7 ms·

> "Were there any drugs in the car? When Henderson and Boatright said no, the officer asked if he and his partner could search the car. The officers found the

by john_b 13y ago

> "Were there any drugs in the car? When Henderson and Boatright said no, the officer asked if he and his partner could search the car. The officers found the couple’s cash and a marbled-glass pipe that Boatright said was a gift for her sister-in-law, and escorted them across town to the police station." The article doesn't say it outright, but does imply that they consented to the police search. Never, ever, under any circumstances whatsoever, should you do this. Even if you "have nothing to hide." These two thought they had nothing to hide too. But what you think doesn't matter when the officer's opinion on what is "suspicious" is all that matters. There is nothing whatsoever for you to gain from agreeing to a search of your property. Don't give them probable cause and make them get a warrant. If you agree to a search you might as well hand your rights over at the same time. Depending on the officer(s) to exercise sound judgment and restraint when they have little to no incentive to do so is simply foolish.

jfb 13y ago
Without passing judgement on the advice, it doesn't sound to me like the cops in Tehana were going to be scrupulous about respecting the rights of the people they were stopping.
- marvin 13y ago
  Surrely surreptiously recording the incident while repeatedly saying "I do not consent to this search" must provide some leverage when it comes to court.
  - jffry 13y ago
    Only if it is legal to do so. In some states, recordings require the knowledge and consent of both parties.
    - dangrossman 13y ago
      There are only two states where there's any question about the legality of recording police officers in public without permission. The laws you're thinking of only require consent to record private conversations, and an interaction with a police officer on a public road is not private. http://reason.com/archives/2012/04/05/7-rules-for-recording-police http://reason.com/archives/2012/04/05/7-rules-for-recording-...
      - jffry 13y ago
        Thanks for the clarification!
  - jfb 13y ago
    If the cops are willing to make certain claims ("I smelled The Dread Marijuana"), they don't need your consent.
    - gnaritas 13y ago
      > I smelled The Dread Marijuana That's not a lawful reason for suspicion in any of the many states where medical marijuana is legal; I don't recall the ruling offhand, but the court has said this.
  - grecy 13y ago
    I wonder how many people attempt that get their camera smashed, memory card wiped and a very violent arrest for their trouble....
bluedino 13y ago
Chances are if the cops see the pipe, that's enough to search the entire car without your permission (drug paraphernalia).
- Zimahl 13y ago
  Hardly a chance, if you have a device that is used for criminal activity don't be surprised if that gives cops a reason to scrutinize you. This article is so biased and reeks of agenda. There are no other more sympathetic people to do news stories for? My BS radar just off the charts. If you can look past the fair amount of cash in the car and the drug paraphernalia then there is a need for outrage. However, I can't. While I might see a reason for seizure laws I could easily see them being abused. That said, the example given in the article isn't going to win over any opponents.
  - alxndr 13y ago
    Did you read any of the other examples?
    - bluedino 13y ago
      The one with the 30-year old guy who lived at home who turned his elderly parents home into a drug house? Obvious what was going on there, but unless the kid recently paid his parents house off with 'drug money', it's easy to argue they have no right to take them home. Since they had been there since 1966 I could see it have been paid off quite a while ago.
  - glesica 13y ago
    Where were the drugs? There was no solid evidence a crime had been committed. It is common for poorer people not to have bank accounts, which would explain the cash, and neither the cash nor the pipe are illegal. It doesn't matter one tiny little bit if you think the people in question are drug runners, or even if they actually are, in fact, drug runners. All that matters is that the government took their property as a de facto punishment for having committed a crime (running drugs) without ever actually proving that they committed a crime. So yeah, there was definitely an agenda here, but it seems to have been to demonstrate a genuinely scary trend in law enforcement and government overreach, which is exactly what it should be.
mbrameld 13y ago
It also says the officer reported smelling marijuana, which is their "get out of the 4th amendment free" card.
- rayiner 13y ago
  They were probably smoking marijuana. Who else has a pipe? Not that it justifies the fact that the smell of marijuana is a "get out of the 4th amendment free" card, mind you.
  - simonster 13y ago
    Not that I've ever smoked marijuana, but it's usually pretty easy to tell if a pipe has been used even once. Unless you cleaned your pipe in acetone before you left home, "it was a gift for a friend" is not going to cut it with a used pipe.
at-fates-hands 13y ago
This is good advice if there's a decent law firm nearby or you already have a good attorney on retainer. I'm guessing they had neither. Keep in mind as soon as you decline the search, the cops will go out of their way to find multiple things to charge you with and then you have more problems than when they pulled you over.
- aestra 13y ago
  ...or they will just let you go. It does actually happen (http://youtu.be/8kfoDHYM9yM http://youtu.be/8kfoDHYM9yM) and I would rather use my forth ammendment rights than be so scared not to that the United States turns into a police state.
keevie 13y ago
I don't know. Sometimes I think cooperating with cops can get you a lot---even consenting to a search. Especially (unfortunately) if you're white and upper class looking. Refusing to do what a cop asks you to will pretty much always piss them off. Most of the time, that's okay, but sometimes you just want to be let on your way and be left alone.
