Skip to comments.
Should Suspects Go Free When Police Blunder?
New York Times ^
| July 19, 2008
| Adam Liptak
Posted on 07/18/2008 12:03:59 PM PDT by reaganaut1
click here to read article
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-20, 21-40, 41-60, 61-80, 81-98 next last
To: reaganaut1
Well... than go ahead and start arresting everyone who says something bad about the government on the charge that it’s “Hate Speech”.
2
posted on
07/18/2008 12:07:52 PM PDT
by
Rick.Donaldson
(http://www.transasianaxis.com - Please visit for latest on DPRK/Russia/China/et al.)
To: Rick.Donaldson
3
posted on
07/18/2008 12:08:13 PM PDT
by
Rick.Donaldson
(http://www.transasianaxis.com - Please visit for latest on DPRK/Russia/China/et al.)
To: reaganaut1
“The United States is the only country to take the position that some police misconduct must automatically result in the suppression of physical evidence.”
That’s because America tends to believe in these things called “rights” for all citizens regardless of what they may have done.
4
posted on
07/18/2008 12:08:16 PM PDT
by
djsherin
To: traviskicks
5
posted on
07/18/2008 12:09:30 PM PDT
by
EdReform
(The right of the people to keep and bear Arms shall not be infringed *NRA*JPFO*SAF*GOA*SAS*CCRKBA)
To: reaganaut1
A mechanism to keep LEOs sharp, effective and on the straight and narrow. Sure, lets get rid of that, right?
6
posted on
07/18/2008 12:09:46 PM PDT
by
TLI
( ITINERIS IMPENDEO VALHALLA)
To: djsherin
If there is no writ you must aquit.
7
posted on
07/18/2008 12:10:12 PM PDT
by
eastforker
(Get-R-Done and then Bring-Em- Home)
To: reaganaut1
With so called “civil rights” laws trumping basic protections against double jeopardy, as in the cops in the Rodney King case, the whole system is one big joke. Who really cares. Thanks Bush Senior.
8
posted on
07/18/2008 12:11:55 PM PDT
by
Mark was here
(The earth is bipolar.)
To: reaganaut1
The only real alternative is a system that reliably and consistently punishes the individual police agents when they abuse citizens.
I'll believe in that when I hear that Lon Horiuchi is in prison for murder.
9
posted on
07/18/2008 12:12:24 PM PDT
by
steve-b
(Intelligent design is to evolutionary biology what socialism is to free-market economics.)
To: djsherin
Is Scalia going to recite “foreign law?”
10
posted on
07/18/2008 12:14:13 PM PDT
by
Shermy
To: steve-b
Don’t blame LH, blame the agency he worked for and his superiors for the fact they should not have even been there.
11
posted on
07/18/2008 12:15:37 PM PDT
by
eastforker
(Get-R-Done and then Bring-Em- Home)
To: reaganaut1
If this happens there will be zero incentive for law enforcement to care about any of our constitutional rights. Why bother with a search warrant at all?
To: reaganaut1
Several justices have in recent years questioned whether the rule still makes sense in light of what they called the increased professionalism of the police and the availability of alternative and arguably more direct ways to punish misconduct, including internal discipline and civil suits.How sad that our Justices are so ignorant.
13
posted on
07/18/2008 12:20:33 PM PDT
by
grjr21
To: Shermy
I hope not. Strange words coming from him.
14
posted on
07/18/2008 12:21:26 PM PDT
by
djsherin
To: reaganaut1
Scalia has a point. Why do people doing bad things get a pass because of a LEO mistake? I understand the need to protect against police abuses but do we let the child molester, islamic terrorist, rapist or other criminal go and feel superior about it because someone errs?
15
posted on
07/18/2008 12:21:28 PM PDT
by
misterrob
(Obama-Does America Need Another Jimmy Carter?)
To: reaganaut1
The case at issue won't destroy the "exclusionary rule".
It is already the law in Georgia that an officer may rely on the reports of other police departments (and transmissions on the radio) as "probable cause" for a warrant.
The key is the reasonable reliance on what appears to be accurate information.
If that becomes the law in Alabama (and nationally), it won't change Fourth Amendment law very much.
16
posted on
07/18/2008 12:24:14 PM PDT
by
AnAmericanMother
(Ministrix of Ye Chase, TTGC Ladies' Auxiliary (recess appointment))
To: misterrob
I understand the need to protect against police abuses but do we let the child molester, islamic terrorist, rapist or other criminal go and feel superior about it because someone errs? Yes, because as a matter of public policy the system of incentives currently in place offers the greatest level of protection to the most people.
To: reaganaut1
What happens if the police purposely blunder, to get someone they know or like off? This is a problem, esp in small towns. I know.
18
posted on
07/18/2008 12:27:59 PM PDT
by
Ainast
To: reaganaut1; misterrob; NittanyLion
The rule is idiotic, and has in some cases led to violent criminals going free and killing/maiming/raping again. If there is police misconduct, punish the misconduct (in the case described, it was not the officers who conducted the search, but the staff responsible for the sloppy recordkeeping.
To: microgood
If this happens there will be zero incentive for law enforcement to care about any of our constitutional rights. Why bother with a search warrant at all? They do not care now. Dock their pay, and then you'll see full compliance.
20
posted on
07/18/2008 12:30:19 PM PDT
by
mwilli20
(Don't let them reformulate it, call it "Global Warming"!)
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-20, 21-40, 41-60, 61-80, 81-98 next last
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.
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson