Posted on 06/22/2016 11:37:57 AM PDT by TangoLimaSierra
The Supreme Court ruling in Utah v Strieff awarded the police total freedom to stop any citizen, at any time, to do whatever they desire. The Supreme Court determined that the “poisonous fruit” of a police officer’s stop of a citizen can be used against them at trial. This has wiped out, in reality, any constitutional protection you thought you had. This is a sad day for the United States, for the Supreme Court has officially created a full-blown police state and clearly has no intention of honoring why this nation began the entire American Revolution — to prevent illegal searches that allowed the king to look for anything he could use to prosecute citizens.
The Supreme Court ruled that even though the officer had initially violated a person’s rights (in other words, the Constitution) the officer’s conduct was “at most negligent” and the result of “good-faith mistakes.” This language is a wink and nod to the police who only have to claim they made a mistake that was not intentional and they walk free. We have witnessed police outrageously murder citizens, but the police officers involved are usually not charged. Now, with this decision, the United States has become exactly as Ukraine stood before the people revolted.
(Excerpt) Read more at armstrongeconomics.com ...
the same argument is made concerning illegal aliens.
The illegal alien is still committing a criminal act by being in the country.
The person with the warrant still has a warrant that MUST be acted upon.
Yes, I have.
Nothing to it. The perp was a wanted man, a fugitive. He was arrested, and searched incident to the arrest. Evidence of new criminal activity was found. He was charged with a new crime and convicted.
What’s he problem?
And there's often a lot of probable cause for stopping such people.
Of course that requires both the use of politically-incorrect "profiling", and the admission that the current system is designed to ignore them.
The person with the warrant still has a warrant that MUST be acted upon.
Ah, so ignorance of the warrant is no excuse, just like ignorance of the law is no excuse?
Sounds like you want everyone, police and population, to be omniscient.
No, read the facts and the opinion again. Thomas said, and the facts of the case show, that it was AFTER the discovery of an outstanding arrest warrant, THEN they conducted a “search incident to arrest” (SIA)- perfectly valid. As Thomas said, the search was attenuated from the unreasonable stop because the SIA was conducted as part of a valid arrest pursuant to an arrest warrant.
Huh? Why would .gov have the ability to collect evidence and information after a illegal search or stop. How does .gov have any right to information for violating our rights as citizens. If that is fine why can't government use this more often to instigate more illegal stops and such as long as the overall 'good' of society is protected. That is crazy.
OH MY GOODNESS......
My Freepers......
XO
If you are ALREADY under arrest due to the outstanding warrant, you property is inventoried.
The state conceded it was a illegal stop. He wasn’t stopped for the warrant.
It’s a typical crap decision we should pretty much expect from the supreme court these days. The police get an almost unlimited “benefit of the doubt” so as not to slow down the freight train of the legal system.
Pretty much the entire concept of “fruit of the poisoned tree” has been steadily whittled away for more than a decade.
Reading...seems there is more to the story
Don’t get out of the car. Your castle on wheels.
And FReepmail me for a low-priced legal company, like insurance. NO. I don’t sell it or have any interest in it, other than that I have it, too, and have for years.
Reading...seems there is more to the story
Ding Ding! We have a winner!
Anyone who has been paying attention to the supreme court over the years will recognize that this is just one more bite taken out of our rights by the ever expanding police state. Each small bite of a piranha in and of themselves, is not really all that significant. It all of them taken together that is the danger.
Hyperbole is the rule of the day on the net. Everything is “best ever”, “funniest ever” yada yada yada with millions of bloggers trying to get hits. The guy who invented this headline is a lying @ss and should be eternally ignored.
You are exactly right. The Supreme Court does not 'Rule' at all, is just gives an opinion. The Congress has neglected its lawgiving duties, preferring to allow the Court to render politically difficult opinions and then calling that a ruling for political cover.
Thank you for pointing that out. I am always amazed at how few people read the original document, preferring to hear another's opinion at to what it means.
We have thousands of lampposts not in use at the moment.
Well said. But sadly, few Americans care about fundamentals. Even FReepers, arguably some of the most switched on, delight in discussing patches rather than addressing the imbalance of the fundamentals.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.