Ask A Cop!!! Post Your Questions Here!

[Dzscubie]

I read on a forum that police were paying delivery men to report underage drinking

(pizza parties, etc)

I just don't understand why "reasonable suspicion" couldn't cover just about anything.

"Reasonable Suspicion" is used at all border crossings (land, airport and seaport) by Customs and Border Protection and is the foundation of all the questions they ask you. It is a much less restrictive level of suspicion and allows for less restrictive searches. This is utilized at the border under Border Search Authority, you may not be aware of this but when you leave the US you leave your constitutional coverage behind in the US. When you request to enter the US you are not covered under the 4th amendment until granted entry by Customs. This is why they can search your bags, cars, boats, planes without violating your "rights". Border search is designed to protect the countries revenue and the people from contraband. "Probable Cause" is used by civilian police to articulate the facts and circumstances to justify their actions under the law and the constitution.

 

[Dzscubie]

lol

she deserved it

BUT why didn't he just man handle her?

I do think he was worried she was demented and could run into traffic.

(I don't support tasers) If they start to taze me, I plan to scream that I have a pacemaker.

Have you ever tried to actually man handled someone, regardless of age, that wants to fight back or even resist? Now I ask a question of you, if you saw a video of an officer about 6 foot tall and he was struggling with an older woman and ended up putting her on the ground to control her and handcuffing her?. What would you think? Officers are damned if they do and damned if they don't when it comes to older subjects. People seem to think that age gives you a free pass when it doesn't. When you have to take someone into custody you try to do it with as little force as possible and as quickly as possible, but some people just wonÃÕ cooperate.

BTW, don't believe all the hype being put out on ECD's, most of it is trash. An ECD is less aggressive and less likely to cause injury (to the subject or the officer) than fist fighting, a baton or shooting someone. And yes I have been hit, quite a few times as IÃÎ an instructor for ECD's.

 

[TJcop]

Actually there is both "reasonable suspicion" and "probable cause".

 

[mike_s]

Towed vehicles are "inventoried"...aka searched...for any expensive property that we might want to remove and place into property for safekeeping. Sometimes we'll search a vehicle if we are seizing it due to a serious injury or fatal accident.

what are the legalities if something illegal is discovered during an inventory that was not the primary reason for the search?

since there was no reason to search for that illegal item, can it be used against the person in court, especially when a search warrant was not obtained?

This comes up all the time. People think that a misspelled name or wrong hair color voids the ticket. It doesn't. And, even if a judge tosses it, it can be re-issued.

The most common error is the officer writing the citation and citing the wrong statute number on it. In that case, the ticket is dismissed and the officer will issue another citation for the correct violation before the defendant leaves court. No big deal. We're human too!

I can understand a judge not tossing it because of hair color. to me that's not reason enough to toss it out.

but if he writes the wrong offense down and the judge tosses it, for the cop to immediately re-write the ticket for the mistake that was just tossed, that's just wrong and borders on harrasement.

 

[TJcop]

what are the legalities if something illegal is discovered during an inventory that was not the primary reason for the search?

since there was no reason to search for that illegal item, can it be used against the person in court, especially when a search warrant was not obtained?




I can understand a judge not tossing it because of hair color. to me that's not reason enough to toss it out.

but if he writes the wrong offense down and the judge tosses it, for the cop to immediately re-write the ticket for the mistake that was just tossed, that's just wrong and borders on harrasement.

If something illegal is found during an inventory search, yes, it is admissable and the appropriate action will be taken (arrest, etc).

If an officer makes a mistake, like you point out, that is not a reason for a "get out of jail free card". It's not harassment, it's just fixing the mistake. For instance, you are stopped for speeding, and the officer accidently writes the wrong statute, let's say for driving on the wrong side of the road. So, the judge dismisses it, and the officer admits the error...no biggie. The officer then writes a new ticket for the original, and correct, offense.

 

[mike_s]

what I'm saying is that if the judge dismisses it, it should NOT be free game for the officer to re-write the ticket again...

 

[TJcop]

what I'm saying is that if the judge dismisses it, it should NOT be free game for the officer to re-write the ticket again...

Why? Did the person not commit the offense that the correctly written ticket would show? Remember, the only reason the ticket is being dismissed (since they can't be voided after being issued, only a judge can dismiss it) is that the officer made an honest mistake. That officer is then correcting that mistake by issuing the correct citation.

If you make a mistake on some paperwork at work, do you not get to fix it?

 

[H2Andy]

reasonable suspicion does exist in the US. it is the basis for an investigative or Terry stop.

the officer must have specific facts that show the suspect has been, is, or is about to be engaged in criminal activity

it is a much lower standard than probable cause, and it's often confused with it

 

[Hallmac]

what I'm saying is that if the judge dismisses it, it should NOT be free game for the officer to re-write the ticket again...

Actually the officer is not re-writing "the ticket" again, the officer is issuing a new citation on a different charge. In your example, the judge's dismissal of the incorrect charge indicates the person did not commit the claimed offense. Since they did not, it is the correct action.

The following citations then charges the accused of a different infraction of the law. Most states allow up to a year for minor charges to be filed. They do not have to be issued at the time of offense, nor do they have to be issued by the witness of the event.

 

[Cacia]

Actually there is both "reasonable suspicion" and "probable cause".

thank-you

I have been reading about a Nevada case that just went to the supreme court and I was just surprised how far probable cause threshold seems to have..migrated.

Assessing the Supreme Court's ruling on giving ID to police. In Hiibel v. Sixth Judicial District Court of Nevada, the U.S. Supreme Court upheld ...dash cam very interesting!


I lurk on a law enforcement forum and the cool thing is you get e-mail updates regarding cases that get on their radar....issues that concern them, etc

it is a much lower standard than probable cause, and it's often confused with it

just curious, why assume I am *confused*

and it is logical people would be most concerned with the lower threshold