Libertarian ping.To be added or removed from my ping list freepmail me or post a message here
Posted on 08/17/2005 11:01:29 AM PDT by freepatriot32
SANDPOINT, Idaho -- Defendants in several misdemeanor drug cases that were thrown out of court for improper police procedure are now asking Bonner County to pay them damages totaling $130,000.
Officials have not yet responded to four tort claims filed recently against the county, naming Sheriff Elaine Savage, Deputy Matt Hathaway and the members of the County Commission.
Each of the four claims asks $25,000 in punitive damages and $7,500 in compensation for civil rights violations.
The claims allege that poorly trained officers in the county routinely trample civil liberties.
"A pattern of similar incidents in Bonner County patrolmen exhibiting a reckless disregard for citizens' constitutional rights exists within Bonner County," the claims read, according to the Bonner County Daily Bee newspaper.
Sandpoint attorney Fred Palmer is representing the individuals in the claims and said Tuesday the problems in the county go beyond the four claims that have been filed.
"We anticipate additional claims will be filed within the next 10 days to two weeks and until they have been resolved or gone through trial, we'd prefer not to comment," Palmer said.
The claims against the county involve misdemeanor drug possession charges that were either dropped by prosecutors or dismissed after a judge ruled that the evidence was improperly obtained.
In one claim, Joshua Thomas of Sandpoint was stopped by Hathaway Jan. 19 on U.S. 95 for having faulty tail lights. He passed a field sobriety test, but according to the arrest report, Hathaway suspected Thomas had been smoking marijuana because he noticed a green tint on Thomas' tongue. A small amount of marijuana and a pipe was seized from the vehicle.
Bonner County Magistrate Barbara Buchanan later ruled that the color of Thomas' tongue was insufficient cause for a drug investigation and prosecutors dropped their case after the evidence was suppressed.
Another claim alleges that Hathaway stopped Christopher Neal Evans of Pullman, Wash., on Feb. 12 near Ponderay for failing to signal and crossing the center line. Evans passed a sobriety test. Hathaway continued to question Evans about drug use, seized a small amount of marijuana and cited him for possession. But in court, the evidence was suppressed after a judge ruled it was obtained after Evans passed the alcohol evaluation and should have been free to leave.
A third claim was filed by Del Rae and Marcus Turley of Careywood, who were arrested Feb. 2 after deputies responded to a hang-up call to the county's 911 emergency line. The deputies reported they smelled the odor of burnt marijuana as they talked with the couple on their porch and conducted a search that found a small amount of marijuana in the home. After the couple asserted in court the search was illegal because the deputies lacked probable cause to enter the house, prosecutors filed a motion to dismiss the case.
The fourth claim was filed by Vida McCurdy of Hope, who alleged her civil rights were violated when Hathaway arrested her for investigation of drunken driving on Jan. 22. There were no details available in court records for her case since charges were never filed against McCurdy.
ping
Libertarian ping.To be added or removed from my ping list freepmail me or post a message here
The "legalize it" and "lock 'em all up" crowds will be here in 5...4...3...2...1...
Judge Dude... Since you dropped the charges, can I have my weed back?
Small town. Same judge?
So these guilty dopeheads were idded in possession of drugs, but because they got a judge looking to abuse a loophole, they got off and now are suing.
Trash is trash.
Wait until they are hit with avoiding the FEDERAL sales tax on drugs!
They'll wish they didn't bitch about the misdemeanor charges!
Sandpoint is a small resort town on Lake Pend d'Oreille.
We used to own property there. Lovely place but you need
to bring money. No real jobs. Lots of strange folks and
I wouldn't want to be a landlord there again...
The machinery needs occasional adjustments.
The 4th Amendment is not a "loophole."
Twisting the interpretation of reasonable suspicion is. The cop suspected based on appearance or actions that the person had drugs. Turned out they did, and his suspicion was correct. It wasn't an unreasonable search, except to dopers and this judge (perhaps one and the same?)
If it is a common side effect of dope use, then yes. Note that if the dopehead hadn't had drugs on him/in his car, he wouldn't have been charged. But he did.
The 4th Amendment is not a "loophole."
It most certainly is to the drug warriors the 9th and 10th amendmants use to be a loophold but the have successfully had those"loopholes" closed by supreme court now they are working on closing out the 5th, 2cd,and 1st amendment "loopholes"
Plus they want their drugs back.
It's not. Trust me, I've been around plenty of dopers. Now, if he was searching for Sour Apple Jolly Ranchers...
Ridiculous victimology nonsense with little parallel.
Fair enough. If what you say is true, let that guy walk this time, but no compensation, the idiot was in possession. As to the others, no.
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.