Jeff Sessions Seeking to Increase Police Seizures/Civil Forfeitures.

Crimson1967 said:

Sad to say, but I'm voting for Mo "I'm reading the KJV until the wall is built" Brooks in the primary. Anything to get crooked Luther and Roy Moore away from the seat.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Click to expand...

Crimson1967 said:

Sad to say, but I'm voting for Mo "I'm reading the KJV until the wall is built" Brooks in the primary. Anything to get crooked Luther and Roy Moore away from the seat.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Click to expand...

Jon said:

full agreement, one is more conventionally associated with big government however. Neither appreciate freedom fully

Click to expand...

Crimson1967 said:

Sad to say, but I'm voting for Mo "I'm reading the KJV until the wall is built" Brooks in the primary. Anything to get crooked Luther and Roy Moore away from the seat.

Click to expand...

jthomas666 said:

Brooks is the intellectual equal of Sessions, so there'd be a certain symmetry.

Click to expand...

Tidewater said:

Here's another one. Traffic stop. Guy (stupidly) carrying $91k in his car. Cops impound the cash.
“It’s been complete [Auburn]”: how police used a traffic stop to take $91,800 from an innocent man
This has just got to stop. This is completely oppressive reckless and irresponsible. Revolutions have been made from less material.

For the young people out there, a few rules.
1. Wear your seat belt and obey the traffic laws (especially if you're car has out-of-state plates).
2. Under no circumstances are you to give consent to the cops to search your vehicle.
3. Don't carry cash (certainly not $91,800 in cash). There is this thing called a "cashier's check" and a "postal money order." Check those out.

Click to expand...

Police brought in a drug-sniffing dog. According to Parhamovich, an officer used a ball to lure the dog to the car and get the canine to act up — and justify a search.

Click to expand...

92tide said:

this was from the article

Click to expand...

Tidewater said:

3. Don't carry cash (certainly not $91,800 in cash).

Click to expand...

92tide said:

this was from the article

Click to expand...

Police brought in a drug-sniffing dog. According to Parhamovich, an officer used a ball to lure the dog to the car and get the canine to act up — and justify a search.

Click to expand...

Tidewater said:

How many times must a sniffer dog "alert" on a dry hole before it can no longer be considered probable cause for a search?

Click to expand...

92tide said:

i think the answer to that is there is always a "probable cause" for search.

i have read that this is a somewhat common tactic, cuing the dog to "alert"

Click to expand...

Tidewater said:

I guess, but if that "alert" proves to be inaccurate enough times, that would seem to be grounds for rejecting sniffer dogs (or one particularly inept sniffer dog) as probably cause.
I mean, if a cop said, "I checked my horoscope, and the horoscope said that a car with Illinois plates was carrying drugs in my county," that probably would not stand up in court as probable cause.

If the cop said, "I wear a mood ring and my mood ring says ..."

Click to expand...

Decision[edit]
The United States Supreme Court returned a unanimous decision on February 19, 2013, ruling against Harris and overturning the ruling of the Florida Supreme Court.[28] In the unanimous opinion, Justice Elena Kagan stated that the dog's certification and continued training are adequate indication of his reliability, and thus is sufficient to presume the dog's alert provides probable cause to search, using the "totality-of-the-circumstances" test per Illinois v. Gates. She wrote that the Florida Supreme Court instead established "a strict evidentiary checklist", where "an alert cannot establish probable cause ... unless the State introduces comprehensive documentation of the dog’s prior 'hits' and 'misses' in the field ... No matter how much other proof the State offers of the dog’s reliability, the absent field performance records will preclude a finding of probable cause."[29]

The Court did not, however, rule out the questioning of reliability where specific grounds are present.[28] Kagan also stated that "a defendant must have an opportunity to challenge such evidence of a dog’s reliability, whether by cross-examining the testifying officer or by introducing his own fact or expert witnesses. The defendant may contest training or testing standards as flawed, or too lax, or raise an issue regarding the particular alert."[30]

Click to expand...

Tidewater said:

I guess, but if that "alert" proves to be inaccurate enough times, that would seem to be grounds for rejecting sniffer dogs (or one particularly inept sniffer dog) as probably cause.
I mean, if a cop said, "I checked my horoscope, and the horoscope said that a car with Illinois plates was carrying drugs in my county," that probably would not stand up in court as probable cause.

If the cop said, "I wear a mood ring and my mood ring says ..."

Click to expand...

Tidewater said:

I guess, but if that "alert" proves to be inaccurate enough times, that would seem to be grounds for rejecting sniffer dogs (or one particularly inept sniffer dog) as probably cause.
I mean, if a cop said, "I checked my horoscope, and the horoscope said that a car with Illinois plates was carrying drugs in my county," that probably would not stand up in court as probable cause.

If the cop said, "I wear a mood ring and my mood ring says ..."

Click to expand...

92tide said:

i have no idea how valid it is, but i have heard that similar to not consenting to the vehicle being searched, it is a good idea to object/not offer consent to a dog being used if they suggest doing so.

Click to expand...

Jon said:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Florida_v._Harris

Click to expand...

Tidewater said:

My high school buddy/current lawyer gave me a business card with a script on the back worded to thwart police officer who are fishing for something. He practises in a nearby college town in which the cops get a bit "over-eager."

Click to expand...

Tidewater said:

How many times must a sniffer dog "alert" on a dry hole before it can no longer be considered probable cause for a search?

Click to expand...