Requesting property after investigation?

[sudden valley gunner]

imported post

Lets hope they didn't do anything with it. Did you talk to a lawyer about this? You can be in for a reward either way.

When you get a traffic ticket it's the fine is because the city/state deems they are awarded that amount in damages or to deter you from committing said infraction again.

That's why I am not for letting public officials get away with just a "oops" we are sorry. Because otherwise they will keep doing it again and again. Your actions on this can help all gun owners with similar encounters in the future.

 

[Trigger Dr]

imported post

When the "detective" says he will have to look fit the items, tell him to check the evidence locker. One of my ancillary duties before I retired, was evidence custodian. This is how the system is supposed to work.

Any items taken have to be placed in "evidence" and a writtenchain of custody maintained. This provides a couple safegards.

1.The evidence has been under secure control for the entire time it was held.

2. Each person who handled the evidence had to sign for it and it had to be signed back into the evidence locker.

3. Each item will have a case number assigned to it and can be located by that case number.

You now, should have a paper trail linking the items to every person (prosecutor, detective, officer, evidence custodian etc) who has posession of the items. I hope this will assist you. If there is no paper trail, you have a dirty cop in the mix.

 

[heresolong]

imported post

TechnoWeenie wrote

I have YET to see anything that says 'you can record any official any time and any where'


You don't need explicit consent (IMO) just implied consent. You telling them that you're recording is enough, as you're not hiding it, and if they don't want to be recorded then they can STFU.

"The State urges us to adopt the view that public officers performing an official function on a public thoroughfare in the presence of a third party and within the sight and hearing of passersby enjoy a privacy interest which they may assert under the statute. We reject that view as wholly without merit."

"Because the exchange was not private, its recording could not violate RCW 9.73.030 which applies to private conversations only. We decline the State's invitation to transform the privacy act into a sword available for use against individuals by public officers acting in their official capacity. The trial court erred in denying Flora's motion to dismiss. Flora's conviction is reversed and the case dismissed."

WA vs Flora, as mentioned earlier, is clear that police officers, acting in their public capacity, have no expectation of privacy. This could easily be extended to other public officials without much of a stretch at all. You don't, therefore, even need to inform them that you are recording and you are likely to get a more honest response if you don't.