Warning

 

Close

Confirm Action

Are you sure you wish to do this?

Confirm Cancel
Member Login
Site Notices
9/19/2017 7:27:10 PM
Arrow Left Previous Page
Page / 2
Posted: 4/24/2002 6:34:13 AM EDT
A few years ago i bought my son a new truck,he does not speed and does not break any laws. He was stopped 5 times in 2 months no tickets were issued and no warnings,just stopped him and questioned his comings and goings,dif.towns i might add, a few of the times he was searched along with the truck and most of the time i was told by my son that the officers were very rude and one of the stops he was taken out of the car at gun point. Now i am getting more upset by these events and i go down to the police station to try and find out what the hell is going on,it seems that because my son is very young loking and the truck i gave him is kind of expensive they thought he might be doing something illegal. It turns out the local police depts.around here do not take certain rights to seriously,so i gave my son a pocket recorder and told him the next time he was stopped to turn it on and record all that happens,bingo he gets stopped 2 days later at 11 at night and is pulled from his truck and searched ,one of the officers is a female and when she searched him her hand went a little to far up his thigh,he giggled and the male officer smacked him in the back of the head causing his head to hit the side window of the truck. No ticket and no arrest,he was told by the male officer to forget the little smack if he knew what was good for him(recorder going the whole time). I heard the tape when i got home that night and went balistic,my first thought was to punch out the lights of the officer who hit my son. My second thought was better, called the police station the next moring and reported the whole thing,I was told they would look into it,3 days later i got a phone call saying the matter was without merrit and was being dropped. I asked if the officer gave a statement and the sergeant said yes. I went down to the police station and went in to see the chief,he gave me the same line as the sergeant,now you have to imagine this guys face as i set the recorder on his desk and hit the play button,the whole thing is on tape and crystal clear. Of course i made a copy of the tape before i went down there. The officer was given desk duty for one week and a perm. reprimand put in his jacket. I could have hung the guy out to dry and the chief knew it. Just so you guys know ,my son is a strait arrow and holds an FFL,he has never been in any trouble and has not been stopped since. Wonder why?
Link Posted: 4/24/2002 6:37:15 AM EDT
You are lucky your son wasn't arrested for illegally recording the officers. In some states, that's not allowed. Afterall, we wouldn't want people to be able to prove what the JBT's are really up to.
Link Posted: 4/24/2002 6:38:55 AM EDT
Is your son Black?
Link Posted: 4/24/2002 6:39:40 AM EDT
How is it that it's legal for the police to record you, but it's illegal for you to record the police?
Link Posted: 4/24/2002 6:42:02 AM EDT
Originally Posted By TheCommissioner: Is your son Black?
View Quote
Not the last time i looked, LOL and he does not dress like a gang banger either. He is one of those people who is always polite and does not give anyone a hard time. I talked to other friends of mine that have kids the same age,it's not just my kid it was happening to their's to.
Link Posted: 4/24/2002 6:42:02 AM EDT
Originally Posted By Jarhead_22: How is it that it's legal for the police to record you, but it's illegal for you to record the police?
View Quote
Yeah. Cuz they are better than us? Cuz they are the Enforcers for the Ruling Elite?
Link Posted: 4/24/2002 6:43:32 AM EDT
Originally Posted By Jarhead_22: How is it that it's legal for the police to record you, but it's illegal for you to record the police?
View Quote
You can record any conversation even on the phone as long as you are a party in the conversation.
