Death of the 4th amendment.

Collarspace Discussion Forums

Home Login Search

Death of the 4th amendment.

View related threads: (in this forum | in all forums)

Logged in as: Guest

All Forums >> [Community Discussions] >> Dungeon of Political and Religious Discussion >> Death of the 4th amendment.

Page: [1] 2 next > >>

Login

Message

<< Older Topic Newer Topic >>

Death of the 4th amendment. - 6/14/2013 10:53:18 AM

MrRodgers

Posts: 10542
Joined: 7/30/2005
Status: offline

Close friend, true case as I have been following it. The 4th amend. is dead.

Caught between residences awaiting the settlement of a house. Staying in hotel rooms with personal effects in storage, leaves a travel bag in a store.

Customers then the manager handles what is lost and found property. Manager calls police. Police remove bag and transport to substation.

Police search bag making an 'administrative search' to take 'inventory.' Done govt. maintains to absolve liability.

Pot found in bag (1 gram) owner now attempting to retrieve...is charged with possession.

We know the state's case, what do you think owner's defense is ?

I'll get back to you on this.

Post #: 1

RE: Death of the 4th amendment. - 6/14/2013 11:01:41 AM

JeffBC

Posts: 5799
Joined: 2/12/2012
From: Canada
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: MrRodgers
Police search bag making an 'administrative search' to take 'inventory.' Done govt. maintains to absolve liability.

ouch.

_____________________________

I'm a lover of "what is", not because I'm a spiritual person, but because it hurts when I argue with reality. -- Bryon Katie
"You're humbly arrogant" -- sunshinemiss
officially a member of the K Crowd

(in reply to MrRodgers)

Post #: 2

RE: Death of the 4th amendment. - 6/14/2013 11:07:05 AM

DaddySatyr

Posts: 9381
Joined: 8/29/2011
From: Pittston, Pennsyltucky
Status: offline

I think there's a pretty good case for "reasonable doubt" if the clerk or manager opened the bag (ostensibly to identify the owner?). Do either of them smoke weed?

_____________________________

A Stone in My Shoe

Screen captures (and pissing on shadows) still RULE! Ya feel me?

"For that which I love, I will do horrible things"

(in reply to JeffBC)

Post #: 3

RE: Death of the 4th amendment. - 6/14/2013 11:13:15 AM

tazzygirl

Posts: 37833
Joined: 10/12/2007
Status: offline

quote:

Caught between residences awaiting the settlement of a house. Staying in hotel rooms with personal effects in storage, leaves a travel bag in a store.

Not sure how well it would play, but it could be played like the stash wasnt his? It went through many hands between the accused and the police.

_____________________________

Telling me to take Midol wont help your butthurt.
RIP, my demon-child 5-16-11
Duchess of Dissent 1
Dont judge me because I sin differently than you.
If you want it sugar coated, dont ask me what i think! It would violate TOS.

(in reply to MrRodgers)

Post #: 4

RE: Death of the 4th amendment. - 6/14/2013 11:15:21 AM

DomKen

Posts: 19457
Joined: 7/4/2004
From: Chicago, IL
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: MrRodgers

Close friend, true case as I have been following it. The 4th amend. is dead.

Caught between residences awaiting the settlement of a house. Staying in hotel rooms with personal effects in storage, leaves a travel bag in a store.

Customers then the manager handles what is lost and found property. Manager calls police. Police remove bag and transport to substation.

Police search bag making an 'administrative search' to take 'inventory.' Done govt. maintains to absolve liability.

Pot found in bag (1 gram) owner now attempting to retrieve...is charged with possession.

We know the state's case, what do you think owner's defense is ?

I'll get back to you on this.

This likely falls under the same legal theory that allows the police to search your trash without a warrant.

(in reply to MrRodgers)

Post #: 5

RE: Death of the 4th amendment. - 6/14/2013 11:15:34 AM

MrRodgers

Posts: 10542
Joined: 7/30/2005
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: DaddySatyr

I think there's a pretty good case for "reasonable doubt" if the clerk or manager opened the bag (ostensibly to identify the owner?). Do either of them smoke weed?

I was looking for a legal defense seeing has how govt. has found a very nice name for what is nothing but a search for the safety of life, limb and property. Seems to me for them to use the pot, they would have had to have obtained a warrant secured by oath as to conditions that suggest probable cause, specifying what and whose property is to searched and seized.

From my reading of the 4th, I think I am pretty close here.

