I-40 highway robbery by TN cops

[gnxtc2]

Couple of things.....

In MS we have the Castle Doctrine that says your vehicle is an extension of your home and the same search and seizure rules that apply to your house apply to your home. With that said, if you get pulled over and the vehicle reeks of weed you are going to get searched no matter if you pull out a protest sign unless the cop is in a really good mood or is in a hurry to get somewhere else.


Billy, don't take this the wrong way, but the reason this country is going to shame is not b/c citizens want to exercise their God given and constitutionally backed civil rights. Civil rights in this country have always caused a cop's job to be harder, don't like it, find another line of work. You knew the game when you joined. Do not, however, expect us to give up our rights to make your job easier. .

No offense taken but don't change the rules of the game in the middle of it. The car reeks of weed, don't it harder to get it..

Here in NJ we don't have the Castle Doctrine. I have heard bits and pieces of it and pretty much agree with some of it.

A car is on a public road, it's on public property so I can walk up to it and look in the window. I don't believe it should the same search and siezure laws as ones house. A car is mobile. Ones house is property owned by an individual. It has nothing to do with civil rights.

I was arrested because when LE searched my car because it smelled like weed. Wa wa wa wa I should free because I didn't consent to the search. My civil rights were violated....No a$$hole your civil rights were not violated, you had weed in your car. Case closed

Billy T.
gnxtc2@aol.com

 

[GregInAtl]

Forget opinions, what does the constitution say my rights are? How does having money make me a criminal (Sounds like an Obama plan....I MUST have screwed someone if I have money so take it away....Bullspit!)
This country needs to quit making so called "progress" and get BACK to the police worrying about the obvious crimes, when those are caught up get to the gray areas. You know the drug houses in every town they WONT raid because they dont have probable cause ....yet its ok to search and take money from someone that there is no proof against (innocent until proven guilty!?!?...)
You wont convince me the Police are not part of the problem....it starts far higher, but the police in most communities are turning their back to some very obvious issues. At least in Atlanta area.

 

[krom]

I was arrested because when LE searched my car because it smelled like weed. Wa wa wa wa I should free because I didn't consent to the search. My civil rights were violated....No a$$hole your civil rights were not violated, you had weed in your car. Case closed

Billy T.
gnxtc2@aol.com

No one is saying that is not an ok bust, but you do not need to search my car because you pull me over for not using my turn signal. You have no reason to suspect me of anything.

 

[V8Assassin]

No offense taken but don't change the rules of the game in the middle of it. The car reeks of weed, don't it harder to get it..

Here in NJ we don't have the Castle Doctrine. I have heard bits and pieces of it and pretty much agree with some of it.

A car is on a public road, it's on public property so I can walk up to it and look in the window. I don't believe it should the same search and siezure laws as ones house. A car is mobile. Ones house is property owned by an individual. It has nothing to do with civil rights.

I was arrested because when LE searched my car because it smelled like weed. Wa wa wa wa I should free because I didn't consent to the search. My civil rights were violated....No a$$hole your civil rights were not violated, you had weed in your car. Case closed

Billy T.
gnxtc2@aol.com

The only problem I see with your logic as far as being on a public road is does that allow the police to search a person for being in public. In other words, if I am walking down the street minding my own business not breaking any laws, should any LEO be able to arbitrarily stop and search me?

 

[V8Assassin]

Forget opinions, what does the constitution say my rights are? How does having money make me a criminal (Sounds like an Obama plan....I MUST have screwed someone if I have money so take it away....Bullspit!)
This country needs to quit making so called "progress" and get BACK to the police worrying about the obvious crimes, when those are caught up get to the gray areas. You know the drug houses in every town they WONT raid because they dont have probable cause ....yet its ok to search and take money from someone that there is no proof against (innocent until proven guilty!?!?...)
You wont convince me the Police are not part of the problem....it starts far higher, but the police in most communities are turning their back to some very obvious issues. At least in Atlanta area.

They don't actually take the money with no hope of getting it back. They simply seize the money for the purpose of making sure it was legally obtained. If you show up with the correct documentation you can get your money back. However, let's face it 250k vacuumed sealed in the spare tire looks pretty suspicious. If that person can prove it's theirs and it was legally obtained they are free to get it back.......................Good F'n Luck with that!

