicago, since there's damned near no way to legally have a gun at all, at least not a handgun.

 

[rc109a]

Not every cop is dishonest and trying to get you. Many obey the law and are just trying to do the job for which you pay them for. There will always be those who are dishonest and trying to improve their stats. Those get caught. The rest pay for their crimes. It happens in every single profession. By telling everyone not to trust the cops is like telling children not to trust priest (minsters, or what every religious person you can think of)because they molest children. A little common sense goes a long way in dealing with LEO's. I am sorry some of you have become so untrusting of LEO's. If there was something I could do to change it, then I would. Other then that, just keep your nose clean and use your head.

 

[Deanimator]

Not every cop is dishonest and trying to get you.

And how can you tell on the street, which one is which?

You CAN'T.

Most hitchhikers aren't rapists or serial killers. Would you recommend that your wife or daughter pick them up?

If I don't trust strange cops by the side of the road, it may hurt a cop's feelings.

If I do trust strange cops by the side of the road, I could lose [at least temporarily] my freedom and what little money I have.

You may want to go home alive, but I want to go home FREE.

My freedom and finances trump your feelings EVERY time.

 

[taprackbang]

The old "for the officer's safety" bogeyman refuses to die!

+++1!!

Never consent to search. LEOs cannot be trusted anymore.
They're too busy trying to justify their existence. ($$$$$)

 

[Deanimator]

Never consent to search. LEOs cannot be trusted anymore.

Most of them probably can. Can you tell WHICH ones?

I can't.

It's like picking up snakes in a jungle.

Beats the crap out of me which ones are poisonous.

A herpetologist has a lot better chance of knowing than I do.

Which cops are honest and which ones aren't?

Beats the crap out of me.

That's why I have a lawyer.

If you can't tell the difference between a corn snake and a coral snake, would you run around picking up every snake you saw?

 

[Jeff White]

This one's done before it degenerates any farther...