Citation with an execution date.

[Everto]

Okay forumfall, last night I got a citation for "Possession of Fireworks".
I'd like your input on the situation, please, no TL;DR's.

It was the Fourth of July around 9:00 PM, and I just got home from the official firework show with every last shot of fireworks on my camcorder. I come home to a guy launching something from a launcher in the middle of the street. Now, I was full of interest, so I pulled out my camera, and recorded it. Now someone shouted "They're coming!" and we all knew who... the police.

Everyone fled back into their houses, as well as I did. But now I had to go to my friends house for a sleepover, so me and those leaving went back outside to leave, but by the time we were ready, they've showed up. Now me, with my backpack on my car contained the following items: An empty can of mango juice, a towel, my camcorder, an Xbox 360 Controller, two Xbox 360 games, paper, and my school ID. The cops left me alone at first, and questioned the five other people outside that were all my friends. But then the off-duty cop that lives next door came up and said "Check his video recorder!" and I closed my bag at those words.

The off-duty cop who said nothing to mention that he was a cop, was only identified by the other policemen as "He's a sergeant". He yanked my bag off the top of my fathers car and proceeded to open it. I replied "I want a warrant!" and he said "I don't need a warrant." and ripped open my bag. When I tried to snatch it back, one of the officers got me in one of those arm locks, and I realized that they simply won't listen. Now, the off-duty cop took God knows how long to work the camcorder but in the end saw the video. The only thing you could see is a man in white clothes shooting something from a launcher! No faces at all. Now that was a pretty useless thing for them, until they asked "Do you have any OTHER fireworks on you?" now I'm thinking "Other fireworks? I didn't have any to begin with..." but then I looked around, and boom, a bottle rocket laying behind me almost under my fathers car.

To just give them what they want, I gave them the item and they asked me if it was mine, I replied "I guess... I mean, I found it right there..." and I pointed to the spot. The cops cut me off at "I mean" and decided to issue me a citation. My father came out and he was furious that everyone BUT me got off the hook for the fireworks. Now, it's no big deal, I just have to appear on 8/27/08. . . they took my camcorder too.

But here's the catch;
do you remember the line where I told the off-duty cop that I want a warrant? I didn't consent to the search, yet they had no proof that I was the firestarter. It was illegal search and seizure, and the camcorder can be taken off as evidence. If that alone is not enough to get the case thrown out, they can't prove the bottle rocket is mine. The off-duty cop said nothing about me shooting anything, I was just an observer. i expect this off-duty cop to show up on my court-day, because he is about to get raped by my long dick of vigilance.

I'll tell you one thing though, because he violated my rights, I'm obligated to sue him on those conditions amirite? But I won't if he and the other officers write me a WRITTEN apology about this condition, and I want it in their signature. That's only if I win though.

The citation is going on my wall behind my computer, and if I win, so will those apologies.

So Forumfall, do you think I can pull this off for great vigilance?

[Spades Felligan]

When are you being executed?

[GlacierFreeze]

They needed consent. They screwed themselves. I don't think you can sue them, but whatever they found can't be used against you (or something like that). Talk to a lawyer.

[Everto]

When are you being executed?

It's a figure of speech, felligan.

when I signed that citation, I signed their failure.

They needed consent. They screwed themselves. I don't think you can sue them, but whatever they found can't be used against you (or something like that). Talk to a lawyer.

Yeah, the thing even worse is when I didn't give them consent and tried to keep my bag, they put me in that arm lock thing and told me to calm down. =_=

[Bawlin]

So why did you say that firework was yours? If it was then well they got you, but if it wasn't why would you admit that it was because then that means it's in your possession. You say they violated your rights, but then you "gave them what they wanted?" Hypocritical imo.

[alfaroverall]

Seriously, /lawsuit man. Don't let your lawyer coax you into a class action suit and you might get enough to buy yourself a home in cash.

[Everto]

So why did you say that firework was yours? If it was then well they got you, but if it wasn't why would you admit that it was because then that means it's in your possession. You say they violated your rights, but then you "gave them what they wanted?" Hypocritical imo.

Bawlin, they obviously didn't care for me. It's not their job. Every time I didn't want to give them what they wanted, they'd pull some other shit on me.
ie; the arm lock when I didn't give them the consent of my bag.

I tried to tell them it wasn't mine, but they kept asking over and over, I gave them the same reply, "It was right there." then I finally said "I guess it's over there." which could be interpreted as "I guess, it was over there."

Seriously, /lawsuit man. Don't let your lawyer coax you into a class action suit and you might get enough to buy yourself a home in cash.

but what if i just decide to represent myself?
i'm not illiterate in terms of legal issues, but i didn't exactly want to call out "ILLEGAL SEARCH AND SEIZURE" and give away the only thing I had against them.

[Uilamin]

in your case it doesn't seem like they need a warrant as they saw something reasonable suspicous and investigated. Now if they didn't know you had the cam corder and searched you it would potentially be a different story (note: in that situation they could probably search you for fireworks without a warrant).

[VidarDf]

You wont get a thing. don't waste your time.

[Everto]

in your case it doesn't seem like they need a warrant as they saw something reasonable suspicous and investigated. Now if they didn't know you had the cam corder and searched you it would potentially be a different story (note: in that situation they could probably search you for fireworks without a warrant).

They didn't know I had the camcorder.
The cop next door just knew someone was recording.

Does that basically mean the same thing?

You wont get a thing. don't waste your time.

I really don't think I will either, but after all my fucking law-abiding years, some stupid shit like this catches up to me? everyone around me knows I hate getting in trouble, so I always follow the law.

I am not pleased with this at all.

[RayesKotrora]

You should go over the top and say you want to watch them write it and then have them read it to you on national television, then bend over and have them kiss your ass while you say "Apologize"...all on national television...then sue them.

[Everto]

You should go over the top and say you want to watch them write it and then have them read it to you on national television, then bend over and have them kiss your ass while you say "Apologize"...all on national television...then sue them.

If only I was that much of a badass.

[Metal Wolf]

Move to a state that isn't nazi bitch fuck crazy about a sparkler. Its a god damn firework for fucks sake. I would have fucking got in a fight with every cop there if they had tried to put me in an armlock over a fucking firework. I'd be damn sure to add a few new teeth to my collection.

[VidarDf]

want some useful info everto.

fight the case... but do it like this


Police officers get paid to go to court, they do it on duty. call the police station, after you figure out the name of the officer that issued the citation, call everyday during the week and ask if he is in. When they tell you... "hes off today" delay the court hearing to that day. Most of the time a cop wont go to court on his day off... mostly over something this stupid.

Second.. before that day comes.. delay it. Call the court house a day early and Say something came up. IE family emergency and your unable to make it. They will postpone it.bang, you've fucked up his week. get them to reschedule on the same day the following week. He wont be there... if he is.. you pay the citation, if he isnt.. then you get off the hook.

it works.

[Teutates]

One thing you should always do, become known with the cops or "friends". And you can drive drunk. Well at least where I live.

[Rokolith]

Fuck those cops, I hope you win.

[alfaroverall]

but what if i just decide to represent myself?
i'm not illiterate in terms of legal issues, but i didn't exactly want to call out "ILLEGAL SEARCH AND SEIZURE" and give away the only thing I had against them.
Don't represent yourself.

[Killuminati]

You definitely need a lawyer if you're going against the police....

Plus I'm confused. Is the damn thing yours? I'm guessing it is since you confessed. I never understood the fireworks deal.

[Durindana]

you lose (at least in terms of suing the cops). I wouldn't worry though, if the video doesn't incriminate you it sounds like you should just show up in court and blow their case open. Seems like there were plenty of witnesses who could corroborate your claim that you never really acknowledged the firework on the ground was yours.

Anyway: there's no requirement that you be issued a citation for a misdemeanor rather than actually arrested and booked; see City of Lago Vista (defendant's name escapes me at the moment, it's a rather well-known case though).

That being the case, circumstances under which you are issued a citation are a seizure of your person and your immediate effects (essentially, whatever is within your reach at the time). The rationale for searching an arrested defendant (which is what you were) concerns weapons, not contraband, but it's an unfortunate reality that almost any surroundings search can be justified after the fact.

It's possible the off-duty guy screwed his co-workers by alluding to the presence of a camera (and not, say, a gun) in your bag, but the arresting officer only has to testify that he was looking for weapons, and the camera seizure becomes legal.

Once the camera is legally seized, viewing its contents probably (this is kind of an interesting question, but I don't have time to look it up) becomes permissible too. But that doesn't really matter, since the video doesn't ID you anyway. You should get it back once the ADAs fail to make a case against whoever it is you were filming.

Edit: I just reread some of the posts about warrants. Common misconception: you (cops, that is) do not, repeat, do not need a warrant to search and seize the person and objects in the control of and within the immediate surroundings of an individual who is under arrest - whether that person is later booked and jailed, or cited, as here. Okay, go forth and multiply.

And yes, IAAL but not your lawyer.

[BlueLion70]

It should depend on the judge, but technically the law is on your side. On the other hand, there seems to be a theme in this country of cops being considered above the law, based on the way they act.

What state do you live in?

EDIT: I missed the part where you confessed to being in posession of fireworks. That pretty much negates any rights you have, even if they had already illegally searched your bag.

[Yobaj]

One thing you should always do, become known with the cops or "friends". And you can drive drunk. Well at least where I live.
Fucking idiotic cops worse than the motherfucking drunk drivers. Seriously how can you know this and be fine with it?

[Spinewire]

Why did you get busted for having fireworks? (or not having them)

I thought you lived in the land of the free...

[Slypieguy]

You can't "sue the cops;" you can raise defenses at your court date though and get out of your citation. Constitutional rights are used as shields (against unconstitutional laws or procedure) not as a sword.

