Toddler Leads Deputies To 1,700 Pounds Of Pot

Status
Not open for further replies.
If there was a unattended 2 year old on the premises, that would seem to me, enough justification for the police to look further to see where the adults were.

A lot of people are overlooking the possibility of child abuse in order to to stick up for the alleged drug dealers.
 
Leaving a 2 yo unattended to the point he or she locks themselves in a car is reason enought to put these folks in jail. I'd hate to think they were punishing the kid in some way and the adults locked the child in the car.
Either way look at it for what it is, a half million dollar lesson in parenting.

Don't know what the temp was in that area that day but if not for ONSTAR the kid might have died.

Cuff'em, stuff'em and throw away the key.

S-
 
They might also have called in a dog to check the area, and the dog would have alerted on the trailer.
Click to expand...
1700#? The dog wouldn't have just alerted, he'd have had an orgasm! :eek: :evil: :evil:

So then you're saying the police, as long as they have a really good reason, should be able to search your house without a warrant.
Click to expand...
In the immortal words of Sgt Hulka, Lighten Up, Francis! The paper doesn't say they had a warrant, but it doesn't say they didn't, either. They probably did.

Oh, and, by the way, the answer to your question is Yes the police can search your house without a warrant if they have a really good reason. It's called exigent circumstances, and it's narrowly defined, but it's the law.
 
How about for child abandonment?

And at that much weed, they probably qualify as a manufacturer, and you could get them on OSHA violations.
Click to expand...

Who cares? No one was harmed in any way.
 
That's an assumption. We really dont know the rest of the story, but 1,500 lbs aint for personal use. Somebody moving that kinda weight, you'll have a hard time convincing me that they are just harmless recreational drug users hassled by The Man. People have been "hurt" over less weed than that.
 
Must be depressing enforcing drug laws, knowing that you're work solves nothing and is essentially useless.
Click to expand...
Not really. I'm sure TPTB have only the "true believers" doing that work.

Who cares? No one was harmed in any way
Click to expand...
A child locked up in a car on a warm day isn't harmed? Ohhhh, the child hadn't suffered harm YET. Is that not as serious as pointing a gun at someone at not pulling the trigger? Why not, nobody's been harmed.

While I think the pot itself is a non-crime, locking the child in the car was a crime and I would expect the cops to enter the house looking for the parents. Since I doubt seriously 1700lbs of pot would not emit an odor, nor would the house be free of any other drug paraphanalia, I'm sure they had probable cause that the article isn't sharing with us (besides the more serious crime of locking a child in a car on a warm day).

Chris
 
I recently seized 30 ounces which is a little over a pound
Click to expand...


Here I was, thinking that 16 ounces were in a pound. :neener:

Couldn't help but poke fun a bit, otherwise I'm simply staying out of this thread.
 
Copyright 2005 by TheNewMexicoChannel.com. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed.
Click to expand...
Anyone else find the inclusion of this bit amusingly ironic?

Anyway, on-topic, as someone who's more than happy to loudly blather on about everything he perceives as wrong with the law enforcement system in this country, this seems perfectly legit to me. 1700 pounds of weed? That much marijuana is going to take up kind of a lot space. When the article says "a large trailer," I'm guessing it means as in "semi-articulated truck trailer," which, if parked next to your one-car-garage bungalow might be a little suspicious, when combined with a child abandoned in a vehicle and the overwhelming stench of dope.

I'm all for demanding PC before allowing searches, but if that's not PC for possession with intent to sell, I have no idea what might be. And since the article isn't raising a hue and cry about no warrant, I'm guessing they had a warrant for the search, based on the above.

Sound completely open and above-board to me.
 
I recently seized 30 ounces
Click to expand...

ok joke about it being 2 pounds aside=

heheh how about you guys start sending yer illegal product over here where the cops have to protect our weed like everyting else!!!

-we just got to set up a transporter beam to avoid the interstate commerce!!

how mad does that make you LE's that it is legal here, that most pot busts end in returning the weed to rightful owner??????

or do you think it sohuld be legal?
 
Again, lighten up. I really doubt legalized pot in Berkeley is making any of our resident LEO's gnash their teeth in frustration.
:rolleyes:
 
Thorn726,

I'll tell you what. You tell me where you keep all your pot, I'll send some other federal agents over to weigh it - not to seize it. Then we will charge you the federal tax on it, by the lowest possible denominator as allowed by federal law. That way you get to keep and smoke all the pot you want, and within about 6 months the national debt will be wiped out, California will have floated away and the USA will be a better place.

All the best,
Glenn B.
 
I really doubt legalized pot in Berkeley is making any of our resident LEO's gnash their teeth in frustration.
Click to expand...

