Armed robbery

[Quantum Windbag]

If only people knew their rights and had the guts to look a cop in the eye and insist on them.

"You got anything illegal in your car here?"

"No."

"Mind if we take a look?"

Proper answer: "Yes, I do mind. If you want to get a search warrant, then you can search my car. Until then, you cannot." In order to get a search warrant, the cop is going to have to convince a judge that probable cause exists to issue the search warrant. If the only reason for the traffic stop was a traffic violation, with nothing more, the cop is either going to have to lie in the search warrant affidavit, or not get the warrant. If he lies, the search warrant affidavit is subject to extreme scrutiny once the case gets to court and if he is caught lying, his ass is grass.

Answer usually given (or answer which the police often claim is given): "Sure, go ahead."

Don't even get me started on police agencies confiscating "drug money" that ends up in their own coffers.

Or police that get their entire budgets from civil confiscation.

 

[George Costanza]

If only people knew their rights and had the guts to look a cop in the eye and insist on them.

"You got anything illegal in your car here?"

"No."

"Mind if we take a look?"

Proper answer: "Yes, I do mind. If you want to get a search warrant, then you can search my car. Until then, you cannot." In order to get a search warrant, the cop is going to have to convince a judge that probable cause exists to issue the search warrant. If the only reason for the traffic stop was a traffic violation, with nothing more, the cop is either going to have to lie in the search warrant affidavit, or not get the warrant. If he lies, the search warrant affidavit is subject to extreme scrutiny once the case gets to court and if he is caught lying, his ass is grass.

Answer usually given (or answer which the police often claim is given): "Sure, go ahead."

Don't even get me started on police agencies confiscating "drug money" that ends up in their own coffers.

Or police that get their entire budgets from civil confiscation.

In the past year, I have had three cases involving confiscation of suspected "drug money" by police. In all three of these cases, the confiscation was so obviously bogus that a school child would be able to see right through it. In one case, they had absolutely no legal justification to retain the money. The case was over, the defendant had pled guilty, and the crime charged, to which he pled guilty, was not even a drug offense. In addition, the defendant had clear and convincing, documented proof of the source of the money. Still, the arrogant bastards refused to return the money. It was over $14,000.00. Finally, after months of litigation, I was able to get the money returned to the defendant. The fact that the money was seized in the first place is not nearly as damning as the fact that the prosecution and the police agency refused to cut loose of it long after the case was over. Disgusting.

 

[FA_Q2]

If only people knew their rights and had the guts to look a cop in the eye and insist on them.

"You got anything illegal in your car here?"

"No."

"Mind if we take a look?"

Proper answer: "Yes, I do mind. If you want to get a search warrant, then you can search my car. Until then, you cannot." In order to get a search warrant, the cop is going to have to convince a judge that probable cause exists to issue the search warrant. If the only reason for the traffic stop was a traffic violation, with nothing more, the cop is either going to have to lie in the search warrant affidavit, or not get the warrant. If he lies, the search warrant affidavit is subject to extreme scrutiny once the case gets to court and if he is caught lying, his ass is grass.

Answer usually given (or answer which the police often claim is given): "Sure, go ahead."

Don't even get me started on police agencies confiscating "drug money" that ends up in their own coffers.

It is complacency and a concept of ‘I didn’t do anything wrong.’ When I was younger that was what I used to be like but a few years ago I came to the realization that I will never agree to a search simply under principal. I don’t care if it costs me time or heartache. I have seen too much abuse and the random assumption that they have the right to do whatever they please to you.

 

[Quantum Windbag]

If only people knew their rights and had the guts to look a cop in the eye and insist on them.

"You got anything illegal in your car here?"

"No."

"Mind if we take a look?"

Proper answer: "Yes, I do mind. If you want to get a search warrant, then you can search my car. Until then, you cannot." In order to get a search warrant, the cop is going to have to convince a judge that probable cause exists to issue the search warrant. If the only reason for the traffic stop was a traffic violation, with nothing more, the cop is either going to have to lie in the search warrant affidavit, or not get the warrant. If he lies, the search warrant affidavit is subject to extreme scrutiny once the case gets to court and if he is caught lying, his ass is grass.