 

[INEEDAGN]

You are the exact reason this country is going to shame. Search warrant this, search warrant that, you have no right to search my car, bla, bla, bla. Here in NJ it already has become that. If I smell marijuana in car, I had to ask for consent to search the car. If consent is denied, the vehicle is siezed and occupants are detained. Then a search warrant is applied for. What this creates is more work for the LEO to do his/her job. In the past, I smelled weed, pulled the occupants out, searched the car no questions asked. Now the LEO has to go through all this extra work that the LEO doesn't want to do. So the car with the drugs, guns, money is let go.

Pretty soon LE will have their hands tied. So instead of LE being proactive, we'll become reactive like firemen. Let people run drugs, guns, money, etc, etc. Then LE will come in and do the clean up work.

Here is another assinine law in NJ. LE needs to obtain a search warrant to search a garbage bag placed on the curb. Why...... Because the garbage bag is black and you can't see through it, you have an expectation of privacy.

Billy T.
gnxtc2@aol.com

I'm not trying to deny "probable cause". I'm trying to point out that YOU have the wrong idea about it. Officers cruising around with this idea, and I qoute:

"IMHO: A vehicle on a public road should have no expectation of privacy, a LEO could search it at anytime. The ones that b!tch are the ones commiting the crimes."

This idea is just wrong from the start. Sure, you pull a guy over, car is an obvious "hot box" of weed smoke, "probable cause" is there. However, pull a car over for minor violation, let's say there's a tail light out, out of state tags, driver "fits the profile" (and you ALL know what I mean), you have it in your head that you have the right to search it, when you don't. Search now, find a reason later is your idea. You think that if I deny a search, that I must be doing something illegal or I wouldn't deny it. What if I am a cross dresser and got a whole trunk full of women's clothes? Extremely embarrassing, but not illegal. But I damn sure wouldn't want you or anyone rooting through my trunk now, would I? What if I'm ashamed of my trunk full of disco 8 tracks and spice girls CDs? What if I'm a germophobe and don't want your dirty fingers touching my spotless interior because you'll make me sick? Yes, it seems silly to use these situations as examples, but the point is, it's MY trunk, I'll fill it with what I desire, and you don't have the right to search through it unless I'm dumb enough to drive around drunk or whatever (which i'm not). You will undoubtedly let drug trafficers slip through, just like the dozens that drive by when you are off duty. You will also not subject innocent people to illegal searches because they "fit the profile". I've seen it with my own two eyes. 2 years ago, the dealership I work for got called by the county PD, "can we use one of your hoists for a search". Sure, hour later they pull the vehicle in, wait for the drug dog, serach every nook and cranny of this durango, find nothing. I mean nothing. Driver was not looking too happy but he didn't speak much english so I didn't catch much of his real opinion. They eventually shrugged their shoulders and let him go. Probably held this guy back for three hours. Don't get me wrong I think anyone in this country should speak english but I don't think that's a reason for an illegal search.

"You are the exact reason this country is going to shame." This sentence would be hilarious, if it weren't so damn scary. Defending my constitutional rights should be YOUR job, not mine.

As far as GNBRETT's reply: My "street lawyer" opinion was formed a few years back from a conversation with a police officer. He said that unless there was obvious "probable cause", they had to obtain permission for any vehicle search, or they'd have to get a written warrant. Exact laws vary from state to state, blah blah blah... It seems the only place any of us disagree, is exactly what "probable cause" means to an officer. If the officer is cruising around with the idea that he can search any vehicle at any time, he will undoubtedly use "probable cause" to do so, when he can't find a real reason other than "fits the profile".

 

[INEEDAGN]

IMHO: A vehicle on a public road should have no expectation of privacy, a LEO could search it at anytime. The ones that b!tch are the ones commiting the crimes.