[Slypieguy]

Why did you get busted for having fireworks? (or not having them)

I thought you lived in the land of the free...

As far as explosives and guns, only the south is free :p

[SSguy]

Your bag was open, thats along the lines of being voice recorded in a public area.

Try to get a plea for whatever you can get by testifying against the guys you recorded....Those are the assholes who got you into this in the first place.

[Damwa]

Edit: I just reread some of the posts about warrants. Common misconception: you (cops, that is) do not, repeat, do not need a warrant to search and seize the person and objects in the control of and within the immediate surroundings of an individual who is under arrest - whether that person is later booked and jailed, or cited, as here. Okay, go forth and multiply.


So, cops can arrest someone and then proceed to go through all his belongings and then upon finding nothing simply say; "GTFO and STFU." ? Wouldn't they need some grounds on which to arrest a person, or is this simply "we arrested him 'cause we felt like it."?

It should depend on the judge, but technically the law is on your side. On the other hand, there seems to be a theme in this country of cops being considered above the law, based on the way they act.

What state do you live in?

EDIT: I missed the part where you confessed to being in posession of fireworks. That pretty much negates any rights you have, even if they had already illegally searched your bag.

Cops can illegally search someones property or belongings - upon finding something use it against him, and then have the search become retro-actively legal by virtue of the confession obtained on the grounds of the illegal search?

[Everto]

want some useful info everto.

fight the case... but do it like this


Police officers get paid to go to court, they do it on duty. call the police station, after you figure out the name of the officer that issued the citation, call everyday during the week and ask if he is in. When they tell you... "hes off today" delay the court hearing to that day. Most of the time a cop wont go to court on his day off... mostly over something this stupid.

Second.. before that day comes.. delay it. Call the court house a day early and Say something came up. IE family emergency and your unable to make it. They will postpone it.bang, you've fucked up his week. get them to reschedule on the same day the following week. He wont be there... if he is.. you pay the citation, if he isnt.. then you get off the hook.

it works.

but will this really work, this sounds like a lot of trouble and almost impossible for me to pull off.

Don't represent yourself.

Well, that does sound like a bad idea.
But I don't want a three-thousand dollar lawyer for something this stupid.

You definitely need a lawyer if you're going against the police....

Plus I'm confused. Is the damn thing yours? I'm guessing it is since you confessed. I never understood the fireworks deal.

No, I didn't want them to think it was mine, so I gave it to them and said "I guess it's right there..." in response to "Do you have any other fireworks?"

you lose (at least in terms of suing the cops). I wouldn't worry though, if the video doesn't incriminate you it sounds like you should just show up in court and blow their case open. Seems like there were plenty of witnesses who could corroborate your claim that you never really acknowledged the firework on the ground was yours.

Anyway: there's no requirement that you be issued a citation for a misdemeanor rather than actually arrested and booked; see City of Lago Vista (defendant's name escapes me at the moment, it's a rather well-known case though).

That being the case, circumstances under which you are issued a citation are a seizure of your person and your immediate effects (essentially, whatever is within your reach at the time). The rationale for searching an arrested defendant (which is what you were) concerns weapons, not contraband, but it's an unfortunate reality that almost any surroundings search can be justified after the fact.

It's possible the off-duty guy screwed his co-workers by alluding to the presence of a camera (and not, say, a gun) in your bag, but the arresting officer only has to testify that he was looking for weapons, and the camera seizure becomes legal.

Once the camera is legally seized, viewing its contents probably (this is kind of an interesting question, but I don't have time to look it up) becomes permissible too. But that doesn't really matter, since the video doesn't ID you anyway. You should get it back once the ADAs fail to make a case against whoever it is you were filming.

Edit: I just reread some of the posts about warrants. Common misconception: you (cops, that is) do not, repeat, do not need a warrant to search and seize the person and objects in the control of and within the immediate surroundings of an individual who is under arrest - whether that person is later booked and jailed, or cited, as here. Okay, go forth and multiply.

And yes, IAAL but not your lawyer.

Paragraph 1: The video only reveals me lighting fireCRACKERS [snap crackle pop] that were taken at another point in the day in broad daylight. There were five other witnesses that saw the bottle rocket on the ground as I was going through my bag, but they were all my friends, wouldn't that matter?

Paragraph 2: I don't understand this paragraph too much, except I wasn't arrested, or booked. I was cited, and I went into my house.

Paragraph 3: The off-duty officer went through the bag himself, the uniformed officers didn't do anything to my bag until AFTER the officer pulled the camera out of my bag and spent countless minutes trying to operate it. They found my towel, my paper, and my soda can and empty mango juice can.

Paragraph 4: Apparently the officer said I get the camera back after the case is closed. Once again, it doesn't ID me doing the illegal fireworks apart from the firecracker.

Paragraph 5: I don't understand too much here, does that mean I cannot object and claim illegal search and seizure?

It should depend on the judge, but technically the law is on your side. On the other hand, there seems to be a theme in this country of cops being considered above the law, based on the way they act.

What state do you live in?

EDIT: I missed the part where you confessed to being in posession of fireworks. That pretty much negates any rights you have, even if they had already illegally searched your bag.

California.

I guess if it's called confession... I really don't know what my reply falls under.

Your bag was open, thats along the lines of being voice recorded in a public area.

Try to get a plea for whatever you can get by testifying against the guys you recorded....Those are the assholes who got you into this in the first place.

No, it was closed by the time the off-duty cop took my bag from me.

I can't testify against mysterious people. I don't know who did it.

- - -

Come on guys, really you guys are the only people actually helping me on this situation, the only five people that witnessed me getting buttfucked by the cops can only appear and say the bottle rocket was on the ground. But even then, apparently my "I guess it's right there..." reply seems like a confession.

Should I even bother pleading not guilty? Because with this information I'm definitely losing hope in my case.

[SSguy]

So, cops can arrest someone and then proceed to go through all his belongings and then upon finding nothing simply say; "GTFO and STFU." ? Wouldn't they need some grounds on which to arrest a person, or is this simply "we arrested him 'cause we felt like it."?


Off duty Sarge counts as a witness. Thats good enough grounds.

[Durindana]

So, cops can arrest someone and then proceed to go through all his belongings and then upon finding nothing simply say; "GTFO and STFU." ? Wouldn't they need some grounds on which to arrest a person, or is this simply "we arrested him 'cause we felt like it."?

No; the arrest has to precede the search when the search is undertaken (or justified after-the-fact, choose whatever terminology you like best) to safeguard the cops' safety. That was true here; these kids were all "under arrest" when the cops were questioning them, which they would have found out quickly had they tried to leave.


Cops can illegally search someones property or belongings - upon finding something use it against him, and then have the search become retro-actively legal by virtue of the confession obtained on the grounds of the illegal search?

No; that comment about the confession making the search ok didn't make any sense. This is Forumfall, after all.

[Spinewire]

Try to get a plea for whatever you can get by testifying against the guys you recorded....Those are the assholes who got you into this in the first place.
Nobody likes a grass

[Damwa]

No; the arrest has to precede the search when the search is undertaken (or justified after-the-fact, choose whatever terminology you like best) to safeguard the cops' safety. That was true here; these kids were all "under arrest" when the cops were questioning them, which they would have found out quickly had they tried to leave.


Doesn't US law require some formal process of arresting someone? In Denmark it is required to explicitly state that someone is arrested, what he is being arrested for and other pertinent formalia (time, date blablabla).
That is to say; wouldn't he have been made aware that he was arrested, in order to be arrested?

[SSguy]

Well, that does sound like a bad idea.
But I don't want a three-thousand dollar lawyer for something this stupid.


Then just take the fine? You set yourself up to take the fall.
First by observing
Second by not cooperating(You should have said "I caught the guys on tape, check my camera") Would have went a hell of a lot smoother.
Third, by picking up that firework and handing it to them.
If its left on the ground, its abandoned. If you pick up an the item, uits considering yours. When you HAND it to them, you are giving it to them, which is assuming ownership.

Should have left it there, because now your fingerprints are all over it.


No, I didn't want them to think it was mine, so I gave it to them and said "I guess it's right there..." in response to "Do you have any other fireworks?"


Bad move. Should have let them pick it up.


Paragraph 1: The video only reveals me lighting fireCRACKERS [snap crackle pop] that were taken at another point in the day in broad daylight. There were five other witnesses that saw the bottle rocket on the ground as I was going through my bag, but they were all my friends, wouldn't that matter?


Thats grounds for an even bigger search, certainly not going to help you out at all.
You need new friends imo. Heresay does not prove fact.
Considering you now have your prints all over it, you are screwed.


Paragraph 3: The off-duty officer went through the bag himself, the uniformed officers didn't do anything to my bag until AFTER the officer pulled the camera out of my bag and spent countless minutes trying to operate it. They found my towel, my paper, and my soda can and empty mango juice can.


Irrelevant things they find don't matter, stop bringing it up as if it proves any innocence.
I don't know if you are going to get any where with an off duty sargeant, I'm pretty sure off duty officers are stil lallowed to uphold the law....I would feel pretty fucking angry if they weren't.


Paragraph 4: Apparently the officer said I get the camera back after the case is closed. Once again, it doesn't ID me doing the illegal fireworks apart from the firecracker.


Prints on the thing you picked up, as well as the camera


No, it was closed by the time the off-duty cop took my bag from me.

IT DOES NOT MATTER. You had it opened in the first place.


I can't testify against mysterious people. I don't know who did it.


But if they pick up these "mysterious people" some later date, you are available to help them prosecute. It doesn't hurt to try.


Come on guys, really you guys are the only people actually helping me on this situation, the only five people that witnessed me getting buttfucked by the cops can only appear and say the bottle rocket was on the ground. But even then, apparently my "I guess it's on the ground..." reply seems like a confession.

