Warning

 

Close

Confirm Action

Are you sure you wish to do this?

Confirm Cancel
Member Login
Site Notices
9/22/2017 12:11:25 AM
Posted: 9/22/2005 12:35:50 PM EDT
Police Give Woman $100K For 2 Small Bags Of Crack
Woman Claims Cop Conducted Illegal Body Cavity Search, Settles Lawsuit

POSTED: 3:43 p.m. MDT September 21, 2005
UPDATED: 10:59 a.m. MDT September 22, 2005


Story by thedenverchannel.com

EDGEWATER, Colo. -- A Colorado woman picked up $100,000 for two small bags of cocaine. It's all legal and you may not believe who wrote the check.

It all started with a traffic stop more than two years ago and now, the admitted crack carrier has a check for $100,000. All criminal charges against her have been dropped and the city's police chief said they did nothing wrong. So how can this happen?

Debi asked 7NEWS Investigators to protect her identity but she wants her story told.


She admits taxpayers will probably not like that the city paid her $100,000 to settle a civil lawsuit. Debi admits that she was trying to hide crack cocaine and she was trying to hide it in a place she thought no one would look.

During the traffic stop on a street corner in Edgewater, an anonymous caller told police that Debi stuffed something down her pants. When asked, Debi told officers that she was hiding crack cocaine in two small bags and the officer searched Debi's genital area right on the street, she said.

In her lawsuit, Debi claimed Edgewater police violated her constitutional rights when a female officer conducted what Debi's attorneys call an illegal strip search and an illegal search of her body cavity.


Debi said during the search, she was naked below the waist for anybody on the road to see.

"It's not because they're just nice guys, OK? They're giving her $100,000 because what they did is absolutely outrageous," said Debi's attorney, David Lane.

Lane convinced attorneys for the city of Edgewater to avoid a trial and write the check.

"Taxpayers are giving away their taxpayer dollars because their police don't know the law," said Lane.

Edgewater's police chief disagrees.

"The city has maintained and will maintain that there is no wrongdoing on the part of our officers," said Edgewater police chief Dan Keough.

Even after the incident, not a single officer was disciplined, not a single policy changed.

Keough admits that Debi was charged with possession of illegal narcotics and then all the charges were dropped. However, he said his officers didn't do anything wrong, despite the fact that Debi has a check for $100,000 from the city of Edgewater.

"Well, all I can tell you is we dispute her version of events," Keough said.

Essentially, Edgewater's police chief said the crack-carrying woman lied about what happened on the street corner.

"We are maintaining that we never pulled this woman's pants down or remove any clothes to recover these drugs," said Keogh. He maintains that the officer didn't do a body cavity search.

But the fact is, the police department's own report contradicts the chief's statements. In the report, the officer admitted to using "two fingers" when she "pulled out" one of two small baggies from inside the woman's genital area.

When talking with Keough 7NEWS Investigator Tony Kovaleski asked, "There are people who are going to watch this and say, 'Caught with illegal drugs. All charges are dropped and you get a check for $100,000. Where do I sign up for that program?'"

Keough said, "Sure, I understand that."

Keough said some people may be outraged but he can't control that.

One person apparently not outraged is Edgewater's Mayor Robert Prewitt. He declined an interview on camera but said, "I have no idea why the insurance company passed out the money."

After being charged with a crime, having the charge dismissed and then getting a $100,000 check, Debi said she kinda feels like she won the lottery.


Debi's criminal attorney, Cynthia Sheehan, said, "Edgewater's insistence that the police did nothing wrong is patently absurd. The plain language of the police report is indisputable. The criminal case against (Debi) was dismissed and she was generously compensated. The Jefferson County District Attorney's Office doesn't just dismiss cases and municipalities don't just give away money. Obviously, they did something wrong. An honest admission of that coupled with a change in policy for future cases would seem like the right way to handle this."