Billy T.
gnxtc2@aol.com

I'll reiterate. If it weren't for this sentence I would have never responded to the thread. But I feel that it IS a big deal. Officers should NOT have that frame of mind. Officers are here to protect and serve, not harass over a possibility of illegal activity. In theory, every car on the road could be hauling illegal substances, but you can't search every single car for them, it is an invasion of privacy. If one was caught smoking a joint and they pulled them over, yes, that's a VERY different story. I'm pretty sure i'll never be the one who has to deal with an illegal search, but others do, because of officers who have the wrong frame of mind.

 

[injdinjn]

A MV is an exception to the search warrant requirement because it is mobile. The police dont need a warrant to search ur car if they feel that they need to and can justify the search.

If this is really true the law needs to be changed.

This is the United States of America and we have Constitutional rights. If some dummy passed a law that violates these rights that law needs to be rescinded and the dummies gene pool eliminated.

As V8Assassin stated - IT'S ALL ABOUT THE MONEY. If the cops really cared about stopping illegal drug trafficking they would stop the east bound vehicles. Not only does that keep the money from the drug dealers it removes the drugs from the street. BUT, STUPID ME - confiscating drugs does not bring revenue to the agency. TFB for the kids getting hooked on drugs - WE WANT THE MONEY.

And the drugs are easier to find, with the use of a dog, then the money.

For you hot shot legal experts how about supplying us with the legal code info so we can read where you have the right to randomly stop a vehicle and search it.

It's probably like "Driving is a privilege not a right". When my dad bought his first car he didn't need a drivers license and since he owned a motor vehicle he could legally drive it on any public road. I am yet to find a "law expert" to cite the law where driving became a "privilege".

As for getting legal money back the video stated "It took months of litigation for some to get the money back". Personally if the cops stole $5 or $10k from me, I would spend as much as necessary to get it back so they could not use it then I would sue the cops and the agency.

 

[Pablo]

The ONLY time? Wrong! If you are arrested for DUI or some other crime for which you are going to booking for or you have a warrant your car will be searched and I dont need any other reason to do so other then I can and will. it must be contemporaneous while the person is on scene.

I dont need any Probable cause to believe there is anything in the car connected to anything you are being arrested for. I only need probable cause for the arrest, not the search when involving a motor vehicle.

if ur NOT arrested and your car is being towed because you do not have a license or insurance or some other reason such as an investigation or medical reason involving ur vehicle then an inventory search will be completed which is just as invasive as a normal search and I dont need probable cause to do so.

there are numerous exceptions to the search warrant requirement so maybe you should re-read ur toilet paper. WOW

In order to get a search or arrest warrant you need probable cause. In the context of the scenarios in this post, an inventory search would be part of an arrest. In order to make an arrest you need probable cause. If someone doesn't have a drivers license then you have probable cause that a crime has been committed. You as a police officer do not convict people. We do that in court. The same is true for driving without insurance in states where it is required by law.
You can come up with left field scenarios where a search without probable cause is legal but what it ultimately comes down to is that within the context of being pulled over in a traffic stop, if the police officer does not have probable cause then they can't search your vehicle without your consent.
If they have probable cause they don't need your consent anyway so if they ask you, that's basically an admission of not having probable cause.

Ultimately with regard to hauling "drug money"... what a monumental waste of time and resources. Using the drug war to justify KGB tactics is circular reasoning. The drug war itself is nonsense. Drugs are cheaper than they have ever been, and anyone that wants to use drugs is going to use them regardless of whether or not the law says they can or can't. Its the height of naivety to believe that someone is stopping themselves from doing heroin because it's illegal. Anyone with any sense would look to Portugal where all drugs have been decriminalized and see that drug use is down.
Worried about the non victimless crime drugs cause? Well look back to our own history. Prohibition didn't work, and when it was repealed what happened?
Do you see Anheuser-Busch and Coors beer gangs having running gun battles in the street?

 

[GNBRETT]

In order to get a search or arrest warrant you need probable cause. In the context of the scenarios in this post, an inventory search would be part of an arrest. In order to make an arrest you need probable cause. If someone doesn't have a drivers license then you have probable cause that a crime has been committed. You as a police officer do not convict people. We do that in court. The same is true for driving without insurance in states where it is required by law.
You can come up with left field scenarios where a search without probable cause is legal but what it ultimately comes down to is that within the context of being pulled over in a traffic stop, if the police officer does not have probable cause then they can't search your vehicle without your consent.
If they have probable cause they don't need your consent anyway so if they ask you, that's basically an admission of not having probable cause.

