4 ms·

Worth noting that both Secret Service and ICE likely have exceptions to Fourth Amendment protection against unreasonable search and seizure based on context. Wi

Worth noting that both Secret Service and ICE likely have exceptions to Fourth Amendment protection against unreasonable search and seizure based on context. Without specific examples, it’s hard to say if laws as is are being violated. If laws are not being violated, then real issue is if the exceptions should stand.

notch898a 4y ago
As if they need much effort elsewhere. ICE (HSI) got a search warrant against me because an anonymous dog allegedly accused me of wrongdoing. That anonymous dog allegedly told an anonymous officer, who allegedly told an HSI detective. I was served a warrant based off 3rd degree, inter-species hearsay. How do you even argue against that. I still have no fucking clue what that was all about and I never interacted with a dog that alerted on me. Then the cost of the (fruitless) search warrant was sent to collections, and I now have debt collectors chasing me where the debt document literally says guarantor "ICE" on it.
- O__________O 4y ago
  Use of K9s as pretext for plausible cause is well known issue, that said, without knowing specifics of the situation, impossible to comment on legal merit of them submitting the cost of search warrant for debt collections.
  - rootusrootus 4y ago
    > submitting the cost of search warrant for debt collections I'm not sure how that would even work.
    - notch898a 4y ago
      The way it works is they have a private party perform part of the search, then have that party bill it to you.
      - rootusrootus 4y ago
        Annoying, for sure, but short of them having a your signature acknowledging responsibility for the cost, it should be straightforward to shut down the debt collector's efforts.
        LocalH 4y ago
        Until that debt gets sold to a collector that couldn't give two shits about what is legal
    - O__________O 4y ago
      Depends on context, jurisdiction, etc — for example, given topic is US law enforcement, here’s one example of costs of investigation assigned for collection based on outcome of a case: https://www.findlaw.com/legalblogs/criminal-defense/when-do-you-have-to-pay-the-costs-of-prosecution/ https://www.findlaw.com/legalblogs/criminal-defense/when-do-...
- starkd 4y ago
  Had to read this many times to understand what you are talking about, but referring to the use of police dogs as "interspecies hearsay" seems like a novel defense. Legally, I would think the use of K9 teams would count as valid evidence for a search. I did not know they billed people for the cost of exectuting a search warrant. Is that really a thing?
  - notch898a 4y ago
    They handcuffed me, tossed me in a cell, then dragged me to two different hospitals by prisoner van, then told the hospital to search me for an alleged "drug conspiracy" up my ass. Literally. Then the hospital sent me the bill after nothing was found.
    - starkd 4y ago
      So, it sounds like they cloaked the search in terms of a "medical procedure". That surprises me, but I guess by now it shouldn't. They do this kind of thing, when they know they can get away with it.
      - notch898a 4y ago
        So I decided to test that exact theory. The warrant wasn't actually signed by the judge until about halfway through my detention. So I complained to the nursing board, that the nurse had searched me without consent and without a signed court order after a doctor had explicitly noted I was fully alert and oriented and denied informed consent. The nursing board denied the complaint, stating a nurse acting under the command of an officer is acting in a "search" and not bound by nurse practice act that would make it impermissable to act without a signed court order or informed consent (if individual alert and oriented, which dr documented I was). That's the gambit. When you legally claim it was a search, they call it a "medical procedure." When you attack the medical procedure, they call it a search. They just flip flop so it's impossible to hold anyone accountable.
        O__________O 4y ago
- nine_zeros 4y ago
  > Then the cost of the (fruitless) search warrant was sent to collections, and I now have debt collectors chasing me where the debt document literally says guarantor "ICE" on it. Wait, am I understanding this correctly? You got a bill for a bullshit search warrant issued against you?
- thephyber 4y ago
  Interesting that they can charge you for a search. Another note: depending on your state, you might have a lot of power in challenging the debt collection. Make sure you demand they send you proof that they hold the debt, that it is in your name, etc. even if the debt was legally applied to you, some debt collectors buy debt that is insufficiently documented. I’m curious if a small claims court could help you.
roywiggins 4y ago
It's not really an exception so much an application of the "reasonable" part, right? You don't have a right against search and seizure, just unreasonable searches and seizures. The existence of a warrant makes a search definitely reasonable, but there are contexts where a search can be reasonable without one.
thephyber 4y ago
Your statement ignores the fact that this article’s info comes from the DHS Inspector General’s report on CSS usage within the department. The IG did the legwork to figure out that agents didn’t comply with department policy, nor the relevant Pen Tap and Trace statutes. In the case that agents use the already well established workarounds for 4A protections, the agents must still file for a warrant post hoc within 48 hours, which they didn’t do, hence the article. And Stingrays / CSS devices are used, there is always an unreasonable search applied towards all phones accidentally intercepted, so there is good reason for both department policy to be followed, and for a judge to at least review this after the fact. Your comment is lazy. The IG report exists for a reason. It removes almost all of the ambiguity you pretend might exist in these cases.