Link Posted: 4/24/2002 6:43:42 AM EDT
[url=http://seattlepi.nwsource.com/local/tapeww.shtml][b]Two men sue over arrests for taping law-enforcement during traffic stop [/b][/url]
BREMERTON -- A Bremerton man has filed a lawsuit over his arrest by the Washington State Patrol for tape-recording his exchanges with a trooper during a traffic stop -- one of two such cases filed recently in federal court. Jerome Alford, 47, was arrested Nov. 22, 1997, according to the lawsuit he has filed in U.S. District Court in Tacoma. The complaint asks that the patrol be enjoined from "stopping, questioning, detaining or arresting persons for allegedly violating the (state privacy act) by recording, or attempting to record, law enforcement activities." It also seeks unspecified monetary damages, alleging excessive force by arresting officers. Alford's lawyer, R. Stuart Phillips of Poulsbo, has filed a similar lawsuit on behalf of a Sequim man who says he was arrested after videotaping the local police chief. Assistant State Attorney General Eric Mentzer said he will oppose Phillips' request for an injunction in Alford's case. Arguments are scheduled July 21 before U.S. District Judge Robert Bryan. Alford says he was pulled over on Highway 16 by Trooper Joi Haner because his car was equipped with headlights that flash alternately, right and left. Such headlights are reserved for use by police, Mentzer said. Haner was joined by Patrol Sgt. Gerald Devenpeck, who arrested Alford for "illegal tape recording" when he noticed a recorder running on the car's passenger seat, the lawsuit says. Alford alleges that Devenpeck, who since has left the patrol to become a private pilot, used excessive force and injured him. Alford spent 12 hours in the Pierce County jail before posting bail. Both the citation for the headlights and the illegal-recording charge later were dismissed. A 1993 court ruling holds that police -- acting in their official capacity in the presence of others -- have no expectation of privacy, Mentzer said. But such tape-recording may be illegal in one-on-one situations, or even in cases in which two officers are present, he said. Alford still carries a tape recorder and will record any future police stops, his lawsuit says. The second case was filed June 16 by Phillips on behalf of Anthony Johnson, 23, of Sequim. Defendants include the city of Sequim and its police chief, Byron Nelson. The lawsuit, which characterizes Johnson as "an avid videographer and film editor," says a Jan. 28 incident followed "a two-year campaign of harassment" of Johnson by police over his skateboarding in or near the town's no-skate zone. On Jan. 28, the lawsuit says, Johnson began taping Nelson as he sat in his patrol car at the Sequim Skateboard Park. Nelson objected, saying it was illegal to record him without his permission, Johnson alleges. He says Nelson then told him he was under arrest for "unlawfully recording my conversations and me." Johnson spent three days in jail, and a judge dismissed the charge May 10, he said. Johnson also alleges he was physically abused by the arresting officers. Nelson declined to comment on the lawsuit. Bryan, a former Bremerton resident and Kitsap County Superior Court judge, will hear Johnson's case as well.
View Quote
Link Posted: 4/24/2002 6:44:45 AM EDT
[Last Edit: 4/24/2002 6:45:58 AM EDT by fight4yourrights]
Originally Posted By jrzy:
Originally Posted By Jarhead_22: How is it that it's legal for the police to record you, but it's illegal for you to record the police?
View Quote
You can record any conversation even on the phone as long as you are a party in the conversation.
View Quote
[b][size=4][blue]WRONG!![/size=4][/blue][/b] Be careful with the legal advise folks, you are often wrong. Ever heard of Monica Lewinsky and Linda Tripp? In Maryland, you CAN'T tape a conversation unless the other party is aware of the taping.
Link Posted: 4/24/2002 6:45:56 AM EDT
[Last Edit: 4/24/2002 6:48:31 AM EDT by ilikelegs]
Link Posted: 4/24/2002 7:00:56 AM EDT
Originally Posted By jrzy: A few years ago i bought my son a new truck,he does not speed
View Quote
Now come on......I find that very HARD to believe! You have a young boy, and you're telling me he DOESN'T speed?!?! I think he's got the covers pulled over your head! Not that he's done anything wrong when he's been pulled over, but I guarantee you that he speeds!
Link Posted: 4/24/2002 7:07:09 AM EDT
[Last Edit: 4/24/2002 7:10:33 AM EDT by thebeekeeper1]
Link Posted: 4/24/2002 7:10:04 AM EDT
[Last Edit: 4/24/2002 7:10:53 AM EDT by NOVA5]
some states, but not all require 1 party to be aware of the recording. now both(varies by state) can be made aware but simply placing the recorder in view and recording. IF the officer is blond and doesnt see it its his fault, not yours. --edit-- Blond? I meant Blind.. hehe
Link Posted: 4/24/2002 7:11:44 AM EDT
Originally Posted By ilikelegs: Thanks, I now have 1,524,234 reasons to still hate all cops. Visualize me giving you the finger [u]HERE![/u]
View Quote
save your hate for the 1% who actually deserve it. the rest are real human beings doing a tough job.
Link Posted: 4/24/2002 7:16:12 AM EDT
Originally Posted By fight4yourrights:
Originally Posted By jrzy:
Originally Posted By Jarhead_22: How is it that it's legal for the police to record you, but it's illegal for you to record the police?
View Quote
You can record any conversation even on the phone as long as you are a party in the conversation.