Ultimately with regard to hauling "drug money"... what a monumental waste of time and resources. Using the drug war to justify KGB tactics is circular reasoning. The drug war itself is nonsense. Drugs are cheaper than they have ever been, and anyone that wants to use drugs is going to use them regardless of whether or not the law says they can or can't. Its the height of naivety to believe that someone is stopping themselves from doing heroin because it's illegal. Anyone with any sense would look to Portugal where all drugs have been decriminalized and see that drug use is down.
Worried about the non victimless crime drugs cause? Well look back to our own history. Prohibition didn't work, and when it was repealed what happened?
Do you see Anheuser-Busch and Coors beer gangs having running gun battles in the street?

an inventory search is not always part of an arrest. that is false. yes, PC is required for an arrest but in many states operating without a license is not a crime (arrest) but an fine (infraction) which carries no jail time and the vehicle can and will be towed and an inventory search will be completed. this could have all stemmed from a reasonable suspicion stop.

a police officer does not need probable cause to stop a motor vehicle just reasonable suspicion. if he approaches the car and sees contraband in plain view he can search the car. another exception to the search warrant requirement and is far from being a left field scenario. in fact that is way more common then any other reason for searching a car. of course PC would result from the plain view observation but a PO does need PC to stop the car in the first place.

could not agree more about the drug war. decriminalizing it like in Portugal would absolutely lead to less crime, less useless arrests, less money spent fighting a war that has only gotten worse over the last 10 years and save the criminal justice system billions every year that could be used for more productive things like border security.

I think the initial legalization would cause a spike in crime but over time the novelty would wear off and crime would drop drastically.

 

[GNBRETT]

If this is really true the law needs to be changed.

no it doesnt. its that way because a vehicle is mobile unlike a house.

making someone wait on the side of the road while fetching a search warrant would violate the time frame for which someone can be detained and would be considered unreasonable.

 

[injdinjn]

The issue in this post is the going after the money and ignoring the drug trafficking going on out their rear window.

To find hidden money a vehicle would have to be dismantled, possibly taken to another location, where to find drugs a dog could do it in a matter of minutes. Saves officer involved time.

But no, greed gets in the way of protecting the public again.

Govt agencies will always tell the public that monetary loss is not a public safety issue, but money, in the form of revenue, is always foremost on any govt agencies mind, and they have no qualms about "bending" the rules to get as much as possible.

 

[gnxtc2]

a police officer does not need probable cause to stop a motor vehicle just reasonable suspicion. if he approaches the car and sees contraband in plain view he can search the car. another exception to the search warrant requirement and is far from being a left field scenario. in fact that is way more common then any other reason for searching a car. of course PC would result from the plain view observation but a PO does need PC to stop the car in the first place.

Here in NJ all this changed. LE can seize contraband in plainview. If we want to go further, we need consent or search warrant.

An odor of marijuana is probable cause, not reasonable suspicion anymore. With probable cause you need a warrant or consent.

Billy T.
gnxtc2@aol.com

 

[SGRIM]

I got a question for you LEO's. What makes you decide to call for a warrant if you ask to search a car and the person refuses?

That would be a hard call IMO, hate to let a bad guy go and hate to worry a judge for nothing...

 

[K Beauchamp]

Couple of things.....

In MS we have the Castle Doctrine that says your vehicle is an extension of your home and the same search and seizure rules that apply to your house apply to your home. With that said, if you get pulled over and the vehicle reeks of weed you are going to get searched no matter if you pull out a protest sign unless the cop is in a really good mood or is in a hurry to get somewhere else.


Billy, don't take this the wrong way, but the reason this country is going to shame is not b/c citizens want to exercise their God given and constitutionally backed civil rights. Civil rights in this country have always caused a cop's job to be harder, don't like it, find another line of work. You knew the game when you joined. Do not, however, expect us to give up our rights to make your job easier.


