|
rawtoxic
Stranger
Registered: 10/06/02
Posts: 2,097
Loc: smokey mountains
Last seen: 13 years, 9 months
|
Vehicle Search Procedure Question
#5731693 - 06/09/06 06:45 PM (17 years, 11 months ago) |
|
|
OK. I had something happen I don't wish to share all the exact details but someone that ***KNOWS FOR SURE*** please answer.
The cops asked to talk to me outside my car, I said OK. I get out the officer says I am acting nervous and I say 'this is within my normal behavior." They do the typical loaded questions to try and get consent to search which I politely refuse. He says bullshit and he's searching my car anyways, I call him out saying it's unconstitutional and end up in handcuffs being shoved in the back of a patrol car. So anyways he finds a small MJ pipe in the driver door map pocket burried with other shit. He then justifies his search that the pipe was in plain site when I got out of the truck (which it was not)
Anyways my question is:
The officer did not tell me why he did not need consent to search my car until AFTER he found the pipe and then he told me he had seen it, is this correct procedure? His seargant claims that no reason needs to be given that they can go ahead and search and tell you the reason later or in court? This sounds like bullshit but I think it would help me and others if this was better understood.
He has admitted this to his seargant and I as an active community member have been in contact with his boss and the internal affairs regarding the actions of this officer and have already recieved a written apology for using intimidation and searching my car in not-so-orderly manner.
Another excellent point I'd like to bring up is the fact if he saw this item, why did he not go to it right away instead of searching my car aimlessly for 5 minutes before finding this pipe in plain site. Of course I live in an area where dash mounted cameras are not used and nothing can prove this and a cops word vs mine = jack shit.
Another thing some of you will be interested to know, regarding this incident is the opening of my US mail without a federal warrant. All they did was deny it and that's all it took. Maybe if they were to have found something it would be easy to get dropped in court. But the officer just ripped that shit open - again NO PROOF for his boss.
LOL this is really a load of shit, thank god I live in Colorado where a $100 fine is the worse thing that can happen.
Anyways sorry this is my 1st post in a bit.
|
Le_Canard
The Duk Abides

Registered: 05/16/03
Posts: 94,392
Loc: Earthfarm 1
|
Re: Vehicle Search Procedure Question [Re: rawtoxic]
#5731721 - 06/09/06 06:52 PM (17 years, 11 months ago) |
|
|
That is bullshit! It sounds like you've got a good chance to get that thrown out of court. Good luck.
|
Koala Koolio
TTAGGGTTAGGGTTAGGGTTAGGG

Registered: 01/07/04
Posts: 7,752
|
Re: Vehicle Search Procedure Question [Re: rawtoxic]
#5731943 - 06/09/06 08:00 PM (17 years, 11 months ago) |
|
|
Do you have your mail? It should have piggy-prints all over the torn part, right? Did he have gloves on? I suppose he could say he did it after finding the pipe, maybe that's reason enough to open the package. But, if you have it in writing, or testimony that they "did not" open the package, you can catch them up for lying?
If you have a written apology for intimidating to search, then how can they claim that the search was performed because the pipe was in sight? The police report probably says the location of the pipe. Does it claim that it was in the door pocket? With most cars, that is not a spot that is easy to see. With yours it might even be easy to prove that it's nearly *impossible* to see from the window.
It seems like you've got more than nothing, especially as they've been in good communication with you, though not dropping their claims. For a 100 dollar fine, it wouldn't be worth most people's time and money to fight, but naturally it would be the right thing to do.
-------------------- You're not like the others. You like the same things I do. Wax paper, boiled football leather... dog breath. We're not hitch-hiking anymore, we're riding!
|
RandalFlagg
Stranger
Registered: 06/15/02
Posts: 15,608
|
Re: Vehicle Search Procedure Question [Re: rawtoxic]
#5732842 - 06/10/06 12:41 AM (17 years, 11 months ago) |
|
|
Did this happen right in front of a patrol car?
All pull-overs are recorded by a recorder in the police car. If your rights were violated it should show up on that tape.
|
Koala Koolio
TTAGGGTTAGGGTTAGGGTTAGGG