(in reply to DaddySatyr)

Post #: 6

RE: Death of the 4th amendment. - 6/14/2013 11:18:29 AM

tazzygirl

Posts: 37833
Joined: 10/12/2007
Status: offline

quote:

Seems to me for them to use the pot, they would have had to have obtained a warrant secured by oath as to conditions that suggest probable cause, specifying what and whose property is to searched and seized.

Except that the police didnt search to find it. The manager did. They were told it was there, abandoned.

_____________________________

Telling me to take Midol wont help your butthurt.
RIP, my demon-child 5-16-11
Duchess of Dissent 1
Dont judge me because I sin differently than you.
If you want it sugar coated, dont ask me what i think! It would violate TOS.

(in reply to MrRodgers)

Post #: 7

RE: Death of the 4th amendment. - 6/14/2013 11:25:58 AM

DaddySatyr

Posts: 9381
Joined: 8/29/2011
From: Pittston, Pennsyltucky
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: MrRodgers

I was looking for a legal defense seeing has how govt. has found a very nice name for what is nothing but a search for the safety of life, limb and property. Seems to me for them to use the pot, they would have had to have obtained a warrant secured by oath as to conditions that suggest probable cause, specifying what and whose property is to searched and seized.

From my reading of the 4th, I think I am pretty close here.

I hear ya but "reasonable doubt" is a legal defense. If you're talking about strictly sticking with a defense of the fourth amendment, you may lose.

Cops are allowed to "pat people down for weapons" to insure their own safety, when they're interviewing a suspect/perpetrator. If they find a weapon or illegal substance, as a result, the evidence is admissable. I don't agree with it but it's kind of established. Mind, you; I'm not saying that they shouldn't be able to check for weapons for their own safety. I'm saying anything found should be inadmissable.

Also already established is the cops' right to "inventory" items and I agree that that should be done, also. They don't need people claiming that there was $100,000.00 in their gym bag, when they lost it and it's gone, now.

However, as in the first instance I brought up, I believe that the evidence should be inadmissable.

Your friend should have been issued a stern verbal warning from the cops about the illegality of weed and given his bag back (minus the weed) and sent home.

Peace and comfort,

Michael

_____________________________

A Stone in My Shoe

Screen captures (and pissing on shadows) still RULE! Ya feel me?

"For that which I love, I will do horrible things"

(in reply to MrRodgers)

Post #: 8

RE: Death of the 4th amendment. - 6/14/2013 11:33:47 AM

MrRodgers

Posts: 10542
Joined: 7/30/2005
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: tazzygirl

quote:

Seems to me for them to use the pot, they would have had to have obtained a warrant secured by oath as to conditions that suggest probable cause, specifying what and whose property is to searched and seized.

Except that the police didnt search to find it. The manager did. They were told it was there, abandoned.

No, the manager didn't search the bag. He just turned it over to the police.

(in reply to tazzygirl)

Post #: 9

RE: Death of the 4th amendment. - 6/14/2013 12:01:46 PM

BitaTruble

Posts: 9779
Joined: 1/12/2006
From: Texas
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: MrRodgers

Pot found in bag (1 gram) owner now attempting to retrieve...is charged with possession.

We know the state's case, what do you think owner's defense is ?

My first thought is the broken chain. No one knows when that pot was put into the bag or who may have put it there. The bag had been lost/forgotten and who knows how many other folks had access to the bag before it was found by the original employee at the store.

There's a bucket load of reasonable doubt. Given the scant facts, I'd say the defense can present a strong case and the state shouldn't bother wasting the tax payer dollars by trying to bring it to a trial. It's not worth it for a couple of bowls of weed that cost, what, 10 bux and that would be hard to prove belonged to the owner of the bag.

_____________________________

"Oh, so it's just like
Rock, paper, scissors."

He laughed. "You are the wisest woman I know."

(in reply to MrRodgers)

Post #: 10

RE: Death of the 4th amendment. - 6/14/2013 9:43:03 PM

muhly22222

Posts: 463
Joined: 3/25/2010
Status: offline

On Fourth Amendment grounds, this is going to be a loser. Lost property was turned into the police, which is where lost property should be turned into. When the police receive property, they are supposed to do an inventory of that property, to make sure that everything they receive is turned over to the owner when he/she recovers the property. In cases of a bag or a car, that means doing an inventory search. If they are doing an inventory search of a bag, they are going to have to remove everything in the bag and catalog it before placing it back in the bag, which is how they discovered the marijuana.

As far as the legal defense of claiming innocence because somebody else planted the marijuana, that's likely going to be difficult, too. The government will be able to call anybody who handled the bag prior to it being turned over to law enforcement, and will ask them if they put marijuana in the bag. Even if one of them is lying, they're all going to say that they didn't.

