Off-Topic

[NDAlum]

re: Off-Topic

I did a few years back. Cop pulled me over for a seatbelt violation and asked if he could search my car. I was in a hurry so I wasn’t trying to wait around. I asked him why and he said because there’s been lots of drug activity in the area and just wanted to make sure I’m clean. I said well I don’t do drugs so sorry but no, it’d be a waste of both of our time. He said ok and gave me my ticket and that was it.

Now, and maybe NDAlum can confirm this or not, I feel like if I let him search my car and he found nothing he would’ve given me a warning on the seatbelt violation. I think it’s an unwritten incentive type thing to letting them search your car. That’s just been my experience anyway. I let a cop search my car like 7-8 years ago after a minor speeding infraction and he gave me a warning on that after he found nothing in the car. That’s happened to a friend as well.


Sent from my iPhone using Operation Sports

This is a bad practice due to the public view of this act in a courtroom. If I ask for a consent search of your person or vehicle and I'm holding onto your driver's license it's easily argued that the search was not consensual in nature as a reasonable person might feel as though they were not free to leave at this point. If I ask consent for a search I give back the driver's license and let them know the stop is over and they are free to leave. Then I would ask consent to search and might state some reasons as to why I'd like to search.

Holding compliance for a search over somebody's head to determine the outcome of the traffic stop is something nobody should do.

What you two said goes back to what I mentioned earlier about good police knowing who the local players are. Besides, something I've noticed from my time living in Baltimore then DC then moving to Texas, lets just say dem boys in Texas are loud. No job but candy paint, banging sound system, and spokes on the rims? One could only guess why the police suspect him lol.

Right but what if you weren't in a vehicle at all? From what the video showed, cops get called out to a bar fight. Arrest the guy in the bar, walk him to the patrol car, ask where his vehicle is, then say they are searching it.

Something had to have been edited out right?

Even if the owner of the establishment wanted the vehicle removed, it would be towed but that not grounds for a search is it?

You need probable cause to search a vehicle, or consent. Finding drugs on a person would amount to probable cause. An arrest gives you the green light to search a person and their personal effects. A vehicle would not be considered their personal effects unless you establish PC. Finding drugs on somebody would amount to PC to search their vehicle.

Did he give consent? Did he tell them he drove to the establishment in a certain vehicle? There's some missing information so I can't tell you how it exactly went down.

Vehicles seem to have less of a protection under constitutional law.

With regards to your comment about knowing the local players: that's true to an extent. There are many more factors that go into assessing potential criminal behavior than simply having a candy paint car on rims with loud music.

[Caulfield]

re: Off-Topic

FWIW, I've been asked if on a couple occasions if I minded a search. I say go right ahead, I don't mind. I know there's nothing to find and they seem satisfied I'd let them search if they wanted but they never have even bothered to actually search.

My brother, on the other hand, fits the stereotype and profile, and a few years back, he was stopped because the officer didn't think he was using his safety belt (he was). The officer asked my brother if he could search and my brother said no. (He was clean at this particular time in his life but he's never been fond of our blue friends). The officer detained him till the canine cop could arrive, when the dog smelled he must've got a false positive (maybe smelled some old stuff, since removed? IDK). Then they do a full search, thoroughly search his car for next 30-40 minutes. Nothing. They let him go & my brother was as happy as a clam at their expense. I didn't witness any of this and it's my brothers version of the truth but I believed him and am fairly certain this is the way it went down. My brother is a lot of things but liar really isn't one of them. Again, FWIW

[NDAlum]

re: Off-Topic

It's a violation of constitutional rights to unreasonably extend the duration of a traffic stop. This is extremely important in traffic stops in which a K9 is requested and responds to the stop.

I've pulled over cars where I get the odor of the freshest of fresh drug smells and come up with no drugs. It's either the drugs were hidden so well you can't find them or they were just taken out of the vehicle prior to the stop in some fashion.

I don't know the accuracy of these K9's as I don't work with them on a daily basis or research their stats. I do know it's not technically a "false positive" if they hit on a vehicle and don't find anything. I do believe they hit if there are or were drugs in the location. It's not exclusive to drugs that are only currently in the vehicle.