Registered: 01/07/04
Posts: 7,752
|
Re: Vehicle Search Procedure Question [Re: RandalFlagg]
#5733025 - 06/10/06 01:56 AM (17 years, 11 months ago) |
|
|
"Of course I live in an area where dash mounted cameras are not used and nothing can prove this and a cops word vs mine = jack shit."
-------------------- You're not like the others. You like the same things I do. Wax paper, boiled football leather... dog breath. We're not hitch-hiking anymore, we're riding!
|
RandalFlagg
Stranger
Registered: 06/15/02
Posts: 15,608
|
Re: Vehicle Search Procedure Question [Re: Koala Koolio]
#5733450 - 06/10/06 08:11 AM (17 years, 11 months ago) |
|
|
Doh!
|
rawtoxic
Stranger
Registered: 10/06/02
Posts: 2,097
Loc: smokey mountains
Last seen: 13 years, 9 months
|
Re: Vehicle Search Procedure Question [Re: RandalFlagg]
#5733625 - 06/10/06 09:45 AM (17 years, 11 months ago) |
|
|
As for using intimidation for search even if they have probable cause police would like you to give consent because it will hold up much better in court it's part of their training (information from County Sheriff Seargant I'm dealing with.) Understand police are trained to use intimidation, loaded questions and a few other not so fair tactics.
Here is the context between me and the officer: "There is no weapons, drugs, knifes, bombs, dead bodies (he says jokingly) in your truck correct?" I answer "Yes, nothing like that is in my truck" He says "Well let me have a look around and I'll let you go with your warning (for the original stop)" I answer "I would prefer to just leave now." He says "Why do you have something to hide?" I answer "No, I would just like to leave without having my truck searched, I have places to go." He asserts "You and I both know there is something in there(the truck)." I say "I know my rights and I do not consent to a vehicle search." At this time he becomes pissed tells me he is searching the truck anyhow that he does not need my consent. I ask "Have you ever heard of the constitution." Then he says "Enough of this, I don't need this shit." He turns me around places me in handcuffs and man handles to his squad car. From this point on, I know there is little I can do so I just keep my mouth shut and allow everything to run its course. Running my mouth will only cause more problems at this point and I know I have done nothing he can detain me for longer than the time it takes for him to write the ticket.
The intimidation the officer wrote me an apology for was for being thrown in handcuffs and pushed around not for trying to fool me into a consentual search.
His prints would be on the package from picking it up in the process of his search, so his seargant had no interest in seeing the package. They didn't even care to look at digital camera pics I had taken of how the officer threw personal objects of mine around during the search, stained a dress shirt by throwing it on the floor and ruined some archictectual drawings I had made for clients.
OK please - someone answer the original question: Do police need to tell you their probable cause before performing a vehicle search? Or can they perform the search and simply put the probable cause they had in there report and that is enough? I guess I'll write NORML as well and see if they have a resident lawyer that can answer. I'll keep you all posted.
I feel that I handled this as I should have according to the FlexYourRights video and other materials I had read in the past and this still did not prevent the ticket.
If I were to fight in court I may have a shot but 4+ court dates, hours of my time, and the stress cannot compare to the simple $100 bill that will take care of the ticket. I may plead not guilty off the bat and see if the DA wants to play ball at the second court date.
|
ZippoZ
Knomadic


Registered: 06/17/03
Posts: 13,227
Loc: Pongyang, North Korea
|
Re: Vehicle Search Procedure Question [Re: rawtoxic]
#5733962 - 06/10/06 11:43 AM (17 years, 11 months ago) |
|
|
get a lawyer, i now carry a didgital camera, video camera, and tape recorder. if i get pulled over, im going to bust out the mike and start recording. id recomend the same for anyone else.
-------------------- PEACE
zippoz "in times of widespread chaos and confusion, it has been the duty of more advanced human beings - artists, scientists, clowns, and philosophers - to create order. In such times as ours however, when there is too much order, too much m management, too much programming and control, it becomes the duty of superior men and women and women to fling their favorite monkey wrenches into the machinery. To relieve the repression of the human spirit, they must sow doubt and disruption" "People do it every day, they talk to themselves ... they see themselves as they'd like to be, they don't have the courage you have, to just run with it."
|
rawtoxic
Stranger
Registered: 10/06/02
Posts: 2,097
Loc: smokey mountains
Last seen: 13 years, 9 months
|
Re: Vehicle Search Procedure Question [Re: ZippoZ]
#5734338 - 06/10/06 01:28 PM (17 years, 11 months ago) |
|
|
Well since MJ is basically decriminalized in Colorado and only $100 fine why would I pay over $500 for a lawyer.
So really what it boils down to is, I pay the ticket, the cops get away with breaching search and seizure laws, and I go on with life.
|
ZippoZ
Knomadic