Should I even bother pleading not guilty? Because with this information I'm definitely losing hope in my case.

Plead not guilty if you want, but your dumbass got yourself into a bad situation, it would just be quicker to take the fine.
I fail to see where ANY of us should even believe you because you are a fellow forumfaller.

[SSguy]

Nobody likes a grass
I do.

Let me know if you still feel that way when your mom and dad get killed and the only guy linked to the case isn't going to snitch and would rather do jailtime.

[Durindana]

Everto I started to make a longass point by point explanation per your previous post, but that kind of stuff makes me nervous. I'm not a criminal lawyer and am not licensed to practice in your state.

Suffice it to say that IMO your best bet is to show up in court, tell the whole story from start to finish, cop to the firecracker and explain the cop's misunderstanding re: the bottle rocket. In other words, just tell the judge what happened. With any luck (and five witnesses ought to help) the cops' behavior will piss off the judge and you'll get a warning (if the firecracker's illegal, which I have no idea about in your jurisdiction).

[Durindana]

Doesn't US law require some formal process of arresting someone? In Denmark it is required to explicitly state that someone is arrested, what he is being arrested for and other pertinent formalia (time, date blablabla).
That is to say; wouldn't he have been made aware that he was arrested, in order to be arrested?

In a word, no.

[Everto]

I fail to see where ANY of us should even believe you because you are a fellow forumfaller.

Perhaps I fail to see where I should listen to you as you are a forumfaller.
Your post has been taken note of, but a proper reply will not be issued.

You are a fellow forumfaller after all.

(if the firecracker's illegal, which I have no idea about in your jurisdiction).

It's not illegal, I guess just the fact I gave it to them fucked me under the conditions.

[GlacierFreeze]

At least talk to a lawyer about it. Most of them give a free consultation. If he thinks you can win then you should fight it.

If not, then you're saying it's okay for cops to abuse their powers and violate individual's rights.

If so, good luck.

[Exultus]

In Right-Wing America you don't have rights.

Sucks to be you.

[Protonix]

call the ACLU!

[Everto]

If not, then you're saying it's okay for cops to abuse their powers and violate individual's rights.

They get away with it in the end anyway.

I've decided I'm pleading guilty.
Because of my stupidity, I will pay the fine and/or do the community hours.

my problem is solved now, this thread can die but you guys may debate on it any further but it will no longer influence my decision.

And SSGuy, as much of an assface your post was to me, you're right.
I'm sorry for seemingly disrespecting you.

[Lethn]

Told ya, we're all living in police states.

[Slypieguy]

In Right-Wing America you don't have rights.

Sucks to be you.

rofl because it's those right wing nutjobs who want to take away your guns and explosives right?! You're precious, next thing we know you'll be in a thread sympathizing with an anti-abortion guy and blaming the right for the current state of a woman's right to choose. Those evil Republicans! Everything across the board is all their fault! lolol

[GlacierFreeze]

I've decided I'm pleading guilty.
Because of my stupidity, I will pay the fine and/or do the community hours.


The only stupidity is letting them violate your rights and accepting it. They had no right to take your bag and search it without consent, a warrant, or probable cause (I doubt they had that, you just walked outside...).

[Dredread]

Drama, drama, drama...


To just give them what they want, I gave them the item and they asked me if it was mine, I replied "I guess... I mean, I found it right there..."

Where do you live? I want to send the police this confession... You failed because of this statement... You claimed it... That's what the coke addict said... And if it had been shot off you might not have failed... But your lawsuit failed because of that.

[VidarDf]

yes everto what i said before does work. i did it to get out of a speeding ticket. other then looking up the court # and the police station # and making a few calls its not to much work.

Your allowed to delay your hearing before the actual day without providing proof of why you have asked for a delay.

second.. you can sue the police, either independently or the city as a whole. However this is not a suit you would want to go against the city with, just show up, and tell the judge what happened. I've defended myself in court on multiple charges due to stupid DoT officers. They give you a chance to talk, prepare what you need to say and hopefully they listen or the cop doesnt show up. But if i were you, i'd do what i said first.

[Durindana]

rofl because it's those right wing nutjobs who want to take away your guns and explosives right?! You're precious, next thing we know you'll be in a thread sympathizing with an anti-abortion guy and blaming the right for the current state of a woman's right to choose. Those evil Republicans! Everything across the board is all their fault! lolol

FWIW the contraction of the Fourth Amendment (which is what we're talking about here) is mooooost definitely the work of the conservatives on the Supreme Court, esp. Rehnquist and Scalia.

Anyway, Everto, I wouldn't necessarily throw your hands in the air.

1. Find out if the fireCRACKER you're on video doing whatever with is actually illegal.

2. If it is, make sure the charge (possession of fireworks, was it?) is the appropriate one.

3. If it isn't illegal or they haven't correctly cited you (the cite to the law violated must be on the citation), hell no don't plead guilty. They'll lose on the bottle rocket, sounds like.

[Slypieguy]

FWIW the contraction of the Fourth Amendment (which is what we're talking about here) is mooooost definitely the work of the conservatives on the Supreme Court, esp. Rehnquist and Scalia.


Which wouldn't matter in this case if the loony left didn't shit their pants over anything containing a little gun powder. Both sides have their anti-freedom streaks, acting like it's only one of them is just dumb.

[Durindana]

Which wouldn't matter in this case if the loony left didn't shit their pants over anything containing a little gun powder. Both sides have their anti-freedom streaks, acting like it's only one of them is just dumb.

tbh this made me giggle... fireworks being banned because of gunpowder? That's the straw-iest straw-man I've ever seen outside of the Wizard of Oz. That kind of policy has to do with kids maiming themselves, and (in California right now, for example) starting wildfires.

[Slypieguy]

tbh this made me giggle... fireworks being banned because of gunpowder? That's the straw-iest straw-man I've ever seen outside of the Wizard of Oz. That kind of policy has to do with kids maiming themselves, and (in California right now, for example) starting wildfires.

I didn't mean literally because of gunpowder, just making a joke of how the left thinks we shouldn't be allowed to have anything that goes "boom." It's just them trying to protect us from ourselves as usual. And if the problem is with kids, just make them have an required age to purchase like my state does.

[Everto]

Anyway, Everto, I wouldn't necessarily throw your hands in the air.

1. Find out if the fireCRACKER you're on video doing whatever with is actually illegal.

2. If it is, make sure the charge (possession of fireworks, was it?) is the appropriate one.


I've already lost hope, no point pulling on a string to nowhere.

1. It's legal, they sell them on the corner store ffs.

2. Yes. If it's possession of ILLEGAL fireworks, then I'm not going down without a fight.

Whatever you guys say isn't going to change my decision of guilty.

edit;
i guess in reality, i'm guilty for being a dumbass.

[Kietharr]

What the fuck you vagina, what kind of homospeak is this. You're posting on forumfall, if you're going to sit there and take it in the ass change your name to Villuin and go buy a PS3, you have EXCELLENT grounds for dismissal of charges here.

Here is how you defend yourself:

1. You were searched illegally and forcefully restrained without warrant
2. Said video evidence (again, obtained in a search that violated federal law) does not indicate who lit said explosive, and it certainly was not you, as you were either working the camera or did not arrive until moments before it was lit (I don't know the whole story, twist things up a bit but NEVER outright lie in a courtroom)

If asked why you did not stop them, say that it is not your job to enforce the law, and that you did not want to cause bad blood with your neighbors and/or their friends. That will reinforce your case that you are a highly responsible young man who consistently avoids conflict with both peers and authority. Have your friends testify that you did not light it and throw in a comment or two about your character, that you do indeed avoid conflict with authority and that you would never knowingly put yourself in a position where you are in conflict with the authorities.

Oh and its no big deal if you do lose, OH GOODNESS NO ONE MORE HOUR OF COMMUNITY SERVICE VERSES A GUILTY PLEA PLEASE KILL ME GOD.

[Death's Chill]

Fuck, even if they apologize to you by taking you out to fucking dinner, I'd sue them to high heavens. Fuck I hate cops.

P.S. - FUCK

[Spart]

Fuck, even if they apologize to you by taking you out to fucking dinner, I'd sue them to high heavens. Fuck I hate cops.

P.S. - FUCK




Oh please god do this, cops piss me off.

[Airius Droc]

Seriously, /lawsuit man. Don't let your lawyer coax you into a class action suit and you might get enough to buy yourself a home in cash.

You're so wrong on so many levels.

[Airius Droc]

call the ACLU!

I'm a card carrying member of the ACLU and I wouldn't call them over that.

Of course, I wouldn't have don't half the stuff this guy did, and wouldn't have been in this situation to begin with.

[Airius Droc]

Here is how you defend yourself:

1. You were searched illegally and forcefully restrained without warrant

Probable cause. Cop Eyewitness. Jesus, it's just like if they want to search your car and you say "no I don't consent"...they still search it, Sherlock.

2. Said video evidence (again, obtained in a search that violated federal law) does not indicate who lit said explosive, and it certainly was not you, as you were either working the camera or did not arrive until moments before it was lit (I don't know the whole story, twist things up a bit but NEVER outright lie in a courtroom)

He's going to get a fine and he's going to talk tough about this and say "I could've sued their asses" for the rest of his life. You should tell him to grow up and move on.

If asked why you did not stop them, say that it is not your job to enforce the law, and that you did not want to cause bad blood with your neighbors and/or their friends. That will reinforce your case that you are a highly responsible young man who consistently avoids conflict with both peers and authority. Have your friends testify that you did not light it and throw in a comment or two about your character, that you do indeed avoid conflict with authority and that you would never knowingly put yourself in a position where you are in conflict with the authorities.