- gyepi 13y ago
  > Sometimes I think cooperating with cops can get you a lot---even consenting to a search. > Especially (unfortunately) if you're white and upper class looking If "being white or upper class looking" gives you an advantage with the police then, by implication, not having those characteristics is a disadvantage. This is exactly why laws exist and should, ideally, be applied impartially. I'd feel much better depending on the law than a cop's favorable feelings about me. I don't mind pissing off a cop of to assert my rights.
lukifer 13y ago
How to decline a search without getting hostile or "looking suspicious" (pick one, or invent your own): - "I'd really prefer not to, if that's okay. It just makes me uncomfortable, it's nothing personal." - "I have a cousin who's a lawyer, and he said I should never let myself get searched or questioned without a lawyer. I feel like I should take his advice. I'm sure you understand." - "I watched a video on the internet saying it's a bad idea to consent to a search, even for innocent people, and it made a pretty convincing case. Sorry to be so difficult, I know you're just doing your job." Above all, stay calm, friendly, and respectful, all while standing firm.
- kposehn 13y ago
  Great advice by the look of it.
- jlgreco 13y ago
  - "I'm sort of on a deadline, sorry." has worked for me. (Probably not a good idea if you were pulled over for a traffic infraction...)
- roc 13y ago
  > "How to decline a search" From the article: "The report describes their children as possible decoys, meant to distract police as the couple breezed down the road, smoking marijuana. (None was found in the car, although Washington claimed to have smelled it.)" Whatever you might say is moot, if the cops are willing to play that card.
  - jonknee 13y ago
    > Whatever you might say is moot, if the cops are willing to play that card. Not really, if things go poorly it makes your lawyer's job a lot easier to get the case thrown out.
    - fnordfnordfnord 13y ago
      What lawyer? They took your money. How do you afford an attorney?
Guvante 13y ago
Failing to disclose having $10,000+ can get you convicted of money trafficking offenses. Combine that with the fact that they were using the disclosure as their reason for claiming the money, and you have an impossible to escape situation.
- segmondy 13y ago
  Wrong! You don't have to disclosure any amount within the country. Only if you are entering or leaving the country
aestra 13y ago
This. I came here just to say that. "The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized." Please do not consent to any random searches. Cops can only do it legally if you consent. They will word it like you should consent, but please exercise your right to not not be searched! You can say no. While I have nothing illegal in my car I don't want cops rooting around in it on principal. I am amazed how many people don't know they can and should decline a request to search. A friend of mine got pulled over for speeding and he told me "I had to let them search my car for drugs otherwise they were going to impound it."
- gohrt 13y ago
  It amazes you how many people don't know precisely which statements an officer makes are lies, and which actions will get them beaten or shot? It doesn't amaze me, sadly. These are hard things to know.
  - cm127 13y ago
    An officer can force you out of the car, legally, and, if you have your cell phone in your hand, he could mistake it for a gun and kill you. It's enough to make me never want to leave my house.
    - saalweachter 13y ago
      If it makes you feel better the police can probably also break down your door on a no-knock warrant for the house next door and shoot you on your couch.
  - aestra 13y ago
    I'm sorry, I might be too unreasonable in my expectations, but the Bill of Rights are fundamental, basic starting rights in the United States. I think every citizen should have a basic understanding of just them, if nothing else. Knowing your rights is important to not be taken advantage of. This should be taught in school.
jasonwatkinspdx 13y ago
I can tell you first hand that sometimes refusing to consent to a search simply doesn't matter. You'll be given the choice of allowing the illegal search, or having your car searched anyhow after you are removed from it at the point of a gun.
- gyepi 13y ago
  Right. But searching the car without consent requires probable cause. The point is not give consent. Though I've seen cases where the defendant is charged with something and their car seized then the evidence is later found during an "inventory" of the vehicle. IANAL so I don't how one would deal with that.
  - AnIrishDuck 13y ago
    > IANAL so I don't how one would deal with that. You can't. Police have the authority to impound your car for any moving violation. They can inventory the contents of your car in the process. Why doesn't this happen often? Fear of public outcry. That, and an officer needs the search to unearth evidence worth the paperwork and bother. Police officers have bosses just like you and me. Your only recourse: follow traffic laws to the letter. Unfortunately, this is more difficult than it sounds.
    - falcolas 13y ago
      Considering people from TFA were being pulled over for being "too close to the white line," difficult is an understatement.
- deleted 13y ago
  [deleted]
jpatokal 13y ago
This. Also, these: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=i8z7NC5sgik http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=i8z7NC5sgik http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=08fZQWjDVKE http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=08fZQWjDVKE
wisty 13y ago
The police "smelled pot". That's probable cause. It's possible that one of them had previously smoked some in the car, maybe some time ago (let's be honest - anyone who has a pipe in their car has probably used it, but that's not the kind of thing which will stand up in a court of law without also finding a stash). But seizing a car because it's got a pipe in it is insane. Even if they had a small quantity of pot, that's crazy - a small stash for personal use doesn't make someone a dealer.