Answer usually given (or answer which the police often claim is given): "Sure, go ahead."

Don't even get me started on police agencies confiscating "drug money" that ends up in their own coffers.

Or police that get their entire budgets from civil confiscation.

In the past year, I have had three cases involving confiscation of suspected "drug money" by police. In all three of these cases, the confiscation was so obviously bogus that a school child would be able to see right through it. In one case, they had absolutely no legal justification to retain the money. The case was over, the defendant had pled guilty, and the crime charged, to which he pled guilty, was not even a drug offense. In addition, the defendant had clear and convincing, documented proof of the source of the money. Still, the arrogant bastards refused to return the money. It was over $14,000.00. Finally, after months of litigation, I was able to get the money returned to the defendant. The fact that the money was seized in the first place is not nearly as damning as the fact that the prosecution and the police agency refused to cut loose of it long after the case was over. Disgusting.

You got off easy George.

Anthony Smelley Will Get His Money Back | The Agitator

This is a massive pet peeve of mine. I do not understand why everyone who hears about this is not outraged.

 

[TheBrain]

If only people knew their rights and had the guts to look a cop in the eye and insist on them.

"You got anything illegal in your car here?"

"No."

"Mind if we take a look?"

Proper answer: "Yes, I do mind. If you want to get a search warrant, then you can search my car. Until then, you cannot." In order to get a search warrant, the cop is going to have to convince a judge that probable cause exists to issue the search warrant. If the only reason for the traffic stop was a traffic violation, with nothing more, the cop is either going to have to lie in the search warrant affidavit, or not get the warrant. If he lies, the search warrant affidavit is subject to extreme scrutiny once the case gets to court and if he is caught lying, his ass is grass.

Answer usually given (or answer which the police often claim is given): "Sure, go ahead."

Don't even get me started on police agencies confiscating "drug money" that ends up in their own coffers.

Exactly right. Amazes me the number of people who give permission and then get arrested because something was found THEN they want to sue b/c a warrant wasn't obtained. HEY IDIOT YOUR PERMISSION WAIVES THE REQUIREMENT.

of course it also amazes me the number of criminals who get busted with drugs or stolen property or whatever in their vehicle because they were pulled over for speeding, or a broken tail light or something. SHEESH if your hauling 2 tons of pot around you might want to obey the traffic laws DUH.

Good thing for cops that criminals are stupid. Guess it's a good thing for people like George to, or he wouldn't have a job.

 

[TheBrain]

Or police that get their entire budgets from civil confiscation.

In the past year, I have had three cases involving confiscation of suspected "drug money" by police. In all three of these cases, the confiscation was so obviously bogus that a school child would be able to see right through it. In one case, they had absolutely no legal justification to retain the money. The case was over, the defendant had pled guilty, and the crime charged, to which he pled guilty, was not even a drug offense. In addition, the defendant had clear and convincing, documented proof of the source of the money. Still, the arrogant bastards refused to return the money. It was over $14,000.00. Finally, after months of litigation, I was able to get the money returned to the defendant. The fact that the money was seized in the first place is not nearly as damning as the fact that the prosecution and the police agency refused to cut loose of it long after the case was over. Disgusting.

You got off easy George.

Anthony Smelley Will Get His Money Back | The Agitator

This is a massive pet peeve of mine. I do not understand why everyone who hears about this is not outraged.

I honestly don't know how civil forfeitures survived a COTUS check. Well, to be fair I don't know off the top of my head if the constitutionality has ever been tested. I can't believe they would pass muster.

 

[George Costanza]

If only people knew their rights and had the guts to look a cop in the eye and insist on them.

"You got anything illegal in your car here?"

"No."

"Mind if we take a look?"

Proper answer: "Yes, I do mind. If you want to get a search warrant, then you can search my car. Until then, you cannot." In order to get a search warrant, the cop is going to have to convince a judge that probable cause exists to issue the search warrant. If the only reason for the traffic stop was a traffic violation, with nothing more, the cop is either going to have to lie in the search warrant affidavit, or not get the warrant. If he lies, the search warrant affidavit is subject to extreme scrutiny once the case gets to court and if he is caught lying, his ass is grass.