Cept that there's this forum post on the internet that contradicts that completely.

Oh and its no big deal if you do lose, OH GOODNESS NO ONE MORE HOUR OF COMMUNITY SERVICE VERSES A GUILTY PLEA PLEASE KILL ME GOD.

This kid should be a man, stop trying to be cool, give the cops some fucking credit (a whole fucking apartment complex burnt down in Toledo leaving 800 people homeless last night because of assholes shooting fireworks) and take some accountability for his own actions. The cops show up, you tell them the truth and stop fucking around and you'll be fine. If you do that (and you sure as hell didn't) and they fuck with you, THEN you sue them.

Kids.

[Death's Chill]

Probable cause. Cop Eyewitness. Jesus, it's just like if they want to search your car and you say "no I don't consent"...they still search it, Sherlock.

Police cannot search your car at will. They have to have a warrant, or proof that they had a reasonable reason to search it. They had neither.



He's going to get a fine and he's going to talk tough about this and say "I could've sued their asses" for the rest of his life. You should tell him to grow up and move on.

No, these cops deserve to get fucked up, badly.

This kid should be a man, stop trying to be cool, give the cops some fucking credit (a whole fucking apartment complex burnt down in Toledo leaving 800 people homeless last night because of assholes shooting fireworks) and take some accountability for his own actions. The cops show up, you tell them the truth and stop fucking around and you'll be fine. If you do that (and you sure as hell didn't) and they fuck with you, THEN you sue them.

Kids.

One apartment, in millions. Big fucking deal. Everyone thinks that anything with even minimal risk should be illegal. It's fucking stupid. Society is filled with nothing but pussies and control freaks. :(

[Kietharr]

Eh, I wouldn't have recorded it nor would have I bothered trying to snatch it back, I would have been cool about it and said "Well, I hope you know you're in violation of my fourth amendment rights and I have grounds to file suit against you, I hope you don't think whatever that recording could possibly contain is worth the potential trouble I could cause you through the courts".

At that line they'd either say fuck it and leave or continue search, making them look bad and you look good. Probable cause is an issue but in reality, not a big one. They had nothing indicating that you were in violation of the law other than a vague suggestion from an off duty officer and that you were at the scene (along with a bunch of other people who weren't forcefully searched). Like I said, you could pretty easily get this case thrown out regardless of what they end up charging you with.

[Airius Droc]

Police cannot search your car at will. They have to have a warrant, or proof that they had a reasonable reason to search it. They had neither.

You're telling me that an off duty cop saying "search the recorder" doesn't give them cause? Really? REALLY?

If this kid gets a lawyer, the lawyer will stop him right there and explain that he's wasting his money.


No, these cops deserve to get fucked up, badly.

Wow, you're standard of justice is really warped.

Society is filled with nothing but pussies and control freaks. :(

At least you know your faults.

[Bamboopanda]

They get away with it in the end anyway.

I've decided I'm pleading guilty.
Because of my stupidity, I will pay the fine and/or do the community hours.

my problem is solved now, this thread can die but you guys may debate on it any further but it will no longer influence my decision.

And SSGuy, as much of an assface your post was to me, you're right.
I'm sorry for seemingly disrespecting you.

You are a pussy and a coward then. You do not ever surrender your rights. Especially if you are a man. Period. The only reason we have laws, courts and rules governing the behavior of government officials is to keep all people equal and to offer fair and balanced ways of bringing disputes to a close with out the escalation of violence and vigilantism.

Any time anyone lets someone in power get away with killing your rights and you do not stand up and fight in some way you are complicit in a crime much worse than anything you have done. If such things continue on for an extended time, the concept of equality is eroded and lost. After that point only blood can 'prove' to those who have gained power that they are your equal and you theirs.

To fight that degrading and promote peace you must fight even pissant shit like this. Otherwise you have given them express permission to do worse later. If you cannot fight the small things, you will not fight when the time comes for the large things. Any time you or anyone else rolls over and just takes it because it is easier, you are doing a disservice to anyone who has come before and fought for the privilege you are tossing away.

If the judge in your crap town/county/state throws it out, fight like a fucking rabid dog all the way to the federal government and don’t stop until every avenue is exhausted. If enough do it, it will assist in putting those who presume to think they are your betters in their place. The only difference between you and ‘authority’ is permission. Do not give your permission to shit on your life.

[Airius Droc]

http://www.aclu.org/police/gen/14528res20040730.html

Know your rights.

[Bamboopanda]

http://www.aclu.org/police/gen/14528res20040730.html

Know your rights.

Your rights are outlined in the founding documents of the nation (http://www.archives.gov/exhibits/charters/constitution_transcript.html). Those are not given rights that can be taken simply because an person is having a shit day. Those are acknowledgements of our inherent rights, and are worded as such to limit government powers. The government can be anyone who exerts power over another, sanctioned or not. If someone ignores those rights and then the governing body does not punish that person to the fullest extent possible then you have no reason to behave in a civil manor.

Telling someone to 'Toe the line' when authority is around is idiotic and damaging to our life, liberty, intelligence and lineage. Those in authority have a job to do, if they have ANY problem being civil and giving more honor and respect to random members of the population than they should ever expect in return they need to be removed and find a different career. The very definition of the job should make each and every officer understand that they are the aggressive party in ALL circumstances unless openly invited, it should never be expected that any human should ever relinquish any power to another simply because of a 'sanctioned' authority.

If you come into contact with one who does not understand such a simple thing, they must be removed from a position of authority and their supervisors disciplined should the problem be ignored. Yes, your link helps people who would rather be left alone comply in the most explicit way possible to avoid being 'inconvenienced'. That link is an example of an affront on our rights, and that such a thing is even accepted is horrid.

There is an give and take in all manors of civil discourse, that is required from all parties. At this point we as a population are receiving less than our share of respect. That is a problem and should be actively fought. First and foremost it must be brought inline in peaceful ways before those who think like me decide enough is enough. I understand why such a link is in existence, but the fact that it is directed at an otherwise innocent and peaceful parts of the population is a slap in the face.

/Edit: Link to a transcription of our "rights" for those who need to be reminded. Keep in mind this is the limiting of government control not a grant of such rights, that is only given by strength.

[Airius Droc]

Telling someone to 'Toe the line' when authority is around is idiotic and damaging to our life, liberty, intelligence and lineage.

Who's telling him to tow the line? He doesn't have a case.

Get real.

If the cop walked over to him, threw him to the ground and searched his backpack for anything he could find, yeah, sue the bastard. But the cop didn't do that. The cop arrived to the scene looking for people using fireworks illegally. It's a safety concern for grown ups. Ya know, people that own all those houses, don't like people out in the middle of the night with explosives, don't think that children should be out late, don't want to worry about their property or their kids. That kind of thing.

So they call the cops and the cops show up. They rightfully question 6 people fitting the description of whoever called in the complaint - probably the off duty cop. Then the off duty cop tells them to search a boy that he knows has a video camera. A judge is going to say that's probable cause. He's going to put those boys on the scene, and have an active member of the police force as a witness.

So then the boy says "Get a warrant" and the cops says he doesn't need want - and he doesn't because he's got probable cause. Not to mention, the boy shuts the bag and pulls away. Now the cops can say they felt threatened - what if he had a gun or a knife?

Look man, I'm all for people having their rights, but I'm also for the police doing their fucking job - and based on the OP, they did. Hats off for this kid figuring out that he was being silly and just paying the ticket. Now he can read the ACLU website - STFU next time and let things happen as they will - who knows, maybe next time he'll have a case.

[Surly]

Yeah, they only need probable cause to search your person or your shit in public... it's different if your shit is in your house, but that kind of scenario could go either way for a judge. So get a lawyer if you want, either way you're just going to go to court and tell them the truth. If you get stomped on and no justice is served, hold on to your hate and buy a lot of guns. I'll get in touch with you when it's time to rock!

[Death's Chill]

You're telling me that an off duty cop saying "search the recorder" doesn't give them cause? Really? REALLY?

Yes, I am. Just because they say he's an off-duty cop doesn't mean he is. However just for the sake of the argument let's assume he really is a cop, just because he was off-duty doesn't give him superpowers. He's just another human.



If this kid gets a lawyer, the lawyer will stop him right there and explain that he's wasting his money.

Oh please. Much harder cases have been fought and one, fortunately for our sake not everyone in the governmental and legislative branches are corrupt.




Wow, you're standard of justice is really warped.

I did not mean physically beaten, by the way. I mean they need a taste of their own medicine. From what I read from the OP, they are nothing but the typical power hungry control freak cops that everyone despises.



At least you know your faults.

I don't consider myself either...

[Death's Chill]

Yeah, they only need probable cause to search your person or your shit in public... it's different if your shit is in your house, but that kind of scenario could go either way for a judge. So get a lawyer if you want, either way you're just going to go to court and tell them the truth. If you get stomped on and no justice is served, hold on to your hate and buy a lot of guns. I'll get in touch with you when it's time to rock!

But they have to prove they had probable cause, which they didn't.

[Airius Droc]

Yes, I am. Just because they say he's an off-duty cop doesn't mean he is. However just for the sake of the argument let's assume he really is a cop, just because he was off-duty doesn't give him superpowers. He's just another human.

The OP said he was an off duty cop. You're right, it doesn't mean he has super powers, I'm just telling you how I think it works. Kids vs. Off Duty Cop....who's the judge going to believe?

I did not mean physically beaten, by the way. I mean they need a taste of their own medicine. From what I read from the OP, they are nothing but the typical power hungry control freak cops that everyone despises.