by john_b 13y ago

jfb 13y ago

Without passing judgement on the advice, it doesn't sound to me like the cops in Tehana were going to be scrupulous about respecting the rights of the people they were stopping.

marvin 13y ago
Surrely surreptiously recording the incident while repeatedly saying "I do not consent to this search" must provide some leverage when it comes to court.
- jffry 13y ago
  Only if it is legal to do so. In some states, recordings require the knowledge and consent of both parties.
  - dangrossman 13y ago
    There are only two states where there's any question about the legality of recording police officers in public without permission. The laws you're thinking of only require consent to record private conversations, and an interaction with a police officer on a public road is not private. http://reason.com/archives/2012/04/05/7-rules-for-recording-police http://reason.com/archives/2012/04/05/7-rules-for-recording-...
    - jffry 13y ago
      Thanks for the clarification!
- jfb 13y ago
  If the cops are willing to make certain claims ("I smelled The Dread Marijuana"), they don't need your consent.
  - gnaritas 13y ago
    > I smelled The Dread Marijuana That's not a lawful reason for suspicion in any of the many states where medical marijuana is legal; I don't recall the ruling offhand, but the court has said this.
- grecy 13y ago
  I wonder how many people attempt that get their camera smashed, memory card wiped and a very violent arrest for their trouble....

bluedino 13y ago

Chances are if the cops see the pipe, that's enough to search the entire car without your permission (drug paraphernalia).

