To: danneskjold
Why were the police doing such a thorough search for a speeding ticket?
15 posted on
12/15/2003 2:24:52 PM PST by
NYC GOP Chick
(Clinton Legacy = 16-acre hole in the ground in lower Manhattan)
To: NYC GOP Chick
Why were the police doing such a thorough search for a speeding ticket? Doesn't say...also doesn't answer my question...
Let's say they smelled pot, searched the car and found a stash in glove box. Who gets arrested if no one claims ownership?
To: NYC GOP Chick
Why were the police doing such a thorough search for a speeding ticket? It definitely wasn't a fishing expedition. They were looking for more evidence of speeding, of course. /s
20 posted on
12/15/2003 2:27:23 PM PST by
freeeee
(I may disagree with what you say but I will defend to the death your right to say it)
To: NYC GOP Chick
Why were the police doing such a thorough search for a speeding ticket? Cop's version:
1. Cop stops car for speeding. 2. Cop asks driver for papers.
3. Driver retrieves papers from glove compartment.
4. Cop notices cash inside glove compartment.
5. Cop runs papers through police computer.
6. Driver has no warrants.
7. [Cop frustrated]
8. Cop asks permission to search car.
9. Driver grants permission to cop [under duress, of course.]
10. Cop finds drugs.
11. At first, no one admitted putting the drugs in the arm rest. Everybody arrested.
12. Eventually, the passenger fesses up to the the drugs being his.
13. Passenger convicted.
As long as
them low lives are being railroaded with these laws,
us don't care. [/s]
Joseph Jermaine Pringle v. State of Maryland
To: NYC GOP Chick
Why were the police doing such a thorough search for a speeding ticket?They were looking for more evidence of speeding in the armrest of the seat.
73 posted on
12/15/2003 3:17:09 PM PST by
Lazamataz
(A poem, by Lazamataz: "What do we do with Saddam, Now that we gottim?")
To: NYC GOP Chick
I suggest that you read my response above as well.
As for why there was a search, it was probably because something triggered the officers suspicion and he asked permission. The reason/basis for the search wasn't an issue in this case and that usually means that the driver consented to the search.
You'd be amazed at how many defendants consent to searches when their case is loaded down with drugs. They admit that they gave consent but claim that they didn't know they could refuse. Fortunately, the Supreme Court has held that police cannot coerce consent, but they don't have to tell the suspect that they're free to refuse.
To: NYC GOP Chick
Its all about revenue collection and asset forfieture.
LEO around here has a special multi-car task force to prowl the interstate specifically profiling out of state drivers in the hopes of finding drugs, guns and money.
Last week a car was pulled, search granted and $50,000 found and confiscated, No Drugs, No contraband, only money.
The Sheriff's dept. will end up keeping the money.
To: NYC GOP Chick
BTW, the reason given for pulling the car in the first place was "car was observed to change lanes without signalling".
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson