Courts are the arbiter and protector of rights, constitutional or statutory. No court can go back in time and undo something an officer did, but they can determine that an officer’s actions were unconstitutional and limit if not outright preclude any evidence obtained because of those actions. If officers know that a certain police tactic or action will cause any potential evidence to be precluded, they’re not likely to keep doing it, if for no other reason that it would result in a big waste of time and paperwork preparing a report and going to court hearings for nothing.
You’re right, of course. And I don’t expect anything else. And if one has the time and money, and can hire a lawyer, then I guess one could do something about it. I didn’t, on those occasions when I’ve been searched.
Like I said, I know the courts are there. But I don’t expect anything different.
Still, you’re talking about a search, not an inventory. You’re lumping the two together. Unless I missed something, the reason for an invevtory is to protect the officer from accusations of theft.
And aren’t violent felons and drunks cause for a search?
Anyway, the driver could likely inventory the car without even going near it. They don’t have to list the locked-up stuff, right?
Heck, what’s preventing the cop from simply saying that you did consent when asked? His word against yours, and how many people actually refuse the search to begin with…it wouldn’t be beyond anything normal.
Say what you will. when I was a young platinum blonde ballerina I got pulled over almost daily.* Most officers were happy to accept my phone number and give me a “warning”.
The local bowling alley got a lot of strange phone calls.
Now that I’m an older, exhausted overweight single Mom, I almost never get pulled over.
and I was driving my Mother’s White Chevy Citation, so it couldn’t have been that . . .
Once, not much. But when 5 or 6 or 8 defendants are making the same claim, IA might take notice.
The opportunities for that happening are shrinking as more and more cars are being equipped with recording gear. And more and more people are getting cell phone camcorders.
In this thread we have been talking about both. The part I was responding to was using an inventory as a pretext for a search.
And no, violent felons and drunks are not cause for a search without more.
I can’t speak of every podunk department in the country but in a professional department there are several things. In my department consent is given in writing. We have a form. We also have cameras in the cars so it is digitally recorded. That and the other limits that have been set by the courts of the state. Of course there is also my integrity but that is easily dismissed by many around here.
punoqllads: yes, there are bad apples, but do you have a better system to put in place that will fill the policeman’s role with perfection? if you have a bad run-in with a cop it’s your duty to file an iad complaint, and (at least in our department) a certain number of those will initiate an investigation. that and we as cops only get so much protection from civil suits, if you’ve been wronged take action.
Given your already expressed opinion that you will initiate an arrest solely to give a pretext for searching a car, then “unarrest” the person if the search turns up nothing, dustinsquarepants, you have ZERO room to talk about “bad apples” and morality of police officers. I give Loach much more consideration in that regard than I will ever give to you after that admission.
Riddle me this:
Why don’t you file on a bad cop? Good cops know who does the bad shit, but they rarely do anything about it. Cops should hold themselves to a higher standard, and not expect that same standard of the rest of us. Then I’d respect the great authority that we give our cops.
Clean up your own backyard, then look over the fence at mine.
Be a Serpico.
lol ds, never once did I say that I went around doing that, just that it can happen, which is what the op was asking. I don’t know why you have such a $%#@'n grudge against me personally, maybe you tried out to be a cop and were not fit enough, or whatever, but dude, get over it. I consider myself a very moral person and I stick to them, in which case it’s you who have zero room to talk, because you don’t know me. but I forget, you’re the typical armchair quarterback who has all the answers and knows not how to answer. I can say with 100% certainty that I do a job that YOU could not. but be sure to say that you could do it better, even though you’ll do nothing but post a rude comment back on an internet board.
mangeorge, serpico got shot, and I’ve heard stories just in our department of what happens to “snitches”. I do my job and try to make the difference I can, there is a whole division of our department that handles policing the police.
Maybe he looked up to cops when he was little, then had to face the hard truth when he grew more aware of the real world.
Oh, wait a minute. That was me! :smack:
Again, there is no way I will tell someone that they are being arrested and that we’re impounding his car, and then let him get back in the car for any reason. I don’t care who you are, that ain’t gonna happen.
If we just let the driver make a list of his belongings without getting into the car, he can either forget to list something important or lie about what’s in there. We would still have to verify what he listed, so there’s no difference.
I’m not inventorying the car because I’m worried about being shot. I’m inventorying the car because it is being impounded, and an inventory is required.
I’m not allowing the suspect to get back into his car because of officer safety. It’s not that I’m expecting to find a weapon in the car or even have any reason to think there might be one. I’m just not taking the chance and allowing the driver anywhere near his car.
dustinsquarepants says he’s in the fourth largest city in the US, which means Houston. Though I had a distinct feeling it’d be Houston even from his first post. Those “po pos” have their own approach to law enforcement, not necessarily shared by the rest of the state.
For the record, I have reported other officers for wrongdoing. Recently I caught one of my officers driving drunk while off-duty and detained him for another agency to handle the investigation (to avoid any conflict of interest). He was fired for it.
Your claim that good officers “rarely do anything about it” shows your bias. You have no idea what goes on inside police departments nationwide, especially since disciplinary records are not public. I’ve seen this many times, where citizens complain that officers aren’t punished when in fact they have been. We just can’t make that punishment public (unless, of course, it’s actually a criminal act).
I know that it’s true that a lot of misconduct isn’t always reported like it should be. But your claim is a sweeping generalization that cannot be supported.