Zimahl 13y ago
Hardly a chance, if you have a device that is used for criminal activity don't be surprised if that gives cops a reason to scrutinize you. This article is so biased and reeks of agenda. There are no other more sympathetic people to do news stories for? My BS radar just off the charts. If you can look past the fair amount of cash in the car and the drug paraphernalia then there is a need for outrage. However, I can't. While I might see a reason for seizure laws I could easily see them being abused. That said, the example given in the article isn't going to win over any opponents.
- alxndr 13y ago
  Did you read any of the other examples?
  - bluedino 13y ago
    The one with the 30-year old guy who lived at home who turned his elderly parents home into a drug house? Obvious what was going on there, but unless the kid recently paid his parents house off with 'drug money', it's easy to argue they have no right to take them home. Since they had been there since 1966 I could see it have been paid off quite a while ago.
- glesica 13y ago
  Where were the drugs? There was no solid evidence a crime had been committed. It is common for poorer people not to have bank accounts, which would explain the cash, and neither the cash nor the pipe are illegal. It doesn't matter one tiny little bit if you think the people in question are drug runners, or even if they actually are, in fact, drug runners. All that matters is that the government took their property as a de facto punishment for having committed a crime (running drugs) without ever actually proving that they committed a crime. So yeah, there was definitely an agenda here, but it seems to have been to demonstrate a genuinely scary trend in law enforcement and government overreach, which is exactly what it should be.

mbrameld 13y ago

It also says the officer reported smelling marijuana, which is their "get out of the 4th amendment free" card.

rayiner 13y ago
They were probably smoking marijuana. Who else has a pipe? Not that it justifies the fact that the smell of marijuana is a "get out of the 4th amendment free" card, mind you.
- simonster 13y ago
  Not that I've ever smoked marijuana, but it's usually pretty easy to tell if a pipe has been used even once. Unless you cleaned your pipe in acetone before you left home, "it was a gift for a friend" is not going to cut it with a used pipe.

at-fates-hands 13y ago

This is good advice if there's a decent law firm nearby or you already have a good attorney on retainer. I'm guessing they had neither. Keep in mind as soon as you decline the search, the cops will go out of their way to find multiple things to charge you with and then you have more problems than when they pulled you over.

aestra 13y ago
...or they will just let you go. It does actually happen (http://youtu.be/8kfoDHYM9yM http://youtu.be/8kfoDHYM9yM) and I would rather use my forth ammendment rights than be so scared not to that the United States turns into a police state.

keevie 13y ago

I don't know. Sometimes I think cooperating with cops can get you a lot---even consenting to a search. Especially (unfortunately) if you're white and upper class looking. Refusing to do what a cop asks you to will pretty much always piss them off. Most of the time, that's okay, but sometimes you just want to be let on your way and be left alone.

gyepi 13y ago
> Sometimes I think cooperating with cops can get you a lot---even consenting to a search. > Especially (unfortunately) if you're white and upper class looking If "being white or upper class looking" gives you an advantage with the police then, by implication, not having those characteristics is a disadvantage. This is exactly why laws exist and should, ideally, be applied impartially. I'd feel much better depending on the law than a cop's favorable feelings about me. I don't mind pissing off a cop of to assert my rights.

lukifer 13y ago

How to decline a search without getting hostile or "looking suspicious" (pick one, or invent your own): - "I'd really prefer not to, if that's okay. It just makes me uncomfortable, it's nothing personal." - "I have a cousin who's a lawyer, and he said I should never let myself get searched or questioned without a lawyer. I feel like I should take his advice. I'm sure you understand." - "I watched a video on the internet saying it's a bad idea to consent to a search, even for innocent people, and it made a pretty convincing case. Sorry to be so difficult, I know you're just doing your job." Above all, stay calm, friendly, and respectful, all while standing firm.