Answer usually given (or answer which the police often claim is given): "Sure, go ahead."

Don't even get me started on police agencies confiscating "drug money" that ends up in their own coffers.

Exactly right. Amazes me the number of people who give permission and then get arrested because something was found THEN they want to sue b/c a warrant wasn't obtained. HEY IDIOT YOUR PERMISSION WAIVES THE REQUIREMENT.

of course it also amazes me the number of criminals who get busted with drugs or stolen property or whatever in their vehicle because they were pulled over for speeding, or a broken tail light or something. SHEESH if your hauling 2 tons of pot around you might want to obey the traffic laws DUH.

Good thing for cops that criminals are stupid. Guess it's a good thing for people like George to, or he wouldn't have a job.

I'll tell you what amazes me - the number of guys who (allegedly) give the cops permission to search, knowing they have meth in their pocket or a gun under the seat of the car. My clients don't always have the best judgment, but they can't be THAT stupid. And then toss in how many times I have heard, "He never asked permission to do shit. He just sat me on the curb and searched the damn car."

Kinda makes one wonder what goes on out there in the field where there are no witnesses except the cops and the crooks . . . .

 

[George Costanza]

My god, where are all the totalitarians coming from.

You're joking, right? This is USMB, for God's sake.

 

[Quantum Windbag]

In the past year, I have had three cases involving confiscation of suspected "drug money" by police. In all three of these cases, the confiscation was so obviously bogus that a school child would be able to see right through it. In one case, they had absolutely no legal justification to retain the money. The case was over, the defendant had pled guilty, and the crime charged, to which he pled guilty, was not even a drug offense. In addition, the defendant had clear and convincing, documented proof of the source of the money. Still, the arrogant bastards refused to return the money. It was over $14,000.00. Finally, after months of litigation, I was able to get the money returned to the defendant. The fact that the money was seized in the first place is not nearly as damning as the fact that the prosecution and the police agency refused to cut loose of it long after the case was over. Disgusting.

You got off easy George.

Anthony Smelley Will Get His Money Back | The Agitator

This is a massive pet peeve of mine. I do not understand why everyone who hears about this is not outraged.

I honestly don't know how civil forfeitures survived a COTUS check. Well, to be fair I don't know off the top of my head if the constitutionality has ever been tested. I can't believe they would pass muster.

They suddenly decided that taking property from a person is not punishment, which makes it perfectly legal to do it.

Supreme Court Rules That Civil Forfeiture is not Punishment for Double Jeopardy Purposes » Publications » The Federalist Society

 

[George Costanza]

Or police that get their entire budgets from civil confiscation.

In the past year, I have had three cases involving confiscation of suspected "drug money" by police. In all three of these cases, the confiscation was so obviously bogus that a school child would be able to see right through it. In one case, they had absolutely no legal justification to retain the money. The case was over, the defendant had pled guilty, and the crime charged, to which he pled guilty, was not even a drug offense. In addition, the defendant had clear and convincing, documented proof of the source of the money. Still, the arrogant bastards refused to return the money. It was over $14,000.00. Finally, after months of litigation, I was able to get the money returned to the defendant. The fact that the money was seized in the first place is not nearly as damning as the fact that the prosecution and the police agency refused to cut loose of it long after the case was over. Disgusting.

You got off easy George.

Anthony Smelley Will Get His Money Back | The Agitator

This is a massive pet peeve of mine. I do not understand why everyone who hears about this is not outraged.

"Drug sniffing dogs" and the crooked cops and corrupt DA's who use them, are a joke. A drug sniffing dog will alert to a dollar bill taken out of your wallet, or the officer's wallet, for that matter. There are traces of cocaine and/or other illegal drugs on ALL folding currency. Any expert in the field will testify to that - and they do, whenever the prosecution tries to use drug sniffing dogs to justify an otherwise illegal seizure of money.

 

[Quantum Windbag]

If only people knew their rights and had the guts to look a cop in the eye and insist on them.

"You got anything illegal in your car here?"

"No."

"Mind if we take a look?"