Registered: 06/17/03
Posts: 13,227
Loc: Pongyang, North Korea
|
Re: Vehicle Search Procedure Question [Re: rawtoxic]
#5734604 - 06/10/06 03:23 PM (17 years, 11 months ago) |
|
|
yeah, if you get convicted it will be on your record forever, you will be in eligable for any college scolarships, and you might just be fucked in some other ways, think about it man
-------------------- PEACE
zippoz "in times of widespread chaos and confusion, it has been the duty of more advanced human beings - artists, scientists, clowns, and philosophers - to create order. In such times as ours however, when there is too much order, too much m management, too much programming and control, it becomes the duty of superior men and women and women to fling their favorite monkey wrenches into the machinery. To relieve the repression of the human spirit, they must sow doubt and disruption" "People do it every day, they talk to themselves ... they see themselves as they'd like to be, they don't have the courage you have, to just run with it."
|
rawtoxic
Stranger
Registered: 10/06/02
Posts: 2,097
Loc: smokey mountains
Last seen: 13 years, 9 months
|
Re: Vehicle Search Procedure Question [Re: ZippoZ]
#5734781 - 06/10/06 04:44 PM (17 years, 11 months ago) |
|
|
OK. Already have one on my record so that is really not relevant.
Plus I've obtained my degree.
|
biglo
Shroomery BabySitter



Registered: 11/22/02
Posts: 603
Loc: US of A
Last seen: 8 years, 9 months
|
Re: Vehicle Search Procedure Question [Re: ZippoZ]
#5735413 - 06/10/06 08:03 PM (17 years, 11 months ago) |
|
|
"get a lawyer, i now carry a didgital camera, video camera, and tape recorder. if i get pulled over, im going to bust out the mike and start recording."
You can actually get in trouble doing this. My one friend got busted for underage drinking and told the officer that he was recording their conversation. The police officer immediately got all pissed and said that he was "violating his rights under wiretapping laws". So my friend turns it off (but fucking forgets to). After the officer dismissed him from the room, you could hear him talking to one of the coordinators for our dorm, muttering about the kid being johnny cochran.
So I don't know if it's possible to record an officer, and I don't believe the evidence will hold up in court. Goddamn double standards, cops hate being caught with their pants down.
|
Koala Koolio
TTAGGGTTAGGGTTAGGGTTAGGG

Registered: 01/07/04
Posts: 7,752
|
Re: Vehicle Search Procedure Question [Re: biglo]
#5735684 - 06/10/06 09:18 PM (17 years, 11 months ago) |
|
|
Might hold up in court, I dunno. But, the cop himself could just very well take the tape and claim it never existed. Secret camera would be the only way to go. But shit, it's 2006, that shouldn't be as hard as it once sounded, especially in a car.
-------------------- You're not like the others. You like the same things I do. Wax paper, boiled football leather... dog breath. We're not hitch-hiking anymore, we're riding!
|
Microcosmatrix
Spiral staircasetechnician


Registered: 10/20/05
Posts: 11,293
Loc: Ythan's house
Last seen: 17 years, 5 months
|
Re: Vehicle Search Procedure Question [Re: Koala Koolio]
#5737634 - 06/11/06 11:22 AM (17 years, 11 months ago) |
|
|
Use a brand new tape for any recordings, otherwise it could be inadmissable in court.
|
RemainRandom50
Do You Need ToKnow Me?
Registered: 01/15/06
Posts: 1,695
Last seen: 15 years, 1 month
|
Re: Vehicle Search Procedure Question [Re: Microcosmatrix]
#5737853 - 06/11/06 12:29 PM (17 years, 11 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
zippoz said: get a lawyer, i now carry a didgital camera, video camera, and tape recorder. if i get pulled over, im going to bust out the mike and start recording. id recomend the same for anyone else.
seriously thats a fucking great idea.
-------------------- At times I get consumed by my everyday life and will leave the Shroomery. Yet, every time drugs come falling into my life for fun.....I always think about the Shroomery and then I'm back!
|
ke1n
Stranger


Registered: 11/15/05
Posts: 359
Last seen: 14 years, 10 months
|
Re: Vehicle Search Procedure Question [Re: RemainRandom50]
#5739507 - 06/11/06 08:32 PM (17 years, 11 months ago) |
|
|
I dont know why it WOULDNT hold up in court. If you have a recording of an officer and it can be verified it is him then why not? I have a voice recorder on my cell phone for that reason.
Hell, I was thinking about being a lawyer just so I can screw over as many cops as possible
--------------------
Everything that is posted, including pictures and text, are a result of fictional storytelling using images found online and/or created using the latest graphics software. I am a fictional writer who likes to explore the internet world. ------------------------------------ http://www.adobe.com/
|
Koala Koolio
TTAGGGTTAGGGTTAGGGTTAGGG