View Quote
[b][size=4][blue]WRONG!![/size=4][/blue][/b] Be careful with the legal advise folks, you are often wrong. Ever heard of Monica Lewinsky and Linda Tripp? In Maryland, you CAN'T tape a conversation unless the other party is aware of the taping.
View Quote
Was Linda Tripp convicted of violating that law?
Link Posted: 4/24/2002 7:24:12 AM EDT
[Last Edit: 4/24/2002 7:27:25 AM EDT by gunham]
These laws vary from state to state. It is legal to tape-record a conversation in Alabama as long as one member of the conversion knows about it. It is not legal in Maryland. This should fall under the 1st ammendment making it legal everywhere. It just makes me mad when a public official says that you cannot record something. They must be hiding something. There was a KKK march in Birmingham years ago and the city said that cameras were not allowed along the parade route. The press was restricted to a small fenced in area, "for their protection". I say take the people take the pictures and let the public judge.
Link Posted: 4/24/2002 7:28:53 AM EDT
Originally Posted By jboze:
Originally Posted By jrzy: A few years ago i bought my son a new truck,he does not speed
View Quote
Now come on......I find that very HARD to believe! You have a young boy, and you're telling me he DOESN'T speed?!?! I think he's got the covers pulled over your head! Not that he's done anything wrong when he's been pulled over, but I guarantee you that he speeds!
View Quote
OK ,Just because you know my son better than I ,He was in the Airforce and recieved a very severe injury to his shoulder and has had 4 surgery's ,he is fine now except for alot of pain now and again. I bought him the new truck for a welcome home gift because the Airforce was screwing him over He drives in a very careful manner because he is afraid he will have a wreck and reinjure his shoulder. On a side note the VA came through and has given him a lifetime pension.
Link Posted: 4/24/2002 7:35:28 AM EDT
I'm a retired LEO so you may think you know where I'm going to come down on this subject. I spent my last 6 years before retirement assigned to the training center (primary job was chief firearms instructor). I taught several academy classes in addition to in-service training for our 400 person department. I retired in 1987. I have seen law enforcement go through a significant change since I was in the business. One of the biggest changes, and one I am sorry to observe, is the almost universal disreguard fo the 4th Amendment (search and seizure). This is an out growth of the War on Drugs. I hear and read constant reports of searchs, particularly during traffic stops, that are absolute violations of what I was taught and what I in turn taught. Related subject, some of the high profile shootings that have occured in the last 10 years. Most of these incidents, that are justified by these same people who don't think much of illegial searches, are what I would call bad shootings. Things that I taught my students not to do (unjustified) are now being called justified. It ain't the same as it was back in the '70s and '80s when I was in the business. And, I don't think it's changed for the better. I still support cops but not this change in attitude/behavior/policy.
Link Posted: 4/24/2002 7:44:01 AM EDT
Originally Posted By jrzy:
Originally Posted By Jarhead_22: How is it that it's legal for the police to record you, but it's illegal for you to record the police?
View Quote
You can record any conversation even on the phone as long as you are a party in the conversation.
View Quote
That is only true in some states. It is also up to a judge to allow it in court. The way I see it, if they can record you, and re-dub the video tapes without some comments on them when its time to produce it as evidence, then its okay for you to record them, since they will definately be recording you (at their leisure) and taking out certain pieces. I don't understand how its legal for a DA to re-dub the tapes with missing comments and scenes. Isn't that tampering with the evidence?
Link Posted: 4/24/2002 7:45:02 AM EDT
I know cops are likely to stop young kids more often than older adults. And they should. They need to learn to respect the law, but the type of behavior you describe doesn't instill much respect for the law in young kids, does it. I know that most cops are good guys doing a very tough job. Even "Joe Average" lies to them and gives them static when they [b]clearly[/b] just did something illegal. (If you fit this picture, maybe you should look at yourself a little more closely!) There are two things I can't stand: a liar and a thief. So y'all are lucky I'm not a cop. If you lied to me, and I knew it, I'd make your life as difficult as possible. (jrzy -- I'm not saying your son did this, just trying to point out how difficult it is to be a good cop.)
