query re vehicle searches while LE looks for escapees

ok, the hundreds of nice LEs are truly eager to find the two horrible bad guys who escaped from a prison built during the civil war, as such, and as shown on the national news, LACs are running into their road blocks and the nice LEs were shown 'searching' private vehicles by looking throughout the vehicle, including the trunk.

my query, is this type of 'search' legal, yes i acknowledge 'everyone' per se are being subjected to this type of stop but have questions if documents are requested? or the nice police find something they believe is contraband?

finally, what prevents the nice LEs from setting up these types of on a regular basis?

tks,

ipse

solus said:

finally, what prevents the nice LEs from setting up these types of on a regular basis?

Click to expand...

When stopped just wave your hand and tell them "These are not the droids you're looking for."

solus said:

ok, the hundreds of nice LEs are truly eager to find the two horrible bad guys who escaped from a prison built during the civil war, as such, and as shown on the national news, LACs are running into their road blocks and the nice LEs were shown 'searching' private vehicles by looking throughout the vehicle, including the trunk.

my query, is this type of 'search' legal, yes i acknowledge 'everyone' per se are being subjected to this type of stop but have questions if documents are requested? or the nice police find something they believe is contraband?

finally, what prevents the nice LEs from setting up these types of on a regular basis?

tks,

ipse

Click to expand...

SCOTUS opinion.

I forget. Michigan v Sitz? Delaware v Prouse? I can't recall, but there's a case out there that says cops can't use roadblocks for routine crime detection. DUI--yes. License and registration--yes. Maybe even safety equipment. But, everyday crime detection, no.

Of course, its all smoke-and-mirrors, because anything else the cops find during a "legal" roadblock is gonna be admissible if it was in plain view or in a place the cop was otherwise allowed to look. Just more chiseling away of the 4th Amendment.

Motorists sue over 2-hour traffic stop after bank robbery in Aurora in 2012

Might be worthwhile to follow up either with the reporter or with attorney David Lane.
http://kln-law.com/news-stories/a-clear-violation-by-aurora-police

https://localtvkdvr.files.wordpress.com/2014/05/complaint-and-jury-demand.pdf
Don't know the disposition of the case.

Fallschirmjäger, thanks the filing was an interesting read as were the photos included in the filing.

guess i now wonder if i would have survived as i can empathize with the olde bloke thrown on the ground and then forcibly wrenched up by his arm.

ipse

These are not searches. They are merely "inspections".

Now of course the cops, the press, the general public and most lawyers and attorneys find it difficult to explain the difference, although judges can do it in their sleep.

It runs like this (using generalities):

Are you transporting Terrible Horrible Bad Guy A and/or B in your vehicle?

Are you hiding them in your vehicle?

Are they hiding in your vehicle but you don't know they are?

Do you mind if we take a look just to make sure they didn't slip in when your back was turned?

What's that? You want to know if I have a warrant? Why, only someone who is guilty of hiding someone/something would want to see a warrant. Pull over there. Yes, you are being detained. No, I do not have to tell you what RAS or PC the detention is based on. Try to leave and I'll shoot you.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=d22CiKMPpaY

Here's the warrant, now open up.

Oh! There nobody/nothing in the trunk. You are under arrest for obstruction of justice.

You know, you could have avoided all this if you had just let us look in the first place.

stay safe.

skidmark said:

These are not searches. They are merely "inspections".

Now of course the cops, the press, the general public and most lawyers and attorneys find it difficult to explain the difference, although judges can do it in their sleep.

It runs like this (using generalities):

Are you transporting Terrible Horrible Bad Guy A and/or B in your vehicle?

Are you hiding them in your vehicle?

Are they hiding in your vehicle but you don't know they are?

Do you mind if we take a look just to make sure they didn't slip in when your back was turned?

What's that? You want to know if I have a warrant? Why, only someone who is guilty of hiding someone/something would want to see a warrant. Pull over there. Yes, you are being detained. No, I do not have to tell you what RAS or PC the detention is based on. Try to leave and I'll shoot you.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=d22CiKMPpaY

Here's the warrant, now open up.