notch898a 4y ago

As if they need much effort elsewhere. ICE (HSI) got a search warrant against me because an anonymous dog allegedly accused me of wrongdoing. That anonymous dog allegedly told an anonymous officer, who allegedly told an HSI detective. I was served a warrant based off 3rd degree, inter-species hearsay. How do you even argue against that. I still have no fucking clue what that was all about and I never interacted with a dog that alerted on me. Then the cost of the (fruitless) search warrant was sent to collections, and I now have debt collectors chasing me where the debt document literally says guarantor "ICE" on it.

O__________O 4y ago
Use of K9s as pretext for plausible cause is well known issue, that said, without knowing specifics of the situation, impossible to comment on legal merit of them submitting the cost of search warrant for debt collections.
- rootusrootus 4y ago
  > submitting the cost of search warrant for debt collections I'm not sure how that would even work.
  - notch898a 4y ago
    The way it works is they have a private party perform part of the search, then have that party bill it to you.
    - rootusrootus 4y ago
      Annoying, for sure, but short of them having a your signature acknowledging responsibility for the cost, it should be straightforward to shut down the debt collector's efforts.
      - LocalH 4y ago
        Until that debt gets sold to a collector that couldn't give two shits about what is legal
  - O__________O 4y ago
    Depends on context, jurisdiction, etc — for example, given topic is US law enforcement, here’s one example of costs of investigation assigned for collection based on outcome of a case: https://www.findlaw.com/legalblogs/criminal-defense/when-do-you-have-to-pay-the-costs-of-prosecution/ https://www.findlaw.com/legalblogs/criminal-defense/when-do-...
starkd 4y ago
Had to read this many times to understand what you are talking about, but referring to the use of police dogs as "interspecies hearsay" seems like a novel defense. Legally, I would think the use of K9 teams would count as valid evidence for a search. I did not know they billed people for the cost of exectuting a search warrant. Is that really a thing?
- notch898a 4y ago
  They handcuffed me, tossed me in a cell, then dragged me to two different hospitals by prisoner van, then told the hospital to search me for an alleged "drug conspiracy" up my ass. Literally. Then the hospital sent me the bill after nothing was found.
  - starkd 4y ago
    So, it sounds like they cloaked the search in terms of a "medical procedure". That surprises me, but I guess by now it shouldn't. They do this kind of thing, when they know they can get away with it.
    - notch898a 4y ago
      So I decided to test that exact theory. The warrant wasn't actually signed by the judge until about halfway through my detention. So I complained to the nursing board, that the nurse had searched me without consent and without a signed court order after a doctor had explicitly noted I was fully alert and oriented and denied informed consent. The nursing board denied the complaint, stating a nurse acting under the command of an officer is acting in a "search" and not bound by nurse practice act that would make it impermissable to act without a signed court order or informed consent (if individual alert and oriented, which dr documented I was). That's the gambit. When you legally claim it was a search, they call it a "medical procedure." When you attack the medical procedure, they call it a search. They just flip flop so it's impossible to hold anyone accountable.
      - O__________O 4y ago
nine_zeros 4y ago
> Then the cost of the (fruitless) search warrant was sent to collections, and I now have debt collectors chasing me where the debt document literally says guarantor "ICE" on it. Wait, am I understanding this correctly? You got a bill for a bullshit search warrant issued against you?
thephyber 4y ago
Interesting that they can charge you for a search. Another note: depending on your state, you might have a lot of power in challenging the debt collection. Make sure you demand they send you proof that they hold the debt, that it is in your name, etc. even if the debt was legally applied to you, some debt collectors buy debt that is insufficiently documented. I’m curious if a small claims court could help you.

roywiggins 4y ago

It's not really an exception so much an application of the "reasonable" part, right? You don't have a right against search and seizure, just unreasonable searches and seizures. The existence of a warrant makes a search definitely reasonable, but there are contexts where a search can be reasonable without one.

thephyber 4y ago

Your statement ignores the fact that this article’s info comes from the DHS Inspector General’s report on CSS usage within the department. The IG did the legwork to figure out that agents didn’t comply with department policy, nor the relevant Pen Tap and Trace statutes. In the case that agents use the already well established workarounds for 4A protections, the agents must still file for a warrant post hoc within 48 hours, which they didn’t do, hence the article. And Stingrays / CSS devices are used, there is always an unreasonable search applied towards all phones accidentally intercepted, so there is good reason for both department policy to be followed, and for a judge to at least review this after the fact. Your comment is lazy. The IG report exists for a reason. It removes almost all of the ambiguity you pretend might exist in these cases.