Tough job, some kid shuts a backpack and pulls away? You don't think you'd have him in a head lock and search the backpack? I would - which is why I'm not a cop. I have a family I want to come home to. That dude probably has one too - and he's out on the 4th putting up with punk kids that can't follow the laws, and can't communicate properly because they think they know their rights but they really don't.

[Death's Chill]

The OP said he was an off duty cop. You're right, it doesn't mean he has super powers, I'm just telling you how I think it works. Kids vs. Off Duty Cop....who's the judge going to believe?

Oh well let me tell you that I don't think he has a 100% chance to win, because the judge is indeed likely biased as you said. But yet, they still may win if they get a fair judge. Worth a try imo, least it will send a message to the cops.

Tough job, some kid shuts a backpack and pulls away? You don't think you'd have him in a head lock and search the backpack? I would - which is why I'm not a cop. I have a family I want to come home to. That dude probably has one too - and he's out on the 4th putting up with punk kids that can't follow the laws, and can't communicate properly because they think they know their rights but they really don't.

Yes, he believes that the cop had no right to go through his stuff, which he didn't (he did NOT have probable cause because a stupid off duty officer said to search his backpack).

You trust cops way too much.

[Airius Droc]

You trust cops way too much.

I don't trust cops much at all actually. But I do believe in the rule of law.

There were fireworks all over the place on the 4th. If a person wanted to, they could've gone to 20 different fireworks shows over this weekend.

But no, people have to go out in the street in a residential area and set them off at the expense of everyone around them. Assholes. My neighbors do that year round. I've never called the cops, I've never complained, but I hate it. 3am, it wakes my kids up sometimes. My kids find bottle rockets in the backyard sometimes.

You'd better believe if I ever called the cops and said I witnessed them doing it - the cops would have probable cause to search them (if they were out in the street). If there wasn't a witness, that would be very different. The cops couldn't just see people outside and search them for the sake of searching them (and that's not what happen here).

Ya know, cops do serve a purpose. You don't have to trust that purpose, but you could at least recognize it when it's being served.

[Everto]

Okay, so half of forumfall is calling me a kid, which IMO I am, but I'm old enough to know what's right and what's wrong.

The only thing I did wrong that night was observe an illegal firework launching take place, try to protect my bag [because honestly, the off-duty cop is a jackass to everything I own. He has one of my rubber kick balls that bounced into his yard], and hand them a bottle rocket that I saw on the ground to avoid trouble.

Within those three instances, as I am what forumfall declares a "kid" you would expect me to have memorized the conditions that require a search warrant? I only know that you should request one when you feel searching is unnecessary. I found it unnecessary because I happened to be at the wrong place, the wrong time, with the wrong item(s) [camera and bottle rocket].

If you really think I'm that troublesome, then thank God you have no idea how I deal in life. I don't even fucking jaywalk because I absolutely HATE running into the trouble.

Now you're probably going to ask, "Then why the fuck did you just not comply with the cops?" simply because I don't like how they operated, with the announciation of "Check his video recorder!" I panic'd, as I've never ever been in such a situation before, so I replied with "I want a warrant!" to try and void him from ravaging my items.

The point is, I can simply find no way out of this. Even though you may think I am guilty of being an accessory to firestarting and burning down three-thousand rain forests. I am not, I really could not care about your opinion on me myself as a person, I requested an opinion about how you think the case would go.

If I wanted to hear "troublemaking teenage punks" I'd go to a senior center, is that really what you are, forumfall?

[Airius Droc]

I didn't know how old you were, and I didn't mean "kid" as disrepectful to you personally.

If there's anything I disliked about the OP it was the outraged that you were being searched. Cops have a job to do, and imo they were doing it.

[Everto]

If there's anything I disliked about the OP it was the outraged that you were being searched. Cops have a job to do, and imo they were doing it.

I just didn't like the procedure. There was no courtesy in what they've done to me. Through that whole night, the most nicest thing they did to me was when they let me out of the fucking arm lock. There was no "Sir, can you please open your bag?" it was a snatch, and I snatched back.

it's not their job to be nice, but they don't find the most compliant people with rudeness, and I'm just that kind of person.

[Airius Droc]

I just didn't like the procedure. There was no courtesy in what they've done to me. Through that whole night, the most nicest thing they did to me was when they let me out of the fucking arm lock. There was no "Sir, can you please open your bag?" it was a snatch, and I snatched back.

it's not their job to be nice, but they don't find the most compliant people with rudeness, and I'm just that kind of person.

I can understand that.

The advice on the ACLU website is sound though, they know what they're talking about. I try to revist that site all the time so that I keep my cool when I get pulled over. It's very difficult sometimes.

One time when I was living in DC, I was walking through the city with a girlfriend near the whitehouse. We were talking and I was just enjoying the day. All the sudden a cop comes out of no where screaming at me to "get back!" We just kept walking towards him out of momentum and failure to recognize what was going on. He came right at us screaming again "get back!"

The next thing I know, they're roping off the street, cops are coming out of no where and everyone's told to get the hell away from there. I have no idea what was going on...nothing for all I know, a drill, a power trip, the motorcade was leaving or returning - who the fuck knows? But the way that dude came at me, he presumed I'd be able to switch gears in a millisecond.

So yeah, I can see why you'd pull away, or why you'd think the cops were being dicks.

[Everto]

Personally Airius, this is why I try to avoid trouble. I can do jack shit under pressure.

However, I guess my collapsing didn't do me any good.
I guess I'll just study that ACLU until I can recite as I take a bubble bath with my rubber ducky tonight.

However, I do thank you for dropping by my thread. This is actually a big thing to me even if forumfall doesn't think so, this is my first citation/trouble with police ever. z_z

[Death's Chill]

Well, you didn't do anything wrong, so don't let it shake you up. Just try to avoid police in the future, regardless of whether or not you think you're in the clear. Police don't care.

[Surly]

Personally Airius, this is why I try to avoid trouble. I can do jack shit under pressure.

However, I guess my collapsing didn't do me any good.
I guess I'll just study that ACLU until I can recite as I take a bubble bath with my rubber ducky tonight.

However, I do thank you for dropping by my thread. This is actually a big thing to me even if forumfall doesn't think so, this is my first citation/trouble with police ever. z_zNow that Homeland Security is here, it won't be the last! I'm starting to think it's too much trouble to learn how you're allowed to express your rights. Shooting police gets more and more appealing by the day.

[Airius Droc]

Now that Homeland Security is here, it won't be the last! I'm starting to think it's too much trouble to learn how you're allowed to express your rights. Shooting police gets more and more appealing by the day.

Yeah, that's a mature response. It's statements like this that almost make me happy that the government tracks all our internet traffic.

[Slypieguy]

Yeah, that's a mature response. It's statements like this that almost make me happy that the government tracks all our internet traffic.

Yea, nevermind the fact that the country was founded on such a "mature response"

[Surly]

Yea, nevermind the fact that the country was founded on such a "mature response"
lol, my thinking exactly. There's nothing more reverend than standing up for your rights, nothing more patriotic than watering the tree of liberty with the blood of tyrants, and nothing more respectable, in my opinion, than being an individual.

[Airius Droc]

Yea, nevermind the fact that the country was founded on such a "mature response"

That's an interesting interpretation.

Our country was founded on people shooting cops because they searched a person's backpack for fireworks?

[Surly]

That's an interesting interpretation.

Our country was founded on people shooting cops because they searched a person's backpack for fireworks?
Unreasonable search and seizure... where have I heard that before?

[Airius Droc]

lol, my thinking exactly. There's nothing more reverend than standing up for your rights, nothing more patriotic than watering the tree of liberty with the blood of tyrants, and nothing more respectable, in my opinion, than being an individual.

Talk about delusions of grandeur.

[GlacierFreeze]

Unreasonable search and seizure... where have I heard that before?

4th Amendment to the Constitution of the United States perhaps? haha

[Drohn Moharri]

lol they enforce fireworks laws where you live?

[Airius Droc]

Unreasonable search and seizure... where have I heard that before?

Even you said they had probable cause.

[Surly]

Yes, we get it, Airius. You're not going to bite the hand that literally feeds you. I understand. I don't fault you for it. However, those of us who're strong enough to make it in life as individuals and stand on our own two feet tend to enjoy the liberties that come along with it. If we didn't, we'd probably quit working for our betterment and start collecting welfare.

Even you said they had probable cause.The legal definition of "probable cause" is pretty loose and subject to local law, so it's not that big of a deal. That's why I said "it could go either way" depending on the judge and local laws, I didn't say they had what I personally would call probable cause, nor did I say that the current use of "probable cause" was indemified from unreasonable searches as seizures, which it isn't.

You generally argue with wishful thinking and by putting words in people's mouths, don't know why I'm shocked this would be any different.

[Airius Droc]

Yes, we get it, Airius. You're not going to bite the hand that literally feeds you. I understand. I don't fault you for it. However, those of us who're strong enough to make it in life as individuals and stand on our own two feet tend to enjoy the liberties that come along with it. If we didn't, we'd probably quit working for our betterment and start collecting welfare.

You live in a delusional world based on a flawed belief system that you yourself fail to live up to.

The legal definition of "probable cause" is pretty loose and subject to local law, so it's not that big of a deal. That's why I said "it could go either way" depending on the judge and local laws, I didn't say they had what I personally would call probable cause, nor did I say that the current use of "probable cause" was indemified from unreasonable searches as seizures, which it isn't.

They had probable cause.

You generally argue with wishful thinking and by putting words in people's mouths, don't know why I'm shocked this would be any different.

It's good to know I get under your skin, though I disagree with your assessment.

[GlacierFreeze]

They had probable cause.


And what probable cause was that? He walked outside with a backpack and is of young age is probable cause? I think not.

[Airius Droc]

And what probable cause was that? He walked outside with a backpack and is of young age is probable cause? I think not.

