I often find Crispin’s comments informative and well thought out, but in
this case I feel he is a bit off base especially when it comes to drug laws
and search laws.
Crispin’s comments:
“Me too. IMHO, law enforcement already goes WAY over the line in violating
our civil rights in the name of law enforcement, and if there is to be any
balancing, it should be to make the rules of evidence, search, and seizure
much tougher on law enforcement:”
“End the practice of drug forfeture laws. This is a shameless
extortion racket carried out by law enforcement to line their own
pockets at the expense of innocent victims.
* End the "knock and talk" drug task force in PDX. This task force
uses circumstantial evidence that would NOT get them a warrant to
go knock on your door, and when the victim opens the door, the
officers "smell something" and then force their way in and
commence to search.
* Kudos to the Supreme Court for ruling that law enforcement cannot
use IR (infra red) scans of someone's house (looking for grow
lights) as evidence for a search warrant.”
“No. The history of the RICO statute tells us otherwise. Drug seizure laws
were intended to allow police to deny the massive wealth of drug kingpins to
arrested suspects, so that they could not use the fruits of their illegal
activities to spend on high-priced lawyers. But in practice drug seizure
laws are used to shake down the poorest and most defenseless members of
society, and the drug kingpins carry on business as usual."
"More liberal search criteria would almost certainly be used to harm the
most defenseless members of society, and not help at all in catching major
criminals."
I’m not sure how often Crispin writes search warrants, but I can personally
recall a burglary in which blood was found at the scene of a crime (about 6
handguns stolen), blood was followed to the apartment not with fancy
gadgets, lights, or dogs, but rather large drops and splatters. On the way
to the apartment bloody tags from the handguns were found ripped off in the
alley behind the apartment, and blood was found running down the apartment
door at the scene. With all this I still took several hours writing and
getting a search warrant signed for the apartment. And if anyone was
uncertain how the story ended…yes the suspect who was taped on video during
the burglary was in the apartment with all but one of the handguns.
While I agree on protecting civil liberties, there is a point where we swing
too far, and law enforcement does not do an effective job. Can anyone
recall a large amount of marijuana that police found doing a building search
on a basketball star’s home near Portland, while responding to a burglary
alarm? Last call I heard was the judge suppressed drugs saying police did
not have right to be there. Now where will that case law lead to, no more
building searches for anyone that has a burglary alarm, for fear that the
police will be sued / prosecuted for unlawful entry. Does not make me feel
too comfortable knowing a burglar in my home may have free reign since
police will no longer check my house when the alarm is going off, and the
front door is open.
The extortion that Crispin refers to in drug seizures in my past 6 years has
been a very small amount of money mixed with a few cars that helped task
force members attempt to fund their continued activities. Maybe lager
departments NY & LA might see a profit in cases, but in my experience the
cost involved in wages, tools, and prosecution has far outweighed the cost
offsets from seizures. And the innocent victims Crispin refers to are the
same people trying to sell drugs to your children, getting into shootouts on
crowded streets with no regard to any other life, and driving vehicles while
under the influence (drugs) endangering anyone on the road.
I have also seen the knock and talks turn out as an effective too. If
anyone is worried about police smelling dope during a knock and talk, then
don’t smoke dope at your front door as the police are knocking J
Its also amazing how many cases have been made against people who could have
told the police no, or closed the door in there face, but rather invited
them in for a voluntary search, and the police quickly found drugs in that
search. Knock and talks IMO are one of the best ways to expose stupid
crooks.
I question if Crispin ever lived next to a house were he watched dozens of
cars make 1 to 5 minute stops all night long from 10pm to 4am, where at
times he watches people give the neighbor large bills in exchange for a
small bags or sealed straws, and if Crispin has ever complained to the
police about such a house and heard the response “we have no evidence /
there’s no proof / sorry can not break into someone’s house just from what
you saw”. If such an example seems preposterous, be surprised I often run
into complaints such as these several times a week.
Tried to keep this short, and still have about 4 more pages I could write,
but in the interest to getting back on track I’ll quit now. Also Crispin,
do not consider this an attack, but rather the other viewpoint of someone
who sees serious problems on a daily basis, and tries to do what I can one
case at a time.
Mike
_________________________________________________________________
Send and receive Hotmail on your mobile device: http://mobile.msn.com
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b30 : Wed Aug 28 2002 - 14:36:49 PDT