I won't disagree that the Fourth Amendment is dead, but this isn't the case to prove your point.

_____________________________

I have always been among those who believed that the greatest freedom of speech was the greatest safety, because if a man is a fool, the best thing to do is to encourage him to advertise the fact by speaking.
-Woodrow Wilson

(in reply to MrRodgers)

Post #: 11

RE: Death of the 4th amendment. - 6/14/2013 11:20:44 PM

DaddySatyr

Posts: 9381
Joined: 8/29/2011
From: Pittston, Pennsyltucky
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: muhly22222

As far as the legal defense of claiming innocence because somebody else planted the marijuana, that's likely going to be difficult, too. The government will be able to call anybody who handled the bag prior to it being turned over to law enforcement, and will ask them if they put marijuana in the bag. Even if one of them is lying, they're all going to say that they didn't.

This is the general idea I meant to convey but, not the specific. You'll forgive a frustrated, wanna-be lawyer a bit of a debate?

If, for example, the defense can prove that the defendent lost the bag on "Tuesday" and the prosecution can't vouch for the "chain of custody" for the bag further back than Wednesday, I think the defense can raise reasonable doubt that any number of people might have had access to the bag. It was, after all, left in a store.

I know for years, when we go to check a bag at the airport, we've heard:

"Did you pack your bag yourself?"

"Has the bag been out of your sight?"

I think that second question is to establish responsibility of the person presenting the bag for anything that might be found in it.

So, if the defense can show that the bag was left alone in a public area for X amount of hours, they might be able to raise reasonable doubt. No?

Peace and comfort,

Michael

_____________________________

A Stone in My Shoe

Screen captures (and pissing on shadows) still RULE! Ya feel me?

"For that which I love, I will do horrible things"

(in reply to muhly22222)

Post #: 12

RE: Death of the 4th amendment. - 6/15/2013 9:47:27 AM

MrRodgers

Posts: 10542
Joined: 7/30/2005
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: DaddySatyr

quote:

ORIGINAL: MrRodgers

I was looking for a legal defense seeing has how govt. has found a very nice name for what is nothing but a search for the safety of life, limb and property. Seems to me for them to use the pot, they would have had to have obtained a warrant secured by oath as to conditions that suggest probable cause, specifying what and whose property is to searched and seized.

From my reading of the 4th, I think I am pretty close here.

I hear ya but "reasonable doubt" is a legal defense. If you're talking about strictly sticking with a defense of the fourth amendment, you may lose.

Cops are allowed to "pat people down for weapons" to insure their own safety, when they're interviewing a suspect/perpetrator. If they find a weapon or illegal substance, as a result, the evidence is admissable. I don't agree with it but it's kind of established. Mind, you; I'm not saying that they shouldn't be able to check for weapons for their own safety. I'm saying anything found should be inadmissable.

Also already established is the cops' right to "inventory" items and I agree that that should be done, also. They don't need people claiming that there was $100,000.00 in their gym bag, when they lost it and it's gone, now.

However, as in the first instance I brought up, I believe that the evidence should be inadmissable.

Your friend should have been issued a stern verbal warning from the cops about the illegality of weed and given his bag back (minus the weed) and sent home.

Peace and comfort,

Michael

You see, now you are on to this and correct. I feel the same way. Govt. had no warrant specifying who, what and where which is quite specific in the 4th amend. BUT I have seen and feel this case in federal court...is thrown out in 5 min.

Actual case: Men on a bus, luggage full of pot. Cops knew it, when on the bus forced the men to open the bags before the could leave. Finally, they did relent and open the bags. BUSTED with lbs. of pot.

Alex., Va. federal court threw it out. Quote from the judge: This isn't Nazi Germany and the police cannot intimidate people into giving up their constitutional rights.

(in reply to DaddySatyr)

Post #: 13

RE: Death of the 4th amendment. - 6/15/2013 9:53:56 AM

MrRodgers

Posts: 10542
Joined: 7/30/2005
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: DaddySatyr

quote:

ORIGINAL: muhly22222

As far as the legal defense of claiming innocence because somebody else planted the marijuana, that's likely going to be difficult, too. The government will be able to call anybody who handled the bag prior to it being turned over to law enforcement, and will ask them if they put marijuana in the bag. Even if one of them is lying, they're all going to say that they didn't.

This is the general idea I meant to convey but, not the specific. You'll forgive a frustrated, wanna-be lawyer a bit of a debate?