Proper answer: "Yes, I do mind. If you want to get a search warrant, then you can search my car. Until then, you cannot." In order to get a search warrant, the cop is going to have to convince a judge that probable cause exists to issue the search warrant. If the only reason for the traffic stop was a traffic violation, with nothing more, the cop is either going to have to lie in the search warrant affidavit, or not get the warrant. If he lies, the search warrant affidavit is subject to extreme scrutiny once the case gets to court and if he is caught lying, his ass is grass.

Answer usually given (or answer which the police often claim is given): "Sure, go ahead."

Don't even get me started on police agencies confiscating "drug money" that ends up in their own coffers.

Exactly right. Amazes me the number of people who give permission and then get arrested because something was found THEN they want to sue b/c a warrant wasn't obtained. HEY IDIOT YOUR PERMISSION WAIVES THE REQUIREMENT.

of course it also amazes me the number of criminals who get busted with drugs or stolen property or whatever in their vehicle because they were pulled over for speeding, or a broken tail light or something. SHEESH if your hauling 2 tons of pot around you might want to obey the traffic laws DUH.

Good thing for cops that criminals are stupid. Guess it's a good thing for people like George to, or he wouldn't have a job.

I'll tell you what amazes me - the number of guys who (allegedly) give the cops permission to search, knowing they have meth in their pocket or a gun under the seat of the car. My clients don't always have the best judgment, but they can't be THAT stupid. And then toss in how many times I have heard, "He never asked permission to do shit. He just sat me on the curb and searched the damn car."

Kinda makes one wonder what goes on out there in the field where there are no witnesses except the cops and the crooks . . . .

Then you get judges who will believe that police never lie, even when presented with documented evidence that they are doing it. I read a couple of appellate decisions recently where the trial court was actually rebuked for even allowing the case to go to trial.

 

[TheBrain]

If only people knew their rights and had the guts to look a cop in the eye and insist on them.

"You got anything illegal in your car here?"

"No."

"Mind if we take a look?"

Proper answer: "Yes, I do mind. If you want to get a search warrant, then you can search my car. Until then, you cannot." In order to get a search warrant, the cop is going to have to convince a judge that probable cause exists to issue the search warrant. If the only reason for the traffic stop was a traffic violation, with nothing more, the cop is either going to have to lie in the search warrant affidavit, or not get the warrant. If he lies, the search warrant affidavit is subject to extreme scrutiny once the case gets to court and if he is caught lying, his ass is grass.

Answer usually given (or answer which the police often claim is given): "Sure, go ahead."

Don't even get me started on police agencies confiscating "drug money" that ends up in their own coffers.

Exactly right. Amazes me the number of people who give permission and then get arrested because something was found THEN they want to sue b/c a warrant wasn't obtained. HEY IDIOT YOUR PERMISSION WAIVES THE REQUIREMENT.

of course it also amazes me the number of criminals who get busted with drugs or stolen property or whatever in their vehicle because they were pulled over for speeding, or a broken tail light or something. SHEESH if your hauling 2 tons of pot around you might want to obey the traffic laws DUH.

Good thing for cops that criminals are stupid. Guess it's a good thing for people like George to, or he wouldn't have a job.

I'll tell you what amazes me - the number of guys who (allegedly) give the cops permission to search, knowing they have meth in their pocket or a gun under the seat of the car. My clients don't always have the best judgment, but they can't be THAT stupid. And then toss in how many times I have heard, "He never asked permission to do shit. He just sat me on the curb and searched the damn car."

Kinda makes one wonder what goes on out there in the field where there are no witnesses except the cops and the crooks . . . .

Sorry, but in most cases I will take the word of a police officer over that of a guy who was just found to have drugs on them. Do some cops lie? Of course they do, but the percentage of guys who just got caught with drugs on them who would lie is MUCH MUCH higher. I think you know that, whether you'd admit or not , is a different story.

 

[TheBrain]

In the past year, I have had three cases involving confiscation of suspected "drug money" by police. In all three of these cases, the confiscation was so obviously bogus that a school child would be able to see right through it. In one case, they had absolutely no legal justification to retain the money. The case was over, the defendant had pled guilty, and the crime charged, to which he pled guilty, was not even a drug offense. In addition, the defendant had clear and convincing, documented proof of the source of the money. Still, the arrogant bastards refused to return the money. It was over $14,000.00. Finally, after months of litigation, I was able to get the money returned to the defendant. The fact that the money was seized in the first place is not nearly as damning as the fact that the prosecution and the police agency refused to cut loose of it long after the case was over. Disgusting.