Oh! There nobody/nothing in the trunk. You are under arrest for obstruction of justice.

You know, you could have avoided all this if you had just let us look in the first place.

stay safe.

Click to expand...

how about more like: "officer, I do not like the implications you are trying to propose during this stop, as a result I would like to invoke my rights under both the 5th and the 4th, and would like to have an attorney present during any such search that is deemed legal by the presentation of a warrant signed by a judge."

then call the nearest attorney via cell phone.

obstruction of justice cannot occur if, when they provide the legal requirements, you cooperate. invoking of your rights and ENFORCING THEM, is not cause for obstruction. justice can only be created by making sure both sides play by the rules. otherwise it is tyranny.

What gets me worked up most about The Great Aurora Bank Robbery Detention, is the specious reasoning used behind it. I believe it went something like "We saw the tracing signal stop, and in order to ensure the safety of the citizens from armed bank robbers we immediately surrounded the intersection " conveniently forgetting "... placing dozens of citizen's lives in possible jeopardy instead of following the signal until it stopped somewhere away from innocent civilians."

It is patently obvious that the police considered the possibility that the tracer was discovered and thrown from the vehicle more important than the lives they jeopardized by surrounding armed criminals amidst innocents.

Ezek said:

....

obstruction of justice cannot occur ....

Click to expand...

We are not talking about whether or not you are going to be found guilty of obstructing justice.

And yes, it is tyranny. But being tyranny does not mean it will not happen.

stay safe.

skidmark said:

We are not talking about whether or not you are going to be found guilty of obstructing justice.

And yes, it is tyranny. But being tyranny does not mean it will not happen.

stay safe.

Click to expand...

true, the unfortunate reality is that it seems to be occurring at an accelerated rate under the guise of "safety" or "security" nothing is safe or secure in regards to the individual you or others when your rights are violated.

I wish people in masse would stop being such sheep, following the herd. it makes us who would prefer to enjoy our rights become targets for exemplifying why you don't go against the grain of "authority".

even if we do win in a court of law.

Ezek said:

how about more like: "officer, I do not like the implications you are trying to propose during this stop, as a result I would like to invoke my rights under both the 5th and the 4th, and would like to have an attorney present during any such search that is deemed legal by the presentation of a warrant signed by a judge."

then call the nearest attorney via cell phone.

obstruction of justice cannot occur if, when they provide the legal requirements, you cooperate. invoking of your rights and ENFORCING THEM, is not cause for obstruction. justice can only be created by making sure both sides play by the rules. otherwise it is tyranny.

Click to expand...

Just to clarify for other readers, I definitely don't recommend enforcing your rights along the side of the road. Invoke them, refuse consent to searches, etc., but don't use force.

Assuming you lose the fist-fight and/or tasering, you've put the cop in the position of losing his job and a lawsuit, or lying about what happened in whichever way will make it look like he was legal and you were obstructing or assaulting him. Backed into a corner, what do you think the cop will do? Lie? Or, tell the truth, lose his job, and lose a lawsuit?

If you're man enough to take the risks, I won't say its your basic human right to defend yourself and your rights with force if need be.

However, you might also consider recording everything, and behaving like an oh-so polite and slightly fearful victim. The cop will look that much worse for mistreating you.

Citizen said:

Just to clarify for other readers, I definitely don't recommend enforcing your rights along the side of the road. Invoke them, refuse consent to searches, etc., but don't use force.
Assuming you lose the fist-fight and/or tasering, you've put the cop in the position of losing his job and a lawsuit, or lying about what happened in whichever way will make it look like he was legal and you were obstructing or assaulting him. Backed into a corner, what do you think the cop will do? Lie? Or, tell the truth, lose his job, and lose a lawsuit?
If you're man enough to take the risks, I won't say its your basic human right to defend yourself and your rights with force if need be.
However, you might also consider recording everything, and behaving like an oh-so polite and slightly fearful victim. The cop will look that much worse for mistreating you.