So why were the criminal charges dropped? Although it happened with the previous administration, the current Jefferson County district attorney reviewed the facts and concluded criminal charges were dropped because there is physical evidence the drugs were in the woman's body cavity, which would make the search illegal. The prosecutor also said Edgewater police failed to meet the state's burden of proof.

It's generally a bad idea to do a physical body cavity search without a warrant. Her admission that she shoved crack down her pants would be lawfull reason to take her to jail, do a visual body cavity search, lock her handcuffed and video taped in a cell with no toilet and wait for the search warrant so a Doctor can do the physical body cavity search.
Link Posted: 9/22/2005 12:38:49 PM EDT
Great...
Link Posted: 9/22/2005 12:42:22 PM EDT
Fu*king lawyers
Link Posted: 9/22/2005 12:43:00 PM EDT
Link Posted: 9/22/2005 12:51:10 PM EDT

Originally Posted By Max_Mike:
Fu*king lawyers



Yes, this had nothing to do with the PD that loused this one up.
Link Posted: 9/22/2005 12:51:38 PM EDT
How didan officer not realise they were doing something wrong by strip searching someone on the side of the road...
Link Posted: 9/22/2005 1:01:42 PM EDT
In the legal world stupidity = $$$$$$$$$$$$
Link Posted: 9/22/2005 1:04:52 PM EDT
detain her, get a warrant, do the search. how hard is that? with cops and criminals like that, I'll always have a job.........
Link Posted: 9/22/2005 1:07:25 PM EDT

Originally Posted By legalese77:

Originally Posted By Max_Mike:
Fu*king lawyers



Yes, this had nothing to do with the PD that loused this one up.





Uh huh...

Only a lawyer could come up with a solution that gives a crack mule $100,000.

If a office or department needed discipline for wrong doing then that is what should be look to not creating a damn lottery for crack whores and their scumbag bottom feeding whore lawyers.

I stand on… fu*king lawyers.
Link Posted: 9/22/2005 1:09:32 PM EDT

Originally Posted By Max_Mike:

Originally Posted By legalese77:

Originally Posted By Max_Mike:
Fu*king lawyers



Yes, this had nothing to do with the PD that loused this one up.





Uh huh...

Only a lawyer could come up with a solution that gives a crack mule $100,000.

If a office or department needed discipline for wrong doing then that is what should be look to not creating a damn lottery for crack whores and their scumbag bottom feeding whore lawyers.

I stand on… fu*king lawyers.



I see you have no experience with bureaocracies. In the .gov world, things ONLY change when somebody has to explain why they are $100k over budget.
Link Posted: 9/22/2005 1:12:43 PM EDT
She will probably CASH the check now and go get

more.
Link Posted: 9/22/2005 1:13:23 PM EDT
[Last Edit: 9/22/2005 1:14:16 PM EDT by Max_Mike]

Originally Posted By happycynic:
I see you have no experience with bureaocracies. In the .gov world, things ONLY change when somebody has to explain why they are $100k over budget.



This aint going to show up on their bottom line… insurance.

And who exactly is responsible for that "bureaocracies"... fu*king lawyers.
Link Posted: 9/22/2005 1:15:21 PM EDT

Originally Posted By liquidsunshine:
She will probably CASH the check now and go get

more.



I guess we can look at it as an investment.
Link Posted: 9/22/2005 1:15:33 PM EDT

Originally Posted By Max_Mike:

Originally Posted By happycynic:

Originally Posted By Max_Mike:

Originally Posted By legalese77:

Originally Posted By Max_Mike:
Fu*king lawyers



Yes, this had nothing to do with the PD that loused this one up.





Uh huh...

Only a lawyer could come up with a solution that gives a crack mule $100,000.

If a office or department needed discipline for wrong doing then that is what should be look to not creating a damn lottery for crack whores and their scumbag bottom feeding whore lawyers.

I stand on… fu*king lawyers.