You got off easy George.

Anthony Smelley Will Get His Money Back | The Agitator

This is a massive pet peeve of mine. I do not understand why everyone who hears about this is not outraged.

"Drug sniffing dogs" and the crooked cops and corrupt DA's who use them, are a joke. A drug sniffing dog will alert to a dollar bill taken out of your wallet, or the officer's wallet, for that matter. There are traces of cocaine and/or other illegal drugs on ALL folding currency. Any expert in the field will testify to that - and they do, whenever the prosecution tries to use drug sniffing dogs to justify an otherwise illegal seizure of money.

drug dogs are a valuable weapon and not all cops and DAs who use them are crooked. You show extreme bias there.

 

[George Costanza]

Exactly right. Amazes me the number of people who give permission and then get arrested because something was found THEN they want to sue b/c a warrant wasn't obtained. HEY IDIOT YOUR PERMISSION WAIVES THE REQUIREMENT.

of course it also amazes me the number of criminals who get busted with drugs or stolen property or whatever in their vehicle because they were pulled over for speeding, or a broken tail light or something. SHEESH if your hauling 2 tons of pot around you might want to obey the traffic laws DUH.

Good thing for cops that criminals are stupid. Guess it's a good thing for people like George to, or he wouldn't have a job.

I'll tell you what amazes me - the number of guys who (allegedly) give the cops permission to search, knowing they have meth in their pocket or a gun under the seat of the car. My clients don't always have the best judgment, but they can't be THAT stupid. And then toss in how many times I have heard, "He never asked permission to do shit. He just sat me on the curb and searched the damn car."

Kinda makes one wonder what goes on out there in the field where there are no witnesses except the cops and the crooks . . . .

Sorry, but in most cases I will take the word of a police officer over that of a guy who was just found to have drugs on them. Do some cops lie? Of course they do, but the percentage of guys who just got caught with drugs on them who would lie is MUCH MUCH higher. I think you know that, whether you'd admit or not , is a different story.

You know, these little personal jabs at the end of many of your posts only make you look bad. They aren't necessary.

In fact, you remind me an awful lot of this flaming asshole who used to post here but who got banned for being precisely that - a flaming asshole. The consensus here is, however, that in addition to being a flaming asshole, this jerk also had some serious mental problems. His name was ConHog. Ever hear of him?

 

[George Costanza]

You got off easy George.

Anthony Smelley Will Get His Money Back | The Agitator

This is a massive pet peeve of mine. I do not understand why everyone who hears about this is not outraged.

"Drug sniffing dogs" and the crooked cops and corrupt DA's who use them, are a joke. A drug sniffing dog will alert to a dollar bill taken out of your wallet, or the officer's wallet, for that matter. There are traces of cocaine and/or other illegal drugs on ALL folding currency. Any expert in the field will testify to that - and they do, whenever the prosecution tries to use drug sniffing dogs to justify an otherwise illegal seizure of money.

drug dogs are a valuable weapon and not all cops and DAs who use them are crooked. You show extreme bias there.

Drug dogs are a valuable weapon when they are sniffing out hidden drugs in a car, a residence or some other similar location. Nothing wrong with that. You are taking my statement out of context. I was only being critical of the cops who try to claim that because a drug sniffing dog alerts to traces of drugs on CURRENCY, it means the money is "drug money." In my opinion, all cops and prosecutors who attempt to foist off THIS type of "evidence" in support of attempts to secure forfeiture of cash, ARE crooked, because scientific studies have clearly proven that such "evidence" is worthless. So cops who grab money based on that alone, and the prosecutors who back them up, are indeed "ethically challenged," to say the least.

 

[syrenn]

"Drug sniffing dogs" and the crooked cops and corrupt DA's who use them, are a joke. A drug sniffing dog will alert to a dollar bill taken out of your wallet, or the officer's wallet, for that matter. There are traces of cocaine and/or other illegal drugs on ALL folding currency. Any expert in the field will testify to that - and they do, whenever the prosecution tries to use drug sniffing dogs to justify an otherwise illegal seizure of money.

drug dogs are a valuable weapon and not all cops and DAs who use them are crooked. You show extreme bias there.