The biggest issue I would take with your example is the seat belt. Reasonable suspicion is the standard to conduct a traffic stop. I don't pull over anybody unless I know they have violated motor vehicle law. If I am not sure about a seat belt I'm not pulling you over.

You know why?

Let's say I pull over Caulfield and the reason is because I believed his seatbelt was off. I'm not sure it was but I think it was. Let's say I initiate the stop and then I walk up and see the seatbelt is on properly and then see a dead body in his back seat. Caulfield looks at me and says "Why did you pull me over officer?". I tell him about the seatbelt and he states it was on the entire time and he has a recording device in his vehicle that shows his seatbelt was on. Police investigate the dead body and discover it's a murder and Caulfield is the suspect and the murder weapon is in the car and he confesses.

Everything is now thrown out in court. Everything. He walks free on a murder because all of the evidence would be suppressed due to a lack of reasonable suspicion on the initial traffic stop.

To pull people over without concrete reasonable suspicion is reckless and something I will never do.

[Caulfield]

re: Off-Topic

I am always very careful to properly store dead bodies in the trunk, where they belong. Not in the backseat where it will mess up the upholstery and devalue the resale price of the car. Learned that good lesson on an episode of Martha Stewart Living.

[ggsimmonds]

re: Off-Topic

It's a violation of constitutional rights to unreasonably extend the duration of a traffic stop. This is extremely important in traffic stops in which a K9 is requested and responds to the stop.

I've pulled over cars where I get the odor of the freshest of fresh drug smells and come up with no drugs. It's either the drugs were hidden so well you can't find them or they were just taken out of the vehicle prior to the stop in some fashion.

I don't know the accuracy of these K9's as I don't work with them on a daily basis or research their stats. I do know it's not technically a "false positive" if they hit on a vehicle and don't find anything. I do believe they hit if there are or were drugs in the location. It's not exclusive to drugs that are only currently in the vehicle.

The biggest issue I would take with your example is the seat belt. Reasonable suspicion is the standard to conduct a traffic stop. I don't pull over anybody unless I know they have violated motor vehicle law. If I am not sure about a seat belt I'm not pulling you over.

You know why?

Let's say I pull over Caulfield and the reason is because I believed his seatbelt was off. I'm not sure it was but I think it was. Let's say I initiate the stop and then I walk up and see the seatbelt is on properly and then see a dead body in his back seat. Caulfield looks at me and says "Why did you pull me over officer?". I tell him about the seatbelt and he states it was on the entire time and he has a recording device in his vehicle that shows his seatbelt was on. Police investigate the dead body and discover it's a murder and Caulfield is the suspect and the murder weapon is in the car and he confesses.

Everything is now thrown out in court. Everything. He walks free on a murder because all of the evidence would be suppressed due to a lack of reasonable suspicion on the initial traffic stop.

To pull people over without concrete reasonable suspicion is reckless and something I will never do.

I did not know that. I figured that be considered in plain view.



Something similar happened to me a while ago.

Spoiler

I got pulled over for running a red light. At the time I did not have car insurance. They towed my car, ticketed me on the insurance, and Texas has their "responsible driver program" so I also had surcharges to pay.

But the initial reason for the stop? It was a nonexistent red light lol. It was a yield. I made a right hand turn to turn into Wal-Mart. There are stop lights at the location because of people leaving Wal-Mart and those that need to enter via a left hand turn. There were 4 lanes on my side of the highway. One for those that wish to turn left to U turn that has its own light, two that continue straight with two stop lights, and one for right turns into Wal-Mart that has no lights. People leaving Wal-Mart have their own stoplight. When they got green, the other lights are obviously red. I approach the turn and see cars leaving Wal-Mart, so obviously their light is green, which means that no one is able to make a left hand turn into Wal-Mart, so I'm clear.

Well I'm in the parking lot and see the police lights behind me. He says I ran a red light.

What about random sobriety checks? What if you see the dead passenger in Caulfield's car at a sobriety checkpoint?

[kehlis]

re: Off-Topic

I would assume that the premise of a sobriety check point constitutes all stops as being fair since every other car goes through the stop so I think anything found during that stop would be deemed admissible evidence.

[Caulfield]

re: Off-Topic

You're hired!