Link Posted: 4/24/2002 7:50:41 AM EDT
Originally Posted By DaveT: I'm a retired LEO so you may think you know where I'm going to come down on this subject. I spent my last 6 years before retirement assigned to the training center (primary job was chief firearms instructor). I taught several academy classes in addition to in-service training for our 400 person department. I retired in 1987. I have seen law enforcement go through a significant change since I was in the business. One of the biggest changes, and one I am sorry to observe, is the almost universal disreguard fo the 4th Amendment (search and seizure). This is an out growth of the War on Drugs. I hear and read constant reports of searchs, particularly during traffic stops, that are absolute violations of what I was taught and what I in turn taught. Related subject, some of the high profile shootings that have occured in the last 10 years. Most of these incidents, that are justified by these same people who don't think much of illegial searches, are what I would call bad shootings. Things that I taught my students not to do (unjustified) are now being called justified. It ain't the same as it was back in the '70s and '80s when I was in the business. And, I don't think it's changed for the better. I still support cops but not this change in attitude/behavior/policy.
View Quote
I heard this recently: "illegal" searches interesting point for routine traffic stops/"illegal" searches If the officer is suspicious that there may be drugs in the car he may call for a dog to sniff it out. When the dog arrives tell the handler he is NOT to touch your vehicle. A bag of dope is routinely carried in the dog handler's pocket as a training device. If he touches the vehicle the dog will alert and give the officers probable cause to search without a warrant.
Link Posted: 4/24/2002 7:52:14 AM EDT
Link Posted: 4/24/2002 8:02:01 AM EDT
Originally Posted By Energizer: If he touches the vehicle the dog will alert and give the officers probable cause to search without a warrant.
View Quote
I believe that the dog alerting to drugs does not give the officer the right to search the vech. without a warrant,I think that the dog alerting gives the officer prob. cause to get a warrant. correct me if i am wrong
Link Posted: 4/24/2002 8:03:02 AM EDT
Originally Posted By lurker:
Originally Posted By ilikelegs: The rest are real human beings doing a tough job.
View Quote
[img]http://www.stopstart.fsnet.co.uk/smilie/boohoo.gif[/img] Right... Remember, they ASKED for the job they have. If it becomes too "tough", they may resign at any time. As for 1%... Please see my response in the link below. [url]http://www.ar15.com/forums/topic.html?id=111333[/url] [img]http://www.stopstart.fsnet.co.uk/smilie/sadness.gif[/img]
Link Posted: 4/24/2002 8:12:32 AM EDT
[url]http://www.ar15.com/forums/topic.html?id=111531[/url]
Link Posted: 4/24/2002 8:12:34 AM EDT
Link Posted: 4/24/2002 8:19:16 AM EDT
Link Posted: 4/24/2002 8:28:19 AM EDT
Originally Posted By platform389:
Originally Posted By lurker:
Originally Posted By ilikelegs: The rest are real human beings doing a tough job.
View Quote
[img]http://www.stopstart.fsnet.co.uk/smilie/boohoo.gif[/img] Right... Remember, they ASKED for the job they have. If it becomes too "tough", they may resign at any time. As for 1%... Please see my response in the link below. [url]http://www.ar15.com/forums/topic.html?id=111333[/url] [img]http://www.stopstart.fsnet.co.uk/smilie/sadness.gif[/img]
View Quote
ive got horror stories of my own. i spent a national holiday in jail because an officer was having a bad day. i still remember how he kept touching his gun while i sat in the car, like he wanted to shoot it. 6 months later he shot someone in the jail. but i repeat, the vast majority are fine people doing a dirty job.
Link Posted: 4/24/2002 8:35:44 AM EDT
Link Posted: 4/24/2002 9:29:02 AM EDT
Originally Posted By ChuckT: I know cops are likely to stop young kids more often than older adults. And they should. They need to learn to respect the law, .....
View Quote
Wow. Can to explain to me how pulling over a kid again and again, even pointing a gun at them, all because they are young and driving a nice truck is going to teach them to [i][b]respect[/b][/i] law?
Link Posted: 4/24/2002 10:12:34 AM EDT
You should teach your son about his rights. He should decline illegal searches and insist on a warrant. If we don't use the rights we have then why bother having them?
Link Posted: 4/24/2002 10:19:32 AM EDT
There's nothing better than a genuine, certified "TV Academy" taught cop. Turn off the boob tube and read some law books. [>(]
Link Posted: 4/24/2002 10:31:45 AM EDT
Originally Posted By ilikelegs:
Originally Posted By lurker: Right... Remember, they ASKED for the job they have. If it becomes too "tough", they may resign at any time. As for 1%... Please see my response in the link below. [url]www.ar15.com/forums/topic.html?id=111333[/url]
View Quote
Its still 1%. Its just that 1% of them dont deserve it. the rest do. And yes your thread is another example of a cop really impressed with him self.
