• We’re currently investigating an issue related to the forum theme and styling that is impacting page layout and visual formatting. The problem has been identified, and we are actively working on a resolution. There is no impact to user data or functionality, this is strictly a front-end display issue. We’ll post an update once the fix has been deployed. Thanks for your patience while we get this sorted.

Female cop give two women roadside body cavity searches-with video!

Page 3 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.
MarkXIX said:
The legal answer is probably, "It depends on the circumstances". Here are two links that discuss it in detail:

http://www.policechiefmagazine.org/...n=display_arch&article_id=714&issue_id=102005

http://www.llrmi.com/articles/legal_questions/2-jan08.shtml

Here's my take, given to me while being trained by a JAG in my Military Police course. When asked for consent to search, ALWAYS, ALWAYS, ALWAYS SAY "NO". Now, keep in mind, he told us this as a prosecuting attorney to a classroom full of police officers. I agree with him. I don't care how damning the evidence is, I will ALWAYS say "No" and make the legal system work for what they think they've got. I will stare straight at the patrol vehicle's camera (if equipped) and say "No" loudly enough to be picked up on the officer's microphone (also if equipped). Every time.

On the flip side, I have used people's own ignorance of the law against them several times as an MP. But I know my rights, and I will always invoke my right to speak to an attorney and never consent to a search, ever.
Click to expand...

yup. been through the same thing when i was a air force cop.

if a cop ask to search you or your car or your house or anything. say NO
 
What's really disturbing is the sequence of events in this:

First, the cop pulls the car over for littering...throwing a cig butt out the window.

Second, he talks with driver, then returns to cruiser, radios for assistance to search the "suspects" because, in the cop's words, the women were "acting weird."

Then, he returns to the car, has them get out, and begins to discuss pot. Search finds nothing, as expected. Then a DWI gets trotted out, sobriety test done, and the women get warnings for littering and sent on their way.


Now, if the cop initially smelled pot in the car when he first talked to the "suspects", wouldn't he have had them exit the car right then? Isn't that pretty much accepted procedure? You suspect drugs, you have them exit the vehicle one at a time, under control---such as pistol drawn---which secures both the person and what's hidden on said person and what's in the vehicle.

Instead, suspecting illegal drugs were in the car, he leaves them alone, goes back to his vehicle and radios for a female cop to assist with a search. And the reason for the search he gave on the call for assistance was NOT given as suspected drugs in the car, but they were "acting weird."


Damn that in car video.........
 
rh71 said:
Cavity search is extreme of course, but if a cop asks to search your car and you say no, knowing you have nothing to hide, wouldn't you rather consent to it and be on your merry way rather than deal with them for the next 2 hours while they hold you up for BS reasons? Either way it's bs, but you take the most convenient way out. Again, cavity search is different, but same concept with allowing a search of the vehicle which people would more likely consent to. I'm sure this is why they consented to THAT.
Click to expand...

Nope, I'll wait. There is highly likelihood that the cop won't want to waste his time and actually seek a warrant, so he/she will probably just detain you for an extended period as "punishment" for defying the request and then let you go. A good cop will say, "Well, okay then. Have a nice day sir." and let you go on your way.
 
dustb0wlkid said:
This is a multi-million dollar lawsuit, and should result in criminal charges and/or suspensions for the officers involved. I'd be surprised if it didn't.
Click to expand...

Well, i doubt it's 'multi million', but if it is, i hope i get a search like that! $$$$$

Edit: Also, Texas, not surprised
 
Last edited:
demotivational-posters-smell-my-fingers.jpg
 
I agreee this is horrible, but I found this odd:

In the lawsuit, Dobbs said the trooper conducted the cavity search on the roadside, illuminated by the police car's headlights, in full view of any passing motorists.
Click to expand...


So they are embarrased it was done in public, but:

In a dashcam video released by the women and their attorney,
Click to expand...

They then release a video of it to the public, so it can be seen all over the world.
 
WilliamM2 said:
I agreee this is horrible, but I found this odd:



So they are embarrased it was done in public, but:



They then release a video of it to the public, so it can be seen all over the world.
Click to expand...

not odd at all. more people that know the worse the outrage the more likely this will be settled and not swept under the rug.
 
WilliamM2 said:
I agreee this is horrible, but I found this odd:



So they are embarrased it was done in public, but:



They then release a video of it to the public, so it can be seen all over the world.
Click to expand...

Nothing soothes an aggravated anal cyst like a mountain of cash.
 
MarkXIX said:
Nope, I'll wait. There is highly likelihood that the cop won't want to waste his time and actually seek a warrant, so he/she will probably just detain you for an extended period as "punishment" for defying the request and then let you go. A good cop will say, "Well, okay then. Have a nice day sir." and let you go on your way.
Click to expand...

and what if you had 2 kids in the car with you which is the only time I'm ever in a car?
 
MarkXIX said:
The legal answer is probably, "It depends on the circumstances". Here are two links that discuss it in detail:

http://www.policechiefmagazine.org/...n=display_arch&article_id=714&issue_id=102005

http://www.llrmi.com/articles/legal_questions/2-jan08.shtml

Here's my take, given to me while being trained by a JAG in my Military Police course. When asked for consent to search, ALWAYS, ALWAYS, ALWAYS SAY "NO". Now, keep in mind, he told us this as a prosecuting attorney to a classroom full of police officers. I agree with him. I don't care how damning the evidence is, I will ALWAYS say "No" and make the legal system work for what they think they've got. I will stare straight at the patrol vehicle's camera (if equipped) and say "No" loudly enough to be picked up on the officer's microphone (also if equipped). Every time.

On the flip side, I have used people's own ignorance of the law against them several times as an MP. But I know my rights, and I will always invoke my right to speak to an attorney and never consent to a search, ever.
Click to expand...

I briefly considered a job in law enforcement when I was younger, until I learned that 90% of what an officer does each day is look for a way to use people's ignorance of the law against them. Few officers really want to help people. They are mostly concerned with figuring out a way to send as many people to jail as possible, and when there are no real criminals around they pick on basically harmless people who don't understand their rights.

I've met some officers who are real saints, who have proven it by risking their lives to help others. But many are bullies who treat the public with like dirt in the effort to make arrests.

For those cops to be so dead set on finding something that they were willing body cavity search those women, with no probably cause and on the side of the road to boot, is just disgusting.
 
Last edited:
rh71 said:
Cavity search is extreme of course, but if a cop asks to search your car and you say no, knowing you have nothing to hide, wouldn't you rather consent to it and be on your merry way rather than deal with them for the next 2 hours while they hold you up for BS reasons? Either way it's bs, but you take the most convenient way out. Again, cavity search is different, but same concept with allowing a search of the vehicle which people would more likely consent to. I'm sure this is why they consented to THAT.
Click to expand...

You should be ashamed that you would give up your rights to save a little time when others fought and died to provide them to you.
 
Paladin3 said:
You should be ashamed that you would give up your rights to save a little time when others fought and died to provide them to you.
Click to expand...

Im sure those "others" you speak of actually fought to give us the right to CHOOSE based on our individual preferences.

You should be ashamed that you would tell others how to exercise THEIR rights...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

Back
Top