kposehn 13y ago
Great advice by the look of it.
jlgreco 13y ago
- "I'm sort of on a deadline, sorry." has worked for me. (Probably not a good idea if you were pulled over for a traffic infraction...)
roc 13y ago
> "How to decline a search" From the article: "The report describes their children as possible decoys, meant to distract police as the couple breezed down the road, smoking marijuana. (None was found in the car, although Washington claimed to have smelled it.)" Whatever you might say is moot, if the cops are willing to play that card.
- jonknee 13y ago
  > Whatever you might say is moot, if the cops are willing to play that card. Not really, if things go poorly it makes your lawyer's job a lot easier to get the case thrown out.
  - fnordfnordfnord 13y ago
    What lawyer? They took your money. How do you afford an attorney?

Guvante 13y ago

Failing to disclose having $10,000+ can get you convicted of money trafficking offenses. Combine that with the fact that they were using the disclosure as their reason for claiming the money, and you have an impossible to escape situation.

segmondy 13y ago
Wrong! You don't have to disclosure any amount within the country. Only if you are entering or leaving the country

aestra 13y ago

This. I came here just to say that. "The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized." Please do not consent to any random searches. Cops can only do it legally if you consent. They will word it like you should consent, but please exercise your right to not not be searched! You can say no. While I have nothing illegal in my car I don't want cops rooting around in it on principal. I am amazed how many people don't know they can and should decline a request to search. A friend of mine got pulled over for speeding and he told me "I had to let them search my car for drugs otherwise they were going to impound it."

gohrt 13y ago
It amazes you how many people don't know precisely which statements an officer makes are lies, and which actions will get them beaten or shot? It doesn't amaze me, sadly. These are hard things to know.
- cm127 13y ago
  An officer can force you out of the car, legally, and, if you have your cell phone in your hand, he could mistake it for a gun and kill you. It's enough to make me never want to leave my house.
  - saalweachter 13y ago
    If it makes you feel better the police can probably also break down your door on a no-knock warrant for the house next door and shoot you on your couch.
- aestra 13y ago
  I'm sorry, I might be too unreasonable in my expectations, but the Bill of Rights are fundamental, basic starting rights in the United States. I think every citizen should have a basic understanding of just them, if nothing else. Knowing your rights is important to not be taken advantage of. This should be taught in school.

jasonwatkinspdx 13y ago

I can tell you first hand that sometimes refusing to consent to a search simply doesn't matter. You'll be given the choice of allowing the illegal search, or having your car searched anyhow after you are removed from it at the point of a gun.

gyepi 13y ago
Right. But searching the car without consent requires probable cause. The point is not give consent. Though I've seen cases where the defendant is charged with something and their car seized then the evidence is later found during an "inventory" of the vehicle. IANAL so I don't how one would deal with that.
- AnIrishDuck 13y ago
  > IANAL so I don't how one would deal with that. You can't. Police have the authority to impound your car for any moving violation. They can inventory the contents of your car in the process. Why doesn't this happen often? Fear of public outcry. That, and an officer needs the search to unearth evidence worth the paperwork and bother. Police officers have bosses just like you and me. Your only recourse: follow traffic laws to the letter. Unfortunately, this is more difficult than it sounds.
  - falcolas 13y ago
    Considering people from TFA were being pulled over for being "too close to the white line," difficult is an understatement.
deleted 13y ago
[deleted]

jpatokal 13y ago

This. Also, these: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=i8z7NC5sgik http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=i8z7NC5sgik http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=08fZQWjDVKE http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=08fZQWjDVKE

wisty 13y ago

The police "smelled pot". That's probable cause. It's possible that one of them had previously smoked some in the car, maybe some time ago (let's be honest - anyone who has a pipe in their car has probably used it, but that's not the kind of thing which will stand up in a court of law without also finding a stash). But seizing a car because it's got a pipe in it is insane. Even if they had a small quantity of pot, that's crazy - a small stash for personal use doesn't make someone a dealer.