Lastly, when is everyone going to wake up and realize the simple truth. The gov't, the cops, and everyone else involved including the judge don't really give a damn if you do drugs or if drug dealers sell drugs. The only motivation behind the "drug war" is MONEY! It has nothing to do with protecting soceity and everything to do with job security. They go after the money instead of the drugs b/c it's easier, and in the end it's all about the money anyway. Instead of fining and incarcerating the people they just seize their money. Why catch someone with drugs when you can catch someone with money and take it? What do the cops do with 100lbs of coke, they burn it. What do the cops do with a million bucks they just seized, spend it. The truth is the supposed "drug war" is nothing but a sorry ass money grab perpetuated under the guise of protecting society when in reality not only did we lose the thing years ago, we never really had any hope of winning in the first place. In the abscence of the ability to win leaves what we have now, legalized robbery by the state.

If this is really true the law needs to be changed.

This is the United States of America and we have Constitutional rights. If some dummy passed a law that violates these rights that law needs to be rescinded and the dummies gene pool eliminated.

As V8Assassin stated - IT'S ALL ABOUT THE MONEY. If the cops really cared about stopping illegal drug trafficking they would stop the east bound vehicles. Not only does that keep the money from the drug dealers it removes the drugs from the street. BUT, STUPID ME - confiscating drugs does not bring revenue to the agency. TFB for the kids getting hooked on drugs - WE WANT THE MONEY.

And the drugs are easier to find, with the use of a dog, then the money.

For you hot shot legal experts how about supplying us with the legal code info so we can read where you have the right to randomly stop a vehicle and search it.

It's probably like "Driving is a privilege not a right". When my dad bought his first car he didn't need a drivers license and since he owned a motor vehicle he could legally drive it on any public road. I am yet to find a "law expert" to cite the law where driving became a "privilege".

As for getting legal money back the video stated "It took months of litigation for some to get the money back". Personally if the cops stole $5 or $10k from me, I would spend as much as necessary to get it back so they could not use it then I would sue the cops and the agency.

The law is called the Carroll Doctrine. I will sumarize what it states. A motor vehicle traveling on a public road does not retain the same rights as does a persons curtillege and residence and may be searched upon probable cause that a crime is being commited or at minium has reasonable articulable suspicion. PC means the officers observes/smells an actual crime in progress. RAS means the officer, has compiled many factors that does not amount to PC but just below it. RAS would be for example, out of state tags, rental vehicle, multiple air freshners, owner not the driver, different stories or the occupants as to where they are going coming from etc,etc,etc. RAS allows for a continued detention while further investigating, IE; k-9 scan, etc. ALso to say that getting stopped for a tag light or something minor is bs, how do you think tons of drugs and DRUG MONEY) is seized. Another big thing to remember is Timothy McVeigh was stopped for not displaying a registration plate. These types of stops and search must happen. Do some "bad" or uneducated officers make bad stops and bad searches? Yes they do and this is a problem that I blame on their supervisors/states attorneys for allowing to happen.

One of the other comments is can you be stopped and searched for just walking down the street, the answer is yes and no. If you are walking in an area that is an open air drug/prostitution area yes you can be stopped and the officer must have at least RAS to search you. The law for this is quoted in Terry vs Ohio, also known as a Terry stop, which allows officers who have RAS to stop persons and "pat" them down for weapons or other objects that in themselves are illegal that a officer would immediatley identify as contriband. Once again they are officers out there that either violate a persons rights and stretch this law, or they are not educated enough on the laws to know what they can or can do.

 

[K Beauchamp]

How about they do more than ride around eating dunkin donuts picking on working people going to work early in the a.m. trying to afford gas? How about they go after real criminals instead of small time bs? The real problem with this country isn't INEEDAGN it's morons that can't do their jobs. Whether it's restaurants or cops or what have you. Cops are no different than anyone else. They take the easy way out. I see it at work. People want the easy tasks. Why work hard when you can get easy prey. That is what this law is about. Easy money. I will say the few good LEO's hands are tied due to the corruption starting with government down to the patrol officer. So it's a catch 22 the right thing can never be done.