View Quote
i believe sir that you are confused, i am not and never have been a law enforcement officer.
Link Posted: 4/24/2002 10:55:07 AM EDT
Link Posted: 4/24/2002 11:06:04 AM EDT
Originally Posted By fight4yourrights:
Originally Posted By ChuckT: I know cops are likely to stop young kids more often than older adults. And they should. They need to learn to respect the law, .....
View Quote
Wow. Can to explain to me how pulling over a kid again and again, even pointing a gun at them, all because they are young and driving a nice truck is going to teach them to [i][b]respect[/b][/i] law?
View Quote
Sorry about the misconception. I meant young kids should be pulled over, IF AND ONLY IF, they are obviously breaking the law. And I don't mean 5 over. And that doesn't mean search their vehicle. And that especially doesn't mean point their gun at them when no threat is apparent. My sarcastic point was that what those cops are doing is enormously wrong as it teaches Kids to despise cops and the law. I have a [b]HUGE[/b] problem with that!
Link Posted: 4/24/2002 11:29:33 AM EDT
Originally Posted By jrzy: the male officer smacked him in the back of the head causing his head to hit the side window of the truck.
View Quote
Be he LEO or non-LEO, if someone attempts to use unlawful physical force against you, defend yourself using physical force. This is my legal advice.
Link Posted: 4/24/2002 11:38:32 AM EDT
I believe that the dog alerting to drugs does not give the officer the right to search the vech. without a warrant,I think that the dog alerting gives the officer prob. cause to get a warrant. correct me if i am wrong
View Quote
According to the U.S. Supreme Court... "A canine sniff, seeking drugs or explosives or some other contraband, is not a search within the meaning of the Fourth Amendment. Because a canine sniff is not a search under the Fourth Amendment, a person or place may be subjected to a canine sniff without a warrant or grounds for suspicion. However, a canine sniff must be reasonable in intensity and duration. If a person or a person's luggage must be detained in order to accomplish a canine sniff, then the detention must be justified either by reasonable suspicion or consent. A canine sniff may be a search under some state constitutions. Courts have held that an "alert" by a reliable canine is sufficient to establish probable cause to a search." That came directly out of the "LAW OFFICERS POCKET MANUAL" As it states, it is probable cause for a search, but some states may prohibit it.
Link Posted: 4/24/2002 11:41:28 AM EDT
I didn't bother to wade through all the bickering here, but it sure sounds like your son was stopped without good cause. May I suggest this little book: [img]http://images.amazon.com/images/P/1888766018.01.MZZZZZZZ.jpg[/img] Available here: [url]http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/1888766018/qid=1019676869/sr=1-7/ref=sr_1_7/104-2464760-9776743[/url] There is no reason to take this kind of crap from police officers.
Link Posted: 4/24/2002 11:52:09 AM EDT
[Last Edit: 4/24/2002 11:54:27 AM EDT by schv]
Generally, you do not have to have a search warrant to search a vehicle as long as it was operating on a public roadway when you stopped it. I am not saying you don't have to have reason, just not a warrant. If it is parked, you cannot. If it is at a private residence you cannot. However, as a LEO if you want to search a car and the occupant fails to give you consent, you can arrest him, even for speeding, and then search the car incident to arrest. Here you can only search the areas that are immediately accessible to the driver and passengers, not the trunk, or underhood. However, if you arrest the person then you can impound the vehicle and do an "Inventory Search" when you bring it to the station. As an LEO there are very few things that we cannot do, if you know how to write a report. BUT, these loopholes should not be abused by dickhead cops like stated in this story. This guys son should not have been hassled, as soon as they found out the vehicle belonged to him,and he was not selling narcotics, they should have let him go immediately.
Link Posted: 4/24/2002 12:09:20 PM EDT
Originally Posted By schv: As an LEO there are very few things that we cannot do, if you know how to write a report. BUT, these loopholes should not be abused by dickhead cops like stated in this story.
View Quote
There's no loophole that allows cops to assault people, like the outlaw cop in this story did. There are laws that allow people to defend themselves against assault.