If, for example, the defense can prove that the defendent lost the bag on "Tuesday" and the prosecution can't vouch for the "chain of custody" for the bag further back than Wednesday, I think the defense can raise reasonable doubt that any number of people might have had access to the bag. It was, after all, left in a store.

I know for years, when we go to check a bag at the airport, we've heard:

"Did you pack your bag yourself?"

"Has the bag been out of your sight?"

I think that second question is to establish responsibility of the person presenting the bag for anything that might be found in it.

So, if the defense can show that the bag was left alone in a public area for X amount of hours, they might be able to raise reasonable doubt. No?

Peace and comfort,

Michael

I understand where you are coming from but I do think that most of all that is irrelevant. The search is fine, calling it what you want, administrative or kinky. What the govt. finds cannot ever be used against anyone in court specifically because there was no warrant, sworn with probable cause there being none, and not specifying exactly what govt. seeks, who the owner is and where they seek that for which they search.

Without this they can find pot, heroin anything but...cannot use it without that warrant. This is recorded legal history dating back to as early as 1604 when even the king's court threw out unreasonable searches.

(in reply to DaddySatyr)

Post #: 14

RE: Death of the 4th amendment. - 6/15/2013 9:57:15 AM

DaddySatyr

Posts: 9381
Joined: 8/29/2011
From: Pittston, Pennsyltucky
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: MrRodgers

You see, now you are on to this and correct. I feel the same way. Govt. had no warrant specifying who, what and where which is quite specific in the 4th amend. BUT I have seen and feel this case in federal court...is thrown out in 5 min.

Actual case: Men on a bus, luggage full of pot. Cops knew it, when on the bus forced the men to open the bags before the could leave. Finally, they did relent and open the bags. BUSTED with lbs. of pot.

Alex., Va. federal court threw it out. Quote from the judge: This isn't Nazi Germany and the police cannot intimidate people into giving up their constitutional rights.

Oh, I've been "on to this" for quite some time. It is a violation of the 4th (as far as I'm concerned) but, I don't hold out much hope for your friend if he tries to fight on 4th amendment grounds.

Like it or not, the 4th has been infringed upon. The way they do this is in baby steps and before you know it, the constitution is nothing more than a back-up for Charmin©.

Peace and comfort,

Michael

_____________________________

A Stone in My Shoe

Screen captures (and pissing on shadows) still RULE! Ya feel me?

"For that which I love, I will do horrible things"

(in reply to MrRodgers)

Post #: 15

RE: Death of the 4th amendment. - 6/15/2013 10:03:05 AM

MrRodgers

Posts: 10542
Joined: 7/30/2005
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: muhly22222

On Fourth Amendment grounds, this is going to be a loser. Lost property was turned into the police, which is where lost property should be turned into. When the police receive property, they are supposed to do an inventory of that property, to make sure that everything they receive is turned over to the owner when he/she recovers the property. In cases of a bag or a car, that means doing an inventory search. If they are doing an inventory search of a bag, they are going to have to remove everything in the bag and catalog it before placing it back in the bag, which is how they discovered the marijuana.

As far as the legal defense of claiming innocence because somebody else planted the marijuana, that's likely going to be difficult, too. The government will be able to call anybody who handled the bag prior to it being turned over to law enforcement, and will ask them if they put marijuana in the bag. Even if one of them is lying, they're all going to say that they didn't.

I won't disagree that the Fourth Amendment is dead, but this isn't the case to prove your point.

As I've written, the govt. can search the bag all it desires and rationalize it all they want but whatever evidence found in that search without a search warrant specifying what they seek, whose it is supposed to own it and where it is to be found all based on probable cause specified before a judge or magistrate...cannot be used in court.

Thus the evidence was supposed to suppressed.

(in reply to muhly22222)

Post #: 16

RE: Death of the 4th amendment. - 6/15/2013 10:13:42 AM

DaddySatyr

Posts: 9381
Joined: 8/29/2011
From: Pittston, Pennsyltucky
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: MrRodgers

As I've written, the govt. can search the bag all it desires and rationalize it all they want but whatever evidence found in that search without a search warrant specifying what they seek, whose it is supposed to own it and where it is to be found all based on probable cause specified before a judge or magistrate...cannot be used in court.

Thus the evidence was supposed to suppressed.

I understand what you're saying in this context but there are exceptions to the 4th amendment ("plain sight" searches upon entrance into a dwelling for exigent circumstances, probable cause during a traffic stop, etc.). Some probably should be admissable and some probably shouldn't. It's what I meant by "baby steps". These things (in parenthesis) are already considered to be "established" exceptions.