I see you have no experience with bureaocracies. In the .gov world, things ONLY change when somebody has to explain why they are $100k over budget.



This aint going to show up no their bottom line… insurance.

And who exactly is responsible for that "bureaocracies"... fu*king lawyers.



You have to pay for insurance. And no, its not lawyers who create these bureaucratic nightmares, its politicians, who are elected by sheeple. Ban sheeple. Do it for the children.
Link Posted: 9/22/2005 1:33:20 PM EDT
[Last Edit: 9/22/2005 2:23:43 PM EDT by Max_Mike]

Originally Posted By happycynic:

You have to pay for insurance. And no, its not lawyers who create these bureaucratic nightmares, its politicians, who are elected by sheeple. Ban sheeple. Do it for the children.



Lawyers have no part in creating bureaucratic nightmares.



Now that is funny.
Link Posted: 9/22/2005 1:41:32 PM EDT
$100,000? That'll get you a "hole-lotta" crack baby!
Link Posted: 9/22/2005 1:42:36 PM EDT
The woman needs to be pistol-whipped and the money given back to the taxpayers.
Link Posted: 9/22/2005 1:49:46 PM EDT

Originally Posted By Max_Mike:
Fu*king lawyers



+1...

BUT NOT ARFCOM LAWYERS...I don't wanna get them worked up!
Link Posted: 9/22/2005 1:57:49 PM EDT
Time for a a $100,000.00 crack party!

Welfare office lady, "You mean you spent the whole $100,000.00 on crack?"

Crackhead, "That's right. Had a heart attack too. It was GREAT!"
Link Posted: 9/22/2005 1:57:56 PM EDT

Originally Posted By Max_Mike:


Uh huh...

Only a lawyer could come up with a solution that gives a crack mule $100,000.

If a office or department needed discipline for wrong doing then that is what should be look to not creating a damn lottery for crack whores and their scumbag bottom feeding whore lawyers.

I stand on… fu*king lawyers.



Yikes, I don't even know where to begin.

How does disciplining anyone remediate the wrong that was done? I'm not suggesting that this particular person necessarily deserved anything but what if this happened to someone who had done nothing wrong? Is the solution still to 'discipline' some one?

Tell me what sort of action the lawyer should have filed to force the City to discipline the department or the Chief to discipline officers. Disciplinary actions are discretionary...that's up to the people running those departments, not a judge. I'd love to see a case where a judge ordered a department to discipline officers.

How do the penniless ever get any compensation if their only remedy is that officer jimbob has to take two weeks off with pay? Or maybe even without *shudder* You think they are likely to get any representation if they offer self satisfaction as payment for services? Tell me, do you work? Is your sole compensation the good feeling you get for helping others? Did it cost you 100k to become qualified to help people such that you could bring home the mighty wage of satisfaction?

When someone is wrongfully killed as a result of negligence, for example, the remedy is not to kill a member of the wrongdoer's family or the wrongdoer. The only remedy the courts can truly offer to remediate a past wrong (as opposed to preventing future wrongs) is pecuniary remunerations.

Sometimes, this results in a windfall. More often than not, a person is not made whole. In this case, the insurance company settled because of the outrageous nature of the behavior. Are you suggesting that damages should be based on your subjective view of the quality of life of the aggrieved party? If the individual violated was your wife or perhaps your mother, do you think her dignity would be worth any less than 100k? I doubt it. Make no mistake, I am not, and do not intend on making a moral comparison between a crack whore and your family. The courts are simply not equipped to do what I think you are suggesting which is to say: "This person is a crackwhore, and her dignity is nonexistent but this is a respectable housewife and her dignity is priceless" Whether or not the lady did anything wrong is irrelevant. The behavior is wholly unjustified in these United States where we abide by the 4th Amendment regardless of whether George Bush, Pat Robertson or Pope Benedict think very much of the life you lead.