Link Posted: 4/24/2002 12:31:40 PM EDT
[Last Edit: 4/24/2002 12:33:42 PM EDT by schv]
Blaze of Glory, You are 100% correct. I was simply responding to the canine sniff question. But, let me give all of you a piece of advice regarding LEOs. There are some guys out there on the streets that should not be cops. They will KILL YOU in a heartbeat if you start "fighting back". If a cop assaults you, DO NOT FIGHT BACK!!!!! If he is messed up enough to assault you then he is messed up enough to kill you. And 9 out of 10 times if a defense attorney shows that you were fighting with the officer, he will not be convicted. IF you are assaulted by a police officer, AND WERE NOT DOING ANYTHING WRONG, Not(He assaulted me cuz' I spit in his face) then get his DSN, or car# and file a report. If a officer starts receiving excessive force complaints, the Department will terminate him, there is just too much liability for a dept. to hang on to a guy like that. Remember though... DO NOT RESIST!! There are guys I have known in the past that would try to get people to resist so they could kick the shit out of them. They are no longer working in Law Enforcement, but how many people got messed up before they were finally terminated?
Link Posted: 4/24/2002 12:32:11 PM EDT
schv, I do believe you need a reason to arrest someone. And I believe there are things known as Reasonably Articulable Suspicion and Probable Cause needed to conduct more than a superficial search. As an LEO there are very few things you cannot do, but you're likely to get your ass charred well-done if you try the wrong thing on a well-informed citizen with access to good legal resources.
Link Posted: 4/24/2002 12:40:03 PM EDT
Link Posted: 4/24/2002 12:44:02 PM EDT
Originally Posted By marvl: schv, I do believe you need a reason to arrest someone. And I believe there are things known as Reasonably Articulable Suspicion and Probable Cause needed to conduct more than a superficial search. As an LEO there are very few things you cannot do, but you're likely to get your ass charred well-done if you try the wrong thing on a well-informed citizen with access to good legal resources.
View Quote
In Missouri, you can arrest someone for speeding. And as long as it was a legal arrest you have the right to search the vehicle. As far as getting your ass charred, nothing that I have stated is illegal. Can you be named in a civil law suit? YEP. But that is part of the job. That's why all of the officers I know have absolutely nothing in their names that can be awarded in a civil law suit, cars/trucks are in their names and the name of their fathers for example, house's are never paid for. If your a cop for more than a few years and haven't been in a civil law suit you are not doing your job.
Link Posted: 4/24/2002 12:48:46 PM EDT
I am not advocating arresting people for speeding in any way, and I would never use that as a reason for a search. I just wanted to let all of these "rebels" out there know that they had better know the law before they start resisting on the grounds of an illegal search!!!! They will get into serious trouble if they don't.
Link Posted: 4/24/2002 12:48:55 PM EDT
jrzy, I have been pretty lucky with the law here in NJ, but my Wife had her life threatened once in Howell. I wanted the son of a bitch's head over my fireplace, but she didnt want to persue it..... I wish we did.
Link Posted: 4/24/2002 2:34:32 PM EDT
Originally Posted By ctrmass: jrzy, I have been pretty lucky with the law here in NJ, but my Wife had her life threatened once in Howell. I wanted the son of a bitch's head over my fireplace, but she didnt want to persue it..... I wish we did.
View Quote
Centermass,it was in one of the shore towns that this happened and since my son was not hurt besides a bruised ego and a little red mark on his forehead ,we decided to let it go with what the chief did. But they were also put on notice by our family attorney that the next time we would file suit. That tape is what made all the dif. in the world,without it there would have been nothing at all done.
Link Posted: 4/24/2002 2:55:12 PM EDT
So when you guys say you can be arrested for speeding, is that speeding more than 15 mph over the limit as in reckless driving? Also is speeding the only traffic offense that someone is "arrestable" for?
Link Posted: 4/24/2002 4:24:57 PM EDT
Link Posted: 4/24/2002 4:57:32 PM EDT
Originally Posted By Hellraiser: You should teach your son about his rights. He should decline illegal searches and insist on a warrant. If we don't use the rights we have then why bother having them?
View Quote
Believe me, if they want to search your car it will happen regardless.
Link Posted: 4/24/2002 5:06:47 PM EDT
Originally Posted By jrzy:
Originally Posted By Jarhead_22: How is it that it's legal for the police to record you, but it's illegal for you to record the police?
View Quote
You can record any conversation even on the phone as long as you are a party in the conversation.
View Quote
I dunno- tell that to Linda Tripp.
Arrow Left Previous Page
Page / 2
Top Top