In the first case you brought up, though, I think you're on the side of the angels.

Peace and comfort,

Michael

< Message edited by DaddySatyr -- 6/15/2013 10:17:51 AM >

_____________________________

A Stone in My Shoe

Screen captures (and pissing on shadows) still RULE! Ya feel me?

"For that which I love, I will do horrible things"

(in reply to MrRodgers)

Post #: 17

RE: Death of the 4th amendment. - 6/15/2013 10:20:25 AM

MrRodgers

Posts: 10542
Joined: 7/30/2005
Status: offline

The rest of the story:

Court was last Friday and I provided transport for him, he having sold his older car before he moved. I went in with him and after waiting and trial, (3 hours or more) the judge didn't give it a second thought...guilty.

Fined $75 (instead of the max. $1,100) 1 year probation and suspension of his drivers license for 6 mos. (automatic) Ouch still because of the license but court costs for appeal cost him. $500+...ripoff.

$562.00 altogether he showed me while asking me how he could take it to federal court for the principle and admonishment of this redneck, county, fascist judge. We'll see. It is of course in America often 'how much justice can he/we afford ?'

Another thought. $500+ isn't throwing him into poverty or even a federal court case really but imagine if you will, if he'd taken this case to a jury. I think he would have won. The jury is us...not them.

< Message edited by MrRodgers -- 6/15/2013 10:37:27 AM >

(in reply to MrRodgers)

Post #: 18

RE: Death of the 4th amendment. - 6/15/2013 10:45:29 AM

MrRodgers

Posts: 10542
Joined: 7/30/2005
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: DomKen

quote:

ORIGINAL: MrRodgers

Close friend, true case as I have been following it. The 4th amend. is dead.

Caught between residences awaiting the settlement of a house. Staying in hotel rooms with personal effects in storage, leaves a travel bag in a store.

Customers then the manager handles what is lost and found property. Manager calls police. Police remove bag and transport to substation.

Police search bag making an 'administrative search' to take 'inventory.' Done govt. maintains to absolve liability.

Pot found in bag (1 gram) owner now attempting to retrieve...is charged with possession.

We know the state's case, what do you think owner's defense is ?

I'll get back to you on this.

This likely falls under the same legal theory that allows the police to search your trash without a warrant.

Last comment. It being an obviously currently used, owned and necessary bag found in public , govt. is allowed a search to determine safety.

Without a sworn specific warrant established by probable cause...no evidence found in that bag can be used in court.

(in reply to DomKen)

Post #: 19

RE: Death of the 4th amendment. - 6/16/2013 12:03:16 AM

joether

Posts: 5195
Joined: 7/24/2005
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: MrRodgers

quote:

ORIGINAL: DomKen

quote:

ORIGINAL: MrRodgers
Close friend, true case as I have been following it. The 4th amend. is dead.

Caught between residences awaiting the settlement of a house. Staying in hotel rooms with personal effects in storage, leaves a travel bag in a store.

Customers then the manager handles what is lost and found property. Manager calls police. Police remove bag and transport to substation.

Police search bag making an 'administrative search' to take 'inventory.' Done govt. maintains to absolve liability.

Pot found in bag (1 gram) owner now attempting to retrieve...is charged with possession.

We know the state's case, what do you think owner's defense is ?

I'll get back to you on this.

This likely falls under the same legal theory that allows the police to search your trash without a warrant.

Last comment. It being an obviously currently used, owned and necessary bag found in public , govt. is allowed a search to determine safety.

Without a sworn specific warrant established by probable cause...no evidence found in that bag can be used in court.

They left the back out in the open, it effectively became public property. Your 4th amendment rights end when someone not with the government opens the bag and looks in. An if they see something 'not right' and call the police, that becomes probable cause. Sounds like the person got nailed for breaking the law and trying to do anything from not facing the penalty. Given the information you gave us, I'd still side with the police on this one. After all, it could have been an IED.....

(in reply to MrRodgers)

Post #: 20

Page: [1] 2 next > >>

All Forums >> [Community Discussions] >> Dungeon of Political and Religious Discussion >> Death of the 4th amendment.

Page: [1] 2 next > >>

Jump to:

New Messages	No New Messages
Hot Topic w/ New Messages	Hot Topic w/o New Messages
Locked w/ New Messages	Locked w/o New Messages

Post New Thread

Reply to Message

Post New Poll

Submit Vote

Delete My Own Post

Delete My Own Thread

Rate Posts

Collarchat.com © 2025

Terms of Service

0.109