Click to expand...

if you read the filing citizen, the nice APD officers 'insisted' their detainees sign releases saying they consented to the search of their vehicles and if you didn't sign they threatened the individual to hold them at the scene until they did sign.

why i was curious about what is transpiring in NY with the manhunt...do you need to stop or is it obstruction of justice not to.

ipse

solus said:

if you read the filing citizen, the nice APD officers 'insisted' their detainees sign releases saying they consented to the search of their vehicles and if you didn't sign they threatened the individual to hold them at the scene until they did sign.

why i was curious about what is transpiring in NY with the manhunt...do you need to stop or is it obstruction of justice not to.

ipse

Click to expand...

I don't know whether refusing to stop would be obstruction.

I can predict that it would be "justification" for a guns-drawn felony stop just as soon as they can catch up with your car, though. I'll give five-to-one they'll gleefully assume you or your car has an escaped murderer in it

solus said:

...
why i was curious about what is transpiring in NY with the manhunt...do you need to stop or is it obstruction of justice not to.

ipse

Click to expand...

The peaceable exercising of your rights, in NY state, could (will?) be very hazardous to your health and future well being.

ya, WW, et al., that is one of the reasons i asked, additionally within the last month a very close local NC friend was involved in a out of the blue, LE standing in the middle of the rural road stopping traffic asking for 'identification' (note i wasn't there but my friend, a former deputy, stated those are the words the LE used!). my friend asked if this was a traffic stop ~ "NO just show me some identification!" apparently, this dance went on for several more choruses until the LE ordered him out of the vehicle, turned him around and handcuffed him, of course, for everyone's safety. during this portion of the dance my friend changed his mantra to get your SGT down here immediately!!!

SGT arrived, immediately walked over and talked to my friend before his officer, did a verbal exclamation of "EXCUSE me, my officer did what?" apparently the SGT turned to the officer who immediately got a sheepish forlorn look, and stated: UNCUFF this man ~ now! then the SGT went into the apologize mode saying he will attend to his officer's training of handling these kind of situations since, point to the officer and state, apparently my officer failed to remember we are a not a show state!

my friend believes the SGT's distress was genuine and not rehearsed per se., tho it is difficult to tell sometimes since they are such good actors.

my reference is the very verbal, angry, phone call i received immediately after this encounter and subsequent conversations to include my insisting IA be contacted or a letter be generated. being former blue, he is hesitant to pursue either course.

ipse

They do it because the sheep don't stand up. Though if in a commercial vehicle the stops are legal, as far as I know. Something about the commerce clause.

WalkingWolf said:

They do it because the sheep don't stand up. Though if in a commercial vehicle the stops are legal, as far as I know. Something about the commerce clause.

Click to expand...

More to due with commercial motor vehicle traffic being a highly regulated industry.

The commerce comes in to play when discussing the federal motor carrier regulations.

How many homes have been searched without warrant or owners permission, a.k.a. Boston bomber searches.

Citizen said:

Just to clarify for other readers, I definitely don't recommend enforcing your rights along the side of the road. Invoke them, refuse consent to searches, etc., but don't use force.

Assuming you lose the fist-fight and/or tasering, you've put the cop in the position of losing his job and a lawsuit, or lying about what happened in whichever way will make it look like he was legal and you were obstructing or assaulting him. Backed into a corner, what do you think the cop will do? Lie? Or, tell the truth, lose his job, and lose a lawsuit?

If you're man enough to take the risks, I won't say its your basic human right to defend yourself and your rights with force if need be.

However, you might also consider recording everything, and behaving like an oh-so polite and slightly fearful victim. The cop will look that much worse for mistreating you.

Click to expand...

You can enforce your rights without use of physical force, one way would be having a lawyer present, or recording the verbal engagement with the officer, and submitting a copy for review by internal affairs, as well as a copy to a lawyer who will represent you for civil rights violations.

Many officers seem to forget they signed an affidavit prior to becoming an officer, and if an attorney had any balls they'd sue the officer for not fulfilling the terms of the affidavit.. Aka breach of contract.

Exercise your rights in a peaceable, humble matter and always have a video and voice recorder in your possession...

Regards

CCJ