WeSS I agree with your whole paragraph with exception to the first two sentences. I'm happy when I see some of your comments from citizens. There is coruption at all levels and normally the good guys finish last, but I'm happy with that as long as its done correctly. The comment about donuts is a sterotype that has lived its life. I work with a group of about 35 guys and ladies and not one of us has ever eaten donuts while working and thats for 18 years. We do drink loads of coffee buts that to keep us awake after working 12 hours shifts. As far as picking on drivers early in the morning well you have traffic cops and you have homicide investigators. The later is supposed to arrest murders, the first's jobs is to write tickets. No we don't have quotas but since this started back in the 1930's there are people that depend on the economy of "tickets", judges, lawyers, insurance companies, the governments general funds, etc,etc,etc, Is it right "NO" but is it going away "no" because its way to big now and there is nothing we can do about it. So the best bet is obey the traffic laws, becuase the bus is not stoping it will be rolling along for years.

 

[injdinjn]

RAS would be for example, out of state tags, rental vehicle, multiple air freshners, owner not the driver,

Being legal to pull over a vehicle just because of out of state tags or its a rental is just wrong, very bad law.

And how do they know the driver is not the owner until they stop the vehicle.

As for BS stops. I got stopped in NB for driving a CA vehicle on the hwy with no front plate. Sawed off little prick dicked me around for 30 min just to give me a "courtesy" ticket in case I got stopped again.

 

[GNBRETT]

Here in NJ all this changed. LE can seize contraband in plainview. If we want to go further, we need consent or search warrant.

An odor of marijuana is probable cause, not reasonable suspicion anymore. With probable cause you need a warrant or consent.

Billy T.
gnxtc2@aol.com

An odor of Marijuana will soon no longer be PC to search a vehicle either. recent case law in Mass has changed that there.

its the sign of the times with states legalizing small amounts of Marijuana. before, any amount was illegal, now small amounts are being decriminalized so ones PC or reasonable susp is being challenged.

and NJ wonders why they have so many issues there.

I still find the no tasers for cops in NJ comical.

 

[GNBRETT]

I got a question for you LEO's. What makes you decide to call for a warrant if you ask to search a car and the person refuses?

That would be a hard call IMO, hate to let a bad guy go and hate to worry a judge for nothing...

the warrant is always the rule. there are exceptions to the search warrant requirement and when one of those exceptions is not applicable then a search warrant will be applied for.

cars may be searched w/out a warrant whenever the car has been stopped for a valid reason and the police have PC to believe the car contains contraband or some sort of evidence. If the police have PC to search the car, all the compartments and packages in there that could possibly contain evidence or contraband are all fair game.

the police can order the driver and any passengers out of the car for safety considerations even though there is no suspicion of a crime other than the traffic infraction for which he/she was stopped. The cops also can frisk the occupants for weapons if the officers have a reasonable suspicion that the occupants are involved in some sort of criminal activity and are reasonably concerned for their safety.

we still get search warrants for motor vehicles tho. usually when a car is involved in a homicide or some other serious crime and left there. its always best to get the search warrant because the burden is now on the judge.

but we are not getting a search warrant every time we search a car tho when PC is there out in the field when conducting a MV stop. the car is not always mobile depending on the scenario tho and the police didnt always stop the car for a violation.

its often just left somewhere and we dont know who the operator or occupants are. like when a car is used in a robbery or all shot up and left somewhere. we will get a search warrant for sure under those circumstances.

Cars are not protected like homes are. Again, mobile and therefore evidence and instrumentalities of crimes can be moved, destroyed, discarded, etc. You don't have as much privacy in your car because its out in public, cops can see through the windows legally. not so with ur home cause ud likely have to be on ones property to do so. cars are on public roads.

 

[Pat Adkins]

I was down there around Easter (in my car with out of state plates ) & was never bothered. I did see them & they are always there (my sister lives there & told me this). I drive 3-4 mph above the speed limit & cars were passing me like I was standing still & those were the cars they were pulling over & most of them are locals.
they sit in the middle in plain view & the people that arent paying attention & are speeding are the ones that are getting pulled over.