1) Off Duty Cop says "I saw him recording the whole thing. Check his recorder." That alone would do it. Eye-Witness (it's a bonus that it's a cop that lives there - and probably called in the complaint)

2) He shut the case and pulled away from the cop. That's going to be considered hostile to the cops. They don't know what's in that bag - could be dangerous. So you can bet that the cops will say they felt threatened...why else would they put him in a choke hold? (that's what they're going to say)

There could be much more - we're only hearing the OP's side of the story. But those two things are very strong imo.

[Surly]

You live in a delusional world based on a flawed belief system that you yourself fail to live up to.lol, you're the one without a job.

They had probable cause.Colloquially, they did not. Legally, that's up for debate and a judge's decision. If he has the money to blow on it, and wants to, he could pursue it. It's not like he doesn't have a case at all, he'd need to talk to a lawyer.

Or are you an unemployed lawyer now?

It's good to know I get under your skin, though I disagree with your assessment.Just surprising. Some one like you would have a pretty difficult time getting under my skin though, lol. I'd need at least a modicum of respect for you, which is precluded by your inability to function as an adult in our society by getting through life without charity. But as I've said, if you really admit to being that wretched, I don't mind paying for your life.

[Airius Droc]

lol, you're the one without a job.

Hmm, I wonder why I keep getting pay checks then.

Colloquially, they did not. Legally, that's up for debate and a judge's decision. If he has the money to blow on it, and wants to, he could pursue it. It's not like he doesn't have a case at all, he'd need to talk to a lawyer.

If he has a case (and he doesn't) he'd spend at least $150 an hour proving it. (but hey, this is a great example of how poor people and the middle class have an unfair standard of living)

Or are you an unemployed lawyer now?

I don't get the joke here...so it's either completely lacking in "teh funny" or my sense of humor is off. I'll take the high road and say that it's my fault and you're the funniest guy in the universe.

Just surprising. Some one like you would have a pretty difficult time getting under my skin though, lol. I'd need at least a modicum of respect for you, which is precluded by your inability to function as an adult in our society by getting through life without charity. But as I've said, if you really admit to being that wretched, I don't mind paying for your life.

I haven't received anything from you yet - so you're 35 years past due. You'll be hearing from my collections people soon.

[Protonix]

Christ you're one fucking waste of space.

[Everto]

Oh Protonix, if you're talking about me, don't be angry because I wouldn't suck your cock.

Small note on something that seems to be the decisive thing here.

He didn't say he saw me recording it. He said "Check his video recorder" and I presume that my bag was the closest thing possible.

One thing he didn't notice is that there was in fact a SECOND cameraman, yet he said I was the only one recording. He also said my african-american friend was lighting the fireworks, however, he was not wearing white clothing, and was wearing all black. But the video itself showed a person wearing white clothes lighting the fireworks. The off-duty cop had to leave him alone on it.

The only thing that discredited this officer, was the inability to realize there was more than one cameraman. I didn't realize this until I saw my friend [who was questioned as well, just not searched] and talked to him about what happened.

It's no big deal anymore guys, my search and seizure issue was discredited, and apparently me touching the bottle rocket was a confession.

There's nothing I'm going to make up.

But for the lulz, and the newscast, I should say not guilty and represent myself.
BIG DADDY NE1?

[Airius Droc]

Small note on something that seems to be the decisive thing here.

He didn't say he saw me recording it. He said "Check his video recorder" and I presume that my bag was the closest thing possible.

I was presuming that he saw you'd recorded it because is why he said "check his video recorder." If he just randomly had them search your recorder without having seen you in the street recording it...THAT would be a violation imo. THAT would be a case. The police can't just walk around checking your video tapes whenever they feel like it.

But if he says he saw you recording it prior to the search, I don't see how the cops wouldn't have probable cause.

You may be able to plead no contest - if your city allows that (you'd want to find out prior to just saying that on the fly). That way you let the judge or mayor or whoever hear your side of things and then make a ruling. You wouldn't actually be admitting guilt that way.

[Bamboopanda]

The OP said he was an off duty cop. You're right, it doesn't mean he has super powers, I'm just telling you how I think it works. Kids vs. Off Duty Cop....who's the judge going to believe?

Tough job, some kid shuts a backpack and pulls away? You don't think you'd have him in a head lock and search the backpack? I would - which is why I'm not a cop. I have a family I want to come home to. That dude probably has one too - and he's out on the 4th putting up with punk kids that can't follow the laws, and can't communicate properly because they think they know their rights but they really don't.

Let me bold something really important in your statement.

Off duty cop = out of uniform. Out of uniform means he’s every bit as much a civilian as anyone else. He starts going thru your shit or physically detaining you, you have the right and requirement to defend yourself. As an on duty cop he would be required to prove there was a reason to forcibly detain a civilian and search anything and also abstain from anything not requiring an immediate life or death response. Nothing from this description pass's muster at all for a legal search and seizure of an citizen. This is not Iraq, the authority figure does not have Carte Blanc permission to do as he pleases. Hell our soldiers don't have that and they fucking scrape up faces off the side of the road for a living.

Your entire argument so far has been: You are a retard so you must submit to authority... because we said so.

NO, that cop needs a damned good reason for doing anything at all. If other cops or the justice system do not see that, and do not recognize that fact, there is a very big problem that must be rectified. Pissing yourself because some random ass in a uniform tells you to do something is neither responsible, nor warranted. If you roll over you are a pussy. You do not need to pull out a gun and kill them like the dogs they are acting like. But you do need to at least try and make them stand and explain every fucking thing they do when they ever cross the line.

And do not deny that from what has been described that they do not deserve to die. There is no difference from the described actions and a common thief/thug. The only reason they as officers are given a cursory pass on that immediate response is due to the need to retain peaceful out's in dissolving various situations. They are given the benefit of the doubt on most matters due to the requirements of the job, but they are still required to operate in a manor that both respects the personnel they deal with, and protects the rights of all parties involved. If they cannot hold themselves up to that aspect they are unfit for the job. And you as a citizen must act to ensure people are made aware.

Anything less and there is no reason to offer them that honor or protection. And no reason at all not to consider them enemies.

[Protonix]

Oh Protonix, if you're talking about me, don't be angry because I wouldn't suck your cock.

I wasn't talking to you, you bowed out of this thread a long time ago when you acquiesed by saying that you'd plead guilty.

[Airius Droc]

Off duty cop = out of uniform. Out of uniform means he’s every bit as much a civilian as anyone else.

Yeah, I'm sure the judge is going to take his word with the same attention span he'd give a local homeless man. Good point.

Your entire argument so far has been: You are a retard so you must submit to authority... because we said so.

My argument hasn't been that, so I'm not going to debate that point with you.

NO, that cop needs a damned good reason for doing anything at all.

You have no idea what you're talking about. Read a book.

And do not deny that from what has been described that they do not deserve to die.

Ok, this is the second time that someone's said something about death in this thread and it's creeping me out.

Anything less and there is no reason to offer them that honor or protection. And no reason at all not to consider them enemies.

Are you located in Waco or Ruby Ridge?

[GlacierFreeze]

*reply*

Good post. +1 points to you and +1 post to me.

[Death's Chill]

I was presuming that he saw you'd recorded it because is why he said "check his video recorder." If he just randomly had them search your recorder without having seen you in the street recording it...THAT would be a violation imo. THAT would be a case. The police can't just walk around checking your video tapes whenever they feel like it.

It's just his WORD though, a WORD cannot be probable cause, as anyone can say anything they want. It's not "proof" whatsoever, and if you consider it probable cause, then it's so fucking easy for the police to get it that there is no need for a warrant to exist in the first place.


But if he says he saw you recording it prior to the search, I don't see how the cops wouldn't have probable cause.

Again, it's just his word. That doesn't equate to probable cause for me, sorry.

If I go and tell a cop that I think some guy over there has drugs, it wouldn't be right for the cop to search him, just because I said I think he does. If it were, then wow is this society really much further down into a police state than I thought.

You may be able to plead no contest - if your city allows that (you'd want to find out prior to just saying that on the fly). That way you let the judge or mayor or whoever hear your side of things and then make a ruling. You wouldn't actually be admitting guilt that way.

Yup I hope he does that.

[GlacierFreeze]

Yeah, I'm sure the judge is going to take his word with the same attention span he'd give a local homeless man. Good point.


I'm assuming your being sarcastic, and yes the judge should have the same attention span to everyone.

Ever hear of Lady Justice? Why is the blind fold over her eyes? It represents that justice should not be biased and should be fair. We would have no rights if all judges were always biased and never fair. Judges are supposed to be fair and open.

[Bamboopanda]

I don't trust cops much at all actually. But I do believe in the rule of law.

The 'rule of law' also states that you can shoot an unarmed man for no legitimate reason other than the fact that you where told that you are allowed too. That does not make the rule of law legitimate or worthy of being ‘believed’ in. There are many laws that are worth having, there are a lot more that are worth less than the paper they where written on. In the eyes of the law they are all equal. And that is a problem.

The original intent of our justice system was for each situation to be handled separately and to have discretion error on the side of caution and freedom. In essence our laws are supposed to be applied with the intent in mind, not necessarily by the exact wording. Until that is fixed our laws are becoming dangerous and are not worth ‘believing’.


There were fireworks all over the place on the 4th. If a person wanted to, they could've gone to 20 different fireworks shows over this weekend.


Prove that any ordinance law is constitutionally legal and you would have a point. But I personally consider every one of those laws illegal and any action supporting them both a waste and traitorous.
Stopping someone from randomly shooting rounds into the air = good.
Stopping someone from lighting off harmless noisemakers because it is an inconvenience = bad.
NOTE: No you don't have to agree. And that is ok.