Registered: 01/07/04
Posts: 7,752
|
Re: Vehicle Search Procedure Question [Re: ke1n]
#5739545 - 06/11/06 08:43 PM (17 years, 11 months ago) |
|
|
Umm... if it's illegally obtained evidence, it's illegally obtained evidence.
Isn't that the whole point of the thread? If a cop breaks in through your window, completely illegally, with 0 cause besides your ugly tye-dyed shirt, and finds drugs, should that evidence hold up in court too?
I'm not saying that this recording would be illegal or legal, I don't know the laws, and i'm sure they differ by location. The point is that you can't declare evidence fair game just because it incriminates someone. You need to play the same game you're fighting. But I know you can't record people's telephone conversations without informing them.
-------------------- You're not like the others. You like the same things I do. Wax paper, boiled football leather... dog breath. We're not hitch-hiking anymore, we're riding!
|
Seuss
Error: divide byzero


Registered: 04/27/01
Posts: 23,480
Loc: Caribbean
Last seen: 3 months, 8 days
|
Re: Vehicle Search Procedure Question [Re: biglo]
#5740687 - 06/12/06 03:35 AM (17 years, 11 months ago) |
|
|
> You can actually get in trouble doing this.
From personal experience, I know it really pisses off the police. A bunch of us were coming back home from a road trip in college when we got pulled over. Several of the people in the van had video recorders. The cop was being the typical jerk when he realized he was being recorded. He kept telling the guy with the camera to turn it off, but was being ignored. The cop finally snapped and demanded the camera. When we finished up to let us go, we asked for the camera back. He denied, saying he was taking it for evidence. Against what, we asked? "Obstruction of justice" was the reply. No charges were ever filed, other than the speeding ticket. However, unfortunately for the cop, he didn't know that we had two other cameras going in the van. I don't know what happened to him, but we did get the third camera back (after a lot of hassle and making threats to bring in the media if the stolen property wasn't promptly returned).
> violating his rights under wiretapping laws
I would have asked to police officer to show me the wire that I was tapping which was violating his rights.
-------------------- Just another spore in the wind.
|
Prisoner#1
Even Dumber ThanAdvertized!


Registered: 01/22/03
Posts: 193,665
Loc: Pvt. Pubfag NutSuck
|
Re: Vehicle Search Procedure Question [Re: biglo]
#5741070 - 06/12/06 09:21 AM (17 years, 11 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
biglo said: "get a lawyer, i now carry a didgital camera, video camera, and tape recorder. if i get pulled over, im going to bust out the mike and start recording."
You can actually get in trouble doing this. The police officer immediately got all pissed and said that he was "violating his rights under wiretapping laws".
So I don't know if it's possible to record an officer, and I don't believe the evidence will hold up in court.
it's perfectly legal to record interaction between yourself and a cop stopping you, most cops wear a hidden microphone and have video rolling in their cars, do you really believe the cop is above the law? The reason they dont want you taping the incident is because many of them routinely violate violate your rights last thing they want is evidence against them. always inform the officer that you are recording the conversation as soon as he approaches the vehicle, you will catch a load of shit but absolutely refuse to turn off the camera/tape
Often times you'll catch the "yopu dont have my permission to record me, you're in violation of XXXX law", if the video is being aired in a movie or on TV, you need his permission and he'll need to sign a waver but no matter his objections, keep the tape rolling and inform him that if he's doing nothing wrong that he has nothing to fear about you taping him, it's the same kind of tricks they use
heres a little bit regarding telephone recording, the same laws hold true for video recording, this mentions being covert but overt is just as suitable http://www.pimall.com/nais/n.recordlaw.html
|
wilshire
free radical


Registered: 05/11/05
Posts: 2,421
Loc: SE PA
Last seen: 14 years, 3 months
|
Re: Vehicle Search Procedure Question [Re: rawtoxic]
#5742455 - 06/12/06 04:19 PM (17 years, 11 months ago) |
|
|
here is the problem with your position:
you could be mistaken about it being in plain sight. just because you thought it was covered doesn't mean it was. that or you could be lying. the cop can't be mistaken though. he either saw it or he didn't. if he's wrong, he must be lying, and he has less to gain, and more to lose, than you do by lying. you're also a stoner and he's a police officer.
the bottom line is that the possibility of you being mistaken is greater than his, your motivation to lie is greater than his, and your credibility before the court is less than his. i highly doubt the court would throw out evidence gained during the search.
this is why i recommend that those who choose to store or transport contraband do so in a locked opaque container.
|
|