Excellent. I'm going to need an advance first couple checks, take a vaca and get my mind right for the grind. Also, weekends are no good for me. Tuesdays and Thursdays I'll need to knock off early for my shrink appointments and stupid anger management classes. Mondays are also iffy for me to come in (big Garfield fan here, some might even say he's my spirit animal). So if you could keep some fresh lasagna in the company 'fridge, that'd be great. Oh, and my triskaidekaphobia is pretty severe so I'll need the 31st off as well as all 13th's.
Thanks again for the opportunity, I won't let you down!

[Majingir]

re: Off-Topic

Oh, and my triskaidekaphobia is pretty severe

You have a fear of triscuits?

[Caulfield]

re: Off-Topic

You have a fear of triscuits?

Triscuits, trinkets, tricycles, I got it bad, man.
There is nothing worse than irrational fears.
At least with rational fears you have a legitimate excuse.

[Speedy]

re: Off-Topic

There is nothing worse than irrational fears.

I am always scared I will lose my wallet or lock my keys somewhere. I am always checked my pocket and or when I lock a door, that I have a way to get back in before I close said door.

[Blzer]

re: Off-Topic

Got a new flip phone, this time it can actually go onto OS (my last one couldn't very easily after they disabled the mobile site). So I tried to do a test post, but the only thing I'm unable to do so far is exit the text box after typing something in it. Perhaps the right keystroke will get me there, but I haven't found it yet.

Anyway, many people tend to hate on the flip phone and all, but this one is pretty nifty. It has its own OS (supporting HTML5), has 32GB of memory storage, can playback most all multimedia file types, has messaging threads that mimics that of the Smartphones, etc. The best news is that it has keys, because I hate touchscreen (having that as a second option would be good). The key portion is ugly because it's big and like, probably for old people lol, but otherwise the rest of it is pretty good.

[callmetaternuts]

re: Off-Topic

Got a new flip phone, this time it can actually go onto OS (my last one couldn't very easily after they disabled the mobile site). So I tried to do a test post, but the only thing I'm unable to do so far is exit the text box after typing something in it. Perhaps the right keystroke will get me there, but I haven't found it yet.

Anyway, many people tend to hate on the flip phone and all, but this one is pretty nifty. It has its own OS (supporting HTML5), has 32GB of memory storage, can playback most all multimedia file types, has messaging threads that mimics that of the Smartphones, etc. The best news is that it has keys, because I hate touchscreen (having that as a second option would be good). The key portion is ugly because it's big and like, probably for old people lol, but otherwise the rest of it is pretty good.

What prompted the change?

[Blzer]

re: Off-Topic

What prompted the change?

I'll video record it later, but three weeks ago my other flip phone suffered the white screen of death. Basically, my screen starting showing up as pure white yet the phone was still functional. So I went twenty days without being able to see a darned screen. Honestly, it wasn't even that bad. I dare anyone here to go twelve whole hours without being able to see their Smartphone screens, lol.

I was holding onto it though to see how I could get my contacts over. After playing a night-time softball game on Tuesday, I checked my phone "just because," and the screen showed! Then several minutes later it stopped. Last night, same thing... softball game, checked the phone, was working! I started to think it had something to do with the temperature outside, so last night I stuck my phone in the fridge haha. Pulled it out some minutes later, and boom! There's my home screen.

My friend explained this reason over FB: "The phone's little processor is likely old and over heating, resulting in the phone's computer to just shut off, but still runs power through the system, hence why your screen is still on. By chilling it, you're allowing the processor a few extra minutes of run time before it overheats." Maybe that is true, but wow who knew that refrigerating a phone would be a solution to anything? I really want to video record this effect; it is pretty laugh-out-loud hilarious.

Anyway, got my contacts off this weekend after doing the fridge trick, and now am in the process of getting my contacts transferred over to my phone manually. The best way to do it is the phone has a G-mail import feature, and I am going to copy-paste my spreadsheet of contacts and numbers into the one G-mail account I only use for YouTube channels, so I can import them over in one fell swoop.

[georgiafan]

re: Off-Topic

i know if your phone gets wet putting it in rice will help

[TheMatrix31]

re: Off-Topic

Hoping our dudes from Toronto here are OK today after the attack today.