But no, people have to go out in the street in a residential area and set them off at the expense of everyone around them. Assholes. My neighbors do that year round. I've never called the cops, I've never complained, but I hate it. 3am, it wakes my kids up sometimes. My kids find bottle rockets in the backyard sometimes.

Good for you, shows you are a decent person with an ability to empathize with others. But can you say for certain that if you do call in the cops that one day your kids are not going to be the ones tossed in jail for it? At this point a cop just has to say your rug rat lit and tossed an noisemaker at him and that would ruin your child’s life. It would not matter if your kid did it, and as most laws stand it would send both you and your kid to jail if you get railroaded by the justice system. By laws that came about because things inconvenienced someone.


You'd better believe if I ever called the cops and said I witnessed them doing it - the cops would have probable cause to search them (if they were out in the street). If there wasn't a witness, that would be very different. The cops couldn't just see people outside and search them for the sake of searching them (and that's not what happen here).

You are right, but the cops made up their own 'witness' and violated his most basic of civil rights. Rights that men are willing to kill over when not pacified by a good life. If there was a serious potential for injury or death to an innocent party then this would be a different matter and it would be understandable in some respects that an officer needed to secure the area. But even then your rights and protections should NEVER be in question. And this is not that kind of situation at all.

Using strong arm tactics is a recipe for violence and destruction and is not acceptable in any form. It degrades the confidence of the populace in getting fair representation and after a point the population will respond back with ever escalating violence. Usually that violence comes out over minor ignorant shit just like this. Any time you violate someone it better be for a damned good reason, and just because you wear a uniform is not a good reason.


Ya know, cops do serve a purpose. You don't have to trust that purpose, but you could at least recognize it when it's being served.

Doing what is described in this person post is not 'serving' the public. At all. It is doing a disservice to anyone who thinks rights trump all.

And it leaves a very sour taste in the mouth of a man who once thought this country was worth dieing for.

[Protonix]

Give it up Bam, Airius isn't worth the effort.

[Airius Droc]

They don't need a warrant based on the situation.

[Airius Droc]

And it leaves a very sour taste in the mouth of a man who once thought this country was worth dieing for.

Your posts are painful to read. Please show me your factual evidence to support your theory that the officers had no right to search the backpack.

[Death's Chill]

Your posts are painful to read. Please show me your factual evidence to support your theory that the officers had no right to search the backpack.

It's relative to each person. That is what I fucking hate about probable cause, who determines what probable cause is? The people who make the decisions over the law. It's really fucking scary.

No, I do not believe that they had probable cause just because some off-duty officer told them to search the backpack.

[Airius Droc]

No, I do not believe that they had probable cause just because some off-duty officer told them to search the backpack.

If some guy (off duty cop or not) just stumbled out of his house and yelled "search the backpack!" That's not probable cause.

But if this thing went in front of a judge, and an active duty officer that lives next door says "I saw him on the street video taping the fireworks...and then when the police showed up I told them that he had it on video tape and they should check it." That's probable cause. You have a creditable eye-witness that says he saw THAT guy VIDEO TAPE the crime. Then the guy pulls away and resists the officer's attempt to view the contents of the backpack.

They're going to say that it was probable cause to search, and that when he pulled away they decided to look for weapons but instead found the recorder which in fact had the illegal event on tape.

[GlacierFreeze]

Then the guy pulls away and resists the officer's attempt to view the contents of the backpack.


He pulled away from the "off duty cop." I would've done the same damn thing. He's just some regular ass guy, to me, unless he's on the clock.

[Airius Droc]

He pulled away from the "off duty cop." I would've done the same damn thing. He's just some regular ass guy, to me, unless he's on the clock.

You're grasping at straws. If an off duty cop is eating dinner at McDonald's and someone tries to rob the place, do you expect him to sit there and finish his fries because he's not on the clock?

[Bamboopanda]

Yeah, I'm sure the judge is going to take his word with the same attention span he'd give a local homeless man. Good point.


If he does not he has not done his job and you move on to the next one up the chain. If any man in power considers the word of a 'biased' party worth more than the word of another then there are issues. If higher courts do not decide to rule on what they consider an local ordinance violation then you level separate charges of civil rights violations against every party involved and then it goes on up.


My argument hasn't been that, so I'm not going to debate that point with you.


Very well, it sounded like that to me, but for things such as this I will admit I do get a bit frothy at the mouth and can and will take things the wrong way.


You have no idea what you're talking about. Read a book.


Which one do you have in mind? Later I will come back and talk to you about it, but randomly saying 'Read a book' does nothing for an argument. BTW I have about 800 books boxed up in my home, and have read many many times that number in my years, but not a one may be that particular area in which you would like me to be educated in.


Ok, this is the second time that someone's said something about death in this thread and it's creeping me out.


It was probably me. I am adamant that any abuse of authority is at its core evil and destructive no matter what the situation. If something is so heinous that a person in power feels the need to break down and become a vigilante and violate the rights of others then they should also understand that they MUST be punished for their own crime. If they end up saving the lives of thousands then so be it when they are executed for their own crime they can die knowing they are a hero. But if any circumstance of ranks closing happens to protect violators of the law by those who essentially are the law happen, then absolutely NOTHING they do is worth that mortal blow to our principles.

The loss of a million is nothing compare to the loss of a single 'right'. Being in uniform is not a free pass to do as you please.

If at any point I take it upon myself to do evil to promote a greater good then I also understand that would not clear me of what I had done. But there are times where civility is to be discarded. Once someone considers you nothing more than a slave, there is no reason at all to not destroy them. History has proven that such men will have not problem doing the same to you.


Are you located in Waco or Ruby Ridge?

Neither of those places should have happened. The fact that nobody on the government side has been brought before the system of law for punishment is a gross violation of what I offered my life up for. I will not doubt that both where nuts. But obviously they are the ones who where proven right when all has been said and done.

History will not paint a good picture of our failings, for such things are a symptom not a cause. And the scars we allow will only hurt us more later.

[Airius Droc]

This forum scares the crap out of me sometimes.

[Protonix]

This forum scares the crap out of me sometimes.

Afraid of people that actually take their rights seriously? That some may actually want to fight for them?

What's scary is that the only right in which you seem to care about is your right to live off of the hard work of others, and how willing you seem to give other rights away.

[Durindana]

This thread sure got ridiculous fast.

[Bamboopanda]

Your posts are painful to read. Please show me your factual evidence to support your theory that the officers had no right to search the backpack.

It is hard to promote 'factual' evidence based off of a random post. But here is a run down.

1. Off duty cop, due to being a primary witness is now required to distance himself from any said investigation, anything he says and does can be constructed in a very negative light no matter how you look at it. He gets to say, hey officer, I saw that kid record some stuff. That is it.

2. Off duty cop, out of uniform takes it upon himself to accost this suspect without showing proper identification or differing to uniforms present at the scene. That is now considered theft, battery and a whole slew of other charges that should have been levied at the site on this supposed sergeant.

Both of those should be more than enough to toss anything at all out of a court.

3. Rather than seek permission to search said person/vehicle; officer physically forced seized property out of the subject’s control. At this point there is no subjective evidence that 'reasonable suspicion' has been obtained by any parties, especially due to the extreme quickness of the engagement.

4. Once the subject demanded to see a warrant and none was produced, any evidence obtained is now non admissible due to…. no evidence has been sufficiently produced to determine reasonable suspicion.

5. Officers on site watched and seized video of an unidentifiable person. That 'evidence' gained unlawfully is being used to charge the suspect, even though there is no way to 'prove' the ones breaking the law on tape are/is the same as the one who owns the camera.

Seriously, after these few points, do you really want me to start pushing thru and showing why each one is illegal and grounds for dismissal? As well as grounds for a civil rights violation suite? This kid was not shooting off a pistol in the street, there is no safety risk to the general population as such there is nothing that has been offered that supports the assumption that the police on duty needed to act immediately rather than conforming to the general rule of law and go thru the process of getting a warrant for the supposed video based off of the off duty police officers testimony and performing an proper investigation before putting up an general confrontation.

Give it up Bam, Airius isn't worth the effort.

Yea, you are very likely right.
But if I do not at least try to offer some manor of peaceful solution or explanation.
I fear for the alternatives.

[Death's Chill]

You're grasping at straws. If an off duty cop is eating dinner at McDonald's and someone tries to rob the place, do you expect him to sit there and finish his fries because he's not on the clock?

You're very diluted to think that cops act in the interest of other people. I'll bet you anything that the vast majority of police officers would never put their life on the line for free, unless it was to protect themselves or their family/close friends. Just like ordinary people.

[Durindana]

It's one thing to say "This should be the law."

It's something entirely different to say "This is the law."

95% of this thread has been the latter, virtually all of it wrong. Why is it that people feel imbued with expertise in matters of their personal freedoms without making the slightest effort to know what they're talking about?

I was just now dicking around with a fucked logic board that has some bulging caps on it, and thinking, "who do I know that's an EE and good with a soldering iron?" I sure as shit wasn't thinking, "Let me rock this job myself."

Let me be clear - it's not as if I'm irritated at the flooding of an OT thread with gibberish. Rather, it pisses me off that uninformed individuals feel some kind of expertise in very important topics, like the law of search and seizure, without feeling any necessity to become even slightly informed on them.

It is impossible to struggle in support of a principle without understanding its application in the real world - and why history has made it that way. It's not enough, not nearly enough, to read the Fourth Amendment's text and think "Well this means the cop fucked up."

That is the lazy, easy, convenient way out that leads completely astray. And it's the way that devalues what the right really means. If you don't know where the lines are, and why, you're not really their protector.