Drug dogs are a valuable weapon when they are sniffing out hidden drugs in a car, a residence or some other similar location. Nothing wrong with that. You are taking my statement out of context. I was only being critical of the cops who try to claim that because a drug sniffing dog alerts to traces of drugs on CURRENCY, it means the money is "drug money." In my opinion, all cops and prosecutors who attempt to foist off THIS type of "evidence" in support of attempts to secure forfeiture of cash, ARE crooked, because scientific studies have clearly proven that such "evidence" is worthless. So cops who grab money based on that alone, and the prosecutors who back them up, are indeed "ethically challenged," to say the least.

Agreed. From what i understand ALL paper currency carries traces of drugs.

 

[editec]

Those cops are more like pirates than law enforcement officers.

Immie

More like privateers, but pirate or privateer it makes small difference to their victims.

 

[MikeK]

This is what the war on drugs has led to, armed thugs taking money from from people traveling the highways.

YouTube - ‪Tennesee Law Enforcement Stealing Money from out of state innocent motorist‬‏

I never though I'd say it... I agree with you, Quantum. The "war" on drugs is wasting our time and money. Having a war on drugs is like having a war on alcohol. It's just idiotic.

While it might seem idiotic to you and me it is in fact highly beneficial to some levels and categories of society, such as the Law-enforcement Industrial Complex, which includes the private prison industry and tens of thousands of redundant police and court personnel. And in the example of marijuana alone, legalizing it would eventually have a major effect on the bottom line of the pharmaceutical and liquor industries.

Also, illegal drugs are a multi-billion dollar industry some percentage of which is distributed to officials at all levels of politics and law enforcement in the form of direct and indirect bribery.

So keeping drugs illegal has nothing to do with morality or concern for social stability. It has to do with money. Period.

 

[TheBrain]

I'll tell you what amazes me - the number of guys who (allegedly) give the cops permission to search, knowing they have meth in their pocket or a gun under the seat of the car. My clients don't always have the best judgment, but they can't be THAT stupid. And then toss in how many times I have heard, "He never asked permission to do shit. He just sat me on the curb and searched the damn car."

Kinda makes one wonder what goes on out there in the field where there are no witnesses except the cops and the crooks . . . .

Sorry, but in most cases I will take the word of a police officer over that of a guy who was just found to have drugs on them. Do some cops lie? Of course they do, but the percentage of guys who just got caught with drugs on them who would lie is MUCH MUCH higher. I think you know that, whether you'd admit or not , is a different story.

You know, these little personal jabs at the end of many of your posts only make you look bad. They aren't necessary.

In fact, you remind me an awful lot of this flaming asshole who used to post here but who got banned for being precisely that - a flaming asshole. The consensus here is, however, that in addition to being a flaming asshole, this jerk also had some serious mental problems. His name was ConHog. Ever hear of him?

Really George, you're going to claim that I took a personal jab at you and then take a HUGE jab at me? How hypocritical.

The fact is I took no jab at you. I merely pointed out that it was unlikely that a defense attorney would admit that most of his clients are liars. That's just logical.

 

[George Costanza]

Sorry, but in most cases I will take the word of a police officer over that of a guy who was just found to have drugs on them. Do some cops lie? Of course they do, but the percentage of guys who just got caught with drugs on them who would lie is MUCH MUCH higher. I think you know that, whether you'd admit or not , is a different story.

You know, these little personal jabs at the end of many of your posts only make you look bad. They aren't necessary.

In fact, you remind me an awful lot of this flaming asshole who used to post here but who got banned for being precisely that - a flaming asshole. The consensus here is, however, that in addition to being a flaming asshole, this jerk also had some serious mental problems. His name was ConHog. Ever hear of him?

Really George, you're going to claim that I took a personal jab at you and then take a HUGE jab at me? How hypocritical.

The fact is I took no jab at you. I merely pointed out that it was unlikely that a defense attorney would admit that most of his clients are liars. That's just logical.

Why, sure, ConHog. Whatever you say.