Hey can't say names, BUT he can give circumstances and facts.Originally Posted by curmudgeon
Hey can't say names, BUT he can give circumstances and facts.
curmudgeon (01-30-2015)
He might not want to tip his hand on any specific strategies he's about to use in a public post though. remember IANAL, but this does interest me to the extent that he can share. (or you two are willing to discuss in the open) Especially since he practices in the Peoples Republic of New Yawk.
Its all public. He doesn't need to breach any confidentiality, BUT I am questioning the use of jammers as a basis for a search of the vehicle and /or its occupants. So you're lidar cant get a reading on my car. How does that reach the level of probable cause or reasonable suspicion to search?? (yes, I understand that they can make sh^% up), BUT that ONLY goes so far. AND, how many guys who DO have parking sensors have really been stopped and cited?? Very few if any on here?? (unless they're RR clients) .
Hypothetical, I've got a matte black car with passive CMs and a V1 that's HOT on lidar. YOU can't get a reading on me and stop me anyway to give me another look. IN the absence of the smell of an illegal substance or otherwise horrible driving (DUI) , what could they possibly conjure UP that would give rise to a search (UNLESS you of course consent).
Leo stops can be for any made up reason, I'm sure we all agree. So how do they then turn it into a search? Mostly they just ask, since that wouldn't cut it with most forum members, leo now uses your refusal to order up a K9 unit. Then the K9 alerts and voilą, they're in!
It's mainly a bluffing game, and you better believe that the Leo's estimation of whether or not you can lawyer up plays a part in who gets their rights violated. That's how the good old boys in the South do it any way.
So, how does the average citizen get good legal representation? That is the problem with rights; you need money to be able to use them.
.
Bingo, give this guy a prize!!! ^^^^^^^ Consent is the # 1 reason cited for a search despite there being no validity for it. If he's asking, he ain't got "nothing on you." I had a stop in Fl where they told the FHP to get a dog and they waited on the side of the road (being detained??) Dog comes up empty and they're looking at a lawsuit......................
Plus @curmudgeon will tell you that a dog can and does false alert based on HOW its trained and HOW its handler is handling it.
Alerts (actually referred to as "indicators" in the trade) are rarely the mistake of the dog, BUT
the handler can either deliberately or subconsciously (by projected expectation) cause the dog to falsely indicate.
Handler can also just misread their dog
And LEO handlers are a mixed bag both as to competence and ethics (just like lawyers)
Last edited by curmudgeon; 02-02-2015 at 02:49 PM.
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
Connect With Us