[Death's Chill]

Durin, a random person (even if he was a cop.. off duty = citizen to me) stating to search his bag is not fucking probable cause, I don't see how anyone could logically disagree. It was just his opinion backed by nothing but his word.

[Bamboopanda]

It's one thing to say "This should be the law."

It's something entirely different to say "This is the law."

If you don't know where the lines are, and why, you're not really their protector.

I am going to assume this is directed at me. I understand that I am a highly idealistic individual even after the shit I have seen and gone thru. I do not care about the actual legalese of law and how those with a quick tongue and wit have twisted the words and meaning of the law. Or how those who have used positions of power to usurp and change the intent of the law.

There is always how things should be, and how things are. I prefer to talk of how things should be, and WHY. This is to change how things are.

I understand that I cannot force people to see the way I do, but I can explain how things need to be, and hopefully stem some of the ignorance that flows thru the world.

The LAW says I cannot kill. The LAW says I cannot steal. The LAW says that if I disrespect an officer of the LAW I can go to jail. And at the end of the day what the law says and what the law does can be two different things.

That ultimately is the problem. If the law ignores the law of the land and twists the meaning so that normally good men have no recourse what is the ultimate destination? Many will bow down and take it, some men like it. Most won’t even notice. Some will not care one way or another no mater what. Others will discard any pretense of civility.

To ignore that final group is to ignore reality. Wrong a man once or twice and a good man can forgive and forget. Wrong a man repeatedly and you have forgotten that he is a man that is every bit as dangerous as you. How those in power dictate their power will determine how people will perceive if they have been wronged. That is ultimately why we have such limits in place, it is to show that even if you got dealt a bad hand, it is not intentional. Go ahead and get rid of that limit, get rid of the idea that men are all equal.

[Echo Del' Torre]

Dude, just get the off duty cop back. You know where he lives!

Siphon the gas out of his car at night.
Take out his cat/dog with a air rifle.
Stealth into his house when no one is there and set up a camera in the bathroom so you post videos online of his wife in the shower/on the shitter.
Beat up his kids at school.
Slice his tires.
Spray his whole yard with weedkiller.
Stuff a cat into a garbage bag and then put him in his mailbox.


Or something.

[Elemancer]

Afraid of people that actually take their rights seriously? That some may actually want to fight for them?

What's scary is that the only right in which you seem to care about is your right to live off of the hard work of others, and how willing you seem to give other rights away.

WTF? Who are you, and what did you do with protonix!!??

In all seriousness though, what you'll learn from this is you're the worst enemy of yourself. NEVER EVER EVER EVER EVER EVER EVER EVER EVER EVER EVER answer any of the questions a cop asks you, even if you think it is irrelevant or unassuming. The best thing I can advise you in the future when a cop asks you something is to say, "I don't know nothing and I didn't see nothing." At that point the burden of proof is 100% on them.

[Everto]

This thread landed on page 2, and it's my duty to bring back such a thread where my interest lays 100% in. By the way Proto, I will be sucking your penis tonight. :3

Okay, so I have a curious question.
Are cops supposed to carry iPhones on them? Because as the cop was writing my citation, his fell and shattered and I almost lolled.

Yeah, I'm actually serious there.
Anyways, so someone explain the "No Contest" to me plea, I mean.. I understand what it means, but I don't know how that proceedure will actually go, does it go like...
Judge: What do you plea?
Me: No contest your honor.

and do we go straight into explination, no examination or anything?

edit; in my county, I have the ability to plea "NO CONTEST".

[Thrill_KIll]

You can do the case Pro Se, but with this incident, I would at least seek legal advice. You can request a jury trial. Go to your araingment, and tell the judge you are going Pro Se and you will be wanting a jury trial. They have to give you this is you make a request. Make them fucking pull a jury, and then let that jury know what happened, and use the words police state and nazi a lot.


Edit:

And if was the off duty police officer that grabbed your bag from you like that, go file assault charges on him. Probably won't stick, but it will give him grief.

[Damwa]

You can do the case Pro Se, but with this incident, I would at least seek legal advice. You can request a jury trial. Go to your araingment, and tell the judge you are going Pro Se and you will be wanting a jury trial. They have to give you this is you make a request. Make them fucking pull a jury, and then let that jury know what happened, and use the words police state and nazi a lot.


Edit:

And if was the off duty police officer that grabbed your bag from you like that, go file assault charges on him. Probably won't stick, but it will give him grief.

Would it be well advised to "grief" a police officer, especially if he is your neighbour?

FYI: I don't know if he could win, but I am also in favour of taking a stand - I am spiteful, like that.

[Everto]

But I've been highly discouraged to plead Not Guilty due to the fact I am dumb for picking up that bottle rocket.

The cops never took note of it, but they did see me pick it up.

[GlacierFreeze]

You can speak to a lawyer about it for free. That's your best bet for advice, seriously.

[Shinzen]

You're grasping at straws. If an off duty cop is eating dinner at McDonald's and someone tries to rob the place, do you expect him to sit there and finish his fries because he's not on the clock?

You Americans are strange.

And no, I would not expect that ion a situation where lives are at risk or a crime was CLEARLY committed, that an off duty officer should sit by and do nothing.

This is a fuckload different from a un-uniformed., un-ided guy claiming to be an off duty cop having the right to grab your shit and search through it. Had it been the guys in uniforms with guns who had done it, yes. But as OP says, it was the off duty cop. I'd have probably done the same this vis-a-vis the bag.

The bottle rocket thing was facepalm worthy though.

[Durindana]

can't believe this thread lives. Everto let it die you cocksucker, how much is the ticket, like $50?

Anyway...

- Frequently you need the approval of the court (or the ADA's consent) to plead no contest, and there's essentially no difference between that and guilty unless you're worried about civil lability (e.g. you don't want a guilty plea thrown at you in someone's civil lawsuit later down the line, which doesn't matter here). YMMV depending on local rules.

- You typically don't have the right to a jury trial for any offense for which the punishment is less than six months in jail or an equivalent monetary fine ("approximately" because some states define "felony" differently, and generally the right to trial by jury extends only to felonies). The best you're going to get is a bench (judge) trial, and asking for a jury is probably going to irritate everyone nearby. Again, though, YMMV depending on state law.

- You may get a free consultation with a lawyer, but you may not. Mostly that is limited to potential plaintiffs, aka a client whose recovery may yield a contingency fee. Criminal defense lawyers rarely do anything without a retainer up-front (and with good reason - their typical clients are criminals).


FWIW, I don't think you "confessed" to dick, and shouldn't plead guilty. There's not some "But but but but he confessed!" switch thrown when you say something dumb, at the scene, in front of a ton of witnesses. Yeah, you should have said "Hell no it's not mine," but "I guess" != "I'm guilty" last time I checked. The video doesn't show you doing anything illegal, so who cares about that (aside from its seizure).

There's also the fact you apparently weren't Mirandized before you started talking in response to direct questioning from the cops. Miranda only applies when you are "interrogated" and "in custody," and those can mean a lot of things, but it certainly sounds like you were. It surprises the hell out of people, but the real definition of "under arrest" is, essentially, "in circumstances under which there is a reasonable subjective belief that one is not free to leave." So long as you believe you are under arrest, and that belief is reasonable under the particular facts, you are under arrest.

Anyway, a little research on how to move to suppress evidence based on Miranda could be all you need to do this pro se.

[amallami]

but what if i just decide to represent myself?
i'm not illiterate in terms of legal issues, but i didn't exactly want to call out "ILLEGAL SEARCH AND SEIZURE" and give away the only thing I had against them.

you don't ever want to do this... you want a lawyer who knows what to do. Even lawyers don't represent themselves for a reason.

[stalwart]

They needed consent. They screwed themselves. I don't think you can sue them, but whatever they found can't be used against you (or something like that). Talk to a lawyer.

lmao, they don't need consent. they saw him stuff something in a bag. that's all they need to take the bag and search it.

just play along and talk to the judge. you might or might not get off. take it like any other teenager that feels like they've had their rights violated and get over it?

the cop also doesn't have to identify himself as a cop. that's a myth.

[Simmy]

in your case it doesn't seem like they need a warrant as they saw something reasonable suspicous and investigated. Now if they didn't know you had the cam corder and searched you it would potentially be a different story (note: in that situation they could probably search you for fireworks without a warrant).

No, they would still need a warrent or his consent to search his property. Suspicion is in no way a go ahead. They have to ask convicted druggies before they can search them, they should have to ask everyone else for it too.

[stalwart]

No, they would still need a warrent or his consent to search his property. Suspicion is in no way a go ahead. They have to ask convicted druggies before they can search them, they should have to ask everyone else for it too.

this is lol. no they don't. they ask crackheads if they have needles on them before they search them. that's pretty much it.

they need consent like your gf needs a bigger ass.

[losinglife]

lol at airus. That link you posted was hilarious, basically it said to be sure to lube up your ass so the police dont chaffe there dicks when then insert it.

I could see where your idea of what to do comes into play, you know a traffic violation and thats about it, or if you are blatently fucking guilty and cant run away.

Other than that, nobody should ever roll over and die like that.

[jonyak]

the moral of the story is.....

don't do stupid shit. especially illegal stupid shit.

and if you do do stupid shit, do it wisely. not like a dumbass.

also... never video tape illegal shit. its just asking for trouble.

[losinglife]

the moral of the story is.....

don't do stupid shit. especially illegal stupid shit.

and if you do do stupid shit, do it wisely. not like a dumbass.

also... never video tape illegal shit. its just asking for trouble.

wrong, the OBVIOUS moral is dont fucking go outside when the cops are there to bust on people ;)

[jonyak]

wrong, the OBVIOUS moral is dont fucking go outside when the cops are there to bust on people ;)

ah yes...

nothing like returning to the scene of your crime.