I don't hold it against you, however. Most folks know about as much about the legal system as Michael Moore understands the pros and cons of the AR gas impingement system. Ignorance tends to breed fear and hatred.

In summation: Life is tough, get a helmet
Link Posted: 9/22/2005 2:01:40 PM EDT

Originally Posted By Max_Mike:


Uh huh...

Only a lawyer could come up with a solution that gives a crack mule $100,000.

If a office or department needed discipline for wrong doing then that is what should be look to not creating a damn lottery for crack whores and their scumbag bottom feeding whore lawyers.

I stand on… fu*king lawyers.



I agree, the officer should have been charged with Criminal Civil Rights violations, and everyone who was witness to it with Conspiracy.

Get enough of these clowns spending 10+ years in the slammer and it might get the point across that the Constitution was meant to be followed.
They could be fined as well as do time.... adding money to the city coffers instead of draining.

It's funny/scary to see so many people here that demand certain constitutional protections for themselves, while ignoring and outright applauding violations of the rights of others.

The entire Bill of Rights is for all of us (crackwhores included)... not just for what certain people agree with on certain days.
Link Posted: 9/22/2005 2:02:04 PM EDT
I think we may be on to something good here. Think about it, if we give all the crack heads $10K
they'll end up dead from an OD and the war on drugs will be over within days.
Link Posted: 9/22/2005 2:03:43 PM EDT

Originally Posted By Gunner1X:
I think we may be on to something good here. Think about it, if we give all the crack heads $10K
they'll end up dead from an OD and the war on drugs will be over within days.



How many people are killed by drugs in the US in a typical year? Got any idea? I didn't think so.

Just FYI, you will have better luck with your plan if you try it with alcoholics.
Link Posted: 9/22/2005 2:13:59 PM EDT
Link Posted: 9/22/2005 2:15:58 PM EDT

Originally Posted By 1GUNRUNNER:

Originally Posted By happycynic:
And no, its not lawyers who create these bureaucratic nightmares, its politicians,



And where do politicians come from? Law school.



Yeah, but we disown them. They're the dumb ones who couldn't make it in private practice.
Link Posted: 9/22/2005 2:22:03 PM EDT
Conducting a cavity search on the side of the road, unless the woman was some sort of suspected suicide cooter-bomber, displays a certain mentality on the part of the officers that I don't want to see in my country.
Link Posted: 9/22/2005 2:27:13 PM EDT

Originally Posted By wolfman97:

Originally Posted By Gunner1X:
I think we may be on to something good here. Think about it, if we give all the crack heads $10K
they'll end up dead from an OD and the war on drugs will be over within days.



How many people are killed by drugs in the US in a typical year? Got any idea? I didn't think so.

Just FYI, you will have better luck with your plan if you try it with alcoholics.



Not enough.
Link Posted: 9/22/2005 2:28:14 PM EDT
reminds me of a headline in Texas Lawyer that said "CCA upholds search of butt for crack"

CCA is the Court of Criminal Appeals

Link Posted: 9/22/2005 2:30:28 PM EDT
Link Posted: 9/22/2005 2:31:32 PM EDT

Originally Posted By Gunner1X:

Originally Posted By wolfman97:

Originally Posted By Gunner1X:
I think we may be on to something good here. Think about it, if we give all the crack heads $10K
they'll end up dead from an OD and the war on drugs will be over within days.



How many people are killed by drugs in the US in a typical year? Got any idea? I didn't think so.

Just FYI, you will have better luck with your plan if you try it with alcoholics.



Not enough.



The man without a clue. Any time someone suggests something like this, it is immediately apparent.
Link Posted: 9/22/2005 2:33:02 PM EDT

Originally Posted By 1GUNRUNNER:

Originally Posted By happycynic:
Yeah, but we disown them. They're the dumb ones who couldn't make it in private practice, fleecing local municipalities



fixt



That's only PART of our job. We fleece corporations as well. Sheesh.
Top Top