Well, actually, based on conversations with a couple of officers, Berkeley PD is still busting plenty of folks for possession, dealing, etc. They don't seem as impressed with the City Council as they should be, perhaps. Or maybe they read the City Attorney memo that said that the marijuana legalization directive was legal dreck.
 
These morons obviously never learned Rule #1 about dealing drugs - NEVER smoke your own stash. Obviously they got high and forgot about the kid in the car, then forgot to close the garage door. Funny how a bunch of amateurs could be in possession of 1700 lbs...reminds me of Trainspotting....
 
So basically most of you think that if a cop smells something suspicious wafting out of your house he should be able to search the premises without a warrant?
Click to expand...
If they see blood seeping out of a door threshold, do they have to get a warrant?

Unless you believe that frying onions are similar to pot in fragrance...
 
Actually, there ARE several things that smell like pot that aren't pot. What if an officer sees something that looks like pot on the seat of your locked car while you're in class? Does he have the right to bash the window in to check it out? Or call someone in to screw up the lock on your car while opening it? This is a wonderful example because my brother was hassled by a cop for having a bag of tobacco on the seat of his car in the university parking lot. Cop thought it was pot :rolleyes:

Problem is, cops can say they "smelled something" and can then search the house. If they find nothing, good faith doctrine usually keeps them safe - especially if they don't have a history of complaints. If they do find something then that "must be what they smelled."
 
Does he have the right to bash the window in to check it out? Or call someone in to screw up the lock on your car while opening it?
Click to expand...
Of course not. But he's certainly got the right to try and get a warrant to search your car, and once he's got it, then yes, he's got the right to do exactly that.

The article doesn't mention that the officers didn't have a warrant when they performed the search, and, given the media, odds are good that if they didn't, it would have. I really don't think it's too much of a stretch to believe that given the abandoned child, the abnormally large trailer, and the obviously overwhelming reek of weed, the police didn't have too much trouble getting a warrant.

I'm all for limiting police powers to protect individual rights, but if we're going to prevent police from investigating blatant evidence of wrongdoing (like a bag of pot in a car), then we might as well not have a police force. As long as the officer can't just on his own recognizance decide that your car looks likely, as long as he's got to demonstrate PC and get a warrant, I'm entirely fine with the search, even if it turns out after the fact that it was just a beg of oregano. You don't get to vilify the cop based on information only available after the fact any more than the cop gets to justify a random search based on information only available after the fact.
 
Do we even know how long he was "locked in the vehicle"? No. He could been in there for 5 minutes for all we know. Of course, I guess the parent(s) were really endangering his life, after all, it may have been warm that day too. Or it coulda been raining and 60*. It could even have been running with the A/C on for all we know. The only mistake the parents made was teaching the kid to press the Onstar button if he needed help. Or maybe he accidentally pushed it. 2yr olds aren't the greatest at reasoning and communication.

Preacherman said:
Wouldn't it be fun if the parents went to jail, while the toddler got the reward for the drug bust?
Click to expand...

LOL! LOL! LOL!

Ummmmmmm NO!

Becoming an orphan because you are too young to know any better. Having your parents locked up for...ohh...like forever because of a mistake you made at 2 yrs old. I'm failing to see the humor in it.

I suppose it's also funny when the elementary and junior high kids turn their parents in for some crap because the D.A.R.E. officer told them to.

I wonder if this works with guns too?

Control Group said:
That much marijuana is going to take up kind of a lot space. When the article says "a large trailer," I'm guessing it means as in "semi-articulated truck trailer,"
Click to expand...

A semi trailer could easily hold 40,000lbs of dope. I'm gonna have to go against that notion of yours.

It was probably more like this: is this a "large trailer"? It should certainly be capable of holding 1,700lbs of endo.
 

Attachments

  • trailer.JPG
    trailer.JPG
    6.8 KB · Views: 6
It is truly amusing how much credence some of you will give to a news report when you can use it to slam law enforcement or try to make them look like goons but, if the same newspaper and same reporter said something negative about second amendment rights you would be calling it something akin to yellow journalism or just another ultra leftist lib rag!
Click to expand...

I once called a reporterette to task after she wrote a story in the local fishwrap that said a local citizen was arrested for possessing child pornography after police received a 'tip' concerning his filthy activities. The article made it look like all the police needed was a 'tip' in order to obtain a search warrant.

The reporterette answered my e-mail and admitted the police did indeed collect more corroborating information after receiving the 'tip', but there was just so much column space available for the story, blah, blah.

So much for the journalist's duty to educate as well as inform the public.

Pilgrim
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top