And I'm sure all the Triskaidekaphobiasts will tell you as much.If people seem a little more "touched in the head" today than other days (and that includes the FULL MOON phases), take it right in stride. You're not alone in noticing this. Most all of us "normals" can see this coming like a jail on wheels.
And one of the MOST evident items that will attest to today being "unlucky" is a story that has been in the paper before, and will certainly be back in the paper again.
This has some SERIOUS repercussions, too.
The article has to do with the innocuous question most police will ask someone after pulling them over when they've exhibited "dubious" behavior."Do you have any guns, drugs, or anything that I need to know about?"
How many times have you watched this on COPS? And how many times have the police been spot on with the assessment of the situation (which always had something else the police DID need to know about)?
Well, the State Supreme Court in Indianapolis will be ruling of the constitutionality of ASKING such a question when police stop someone. The justices are playing a balancing act between having the police ferret out criminal activity and a citizen's right to be left alone. And this all stems from a traffic stop by a FWPD officer back in 2006.
Officer Chris Hoffamn pulled over Raymond Washington and his friend (who were on mopeds) after he observed them swerving past the "centerline" (there was no FORMAL centerline painted, but you should ALL know the difference between the lane YOU'RE in and the ONCOMING LANE, right?). During the stop Officer Hoffman asked "the" question about drugs and guns.
Washington admitted to having some pot in his front pocket and was arrested for misdemeanor drug possession.
End of story, right?
Not on your life.
The trial judge tossed the evidence, saying the QUESTION the officer asked Mr. Washington (get this load of crap) VIOLATED the state's constitutional protections against "unreasonable search and seizure".
The prosecution appealed (of course) and the Indiana Court of Appeals ruled in October that police ARE ALLOWED to ask about guns out of concern for the officer's safety.
But wait...it DOES get "better"...
The the opinion (of the court) also said that Washington's' "nervousness" was NOT ENOUGH to justify asking about drugs, a question unrelated to the purpose of the traffic stop.Again, the state appealed,and the court heard oral arguments this past Thursday.
The state attorney general's office spokesperson stated that: "There is NO constitutional violation in this case because merely ASKING A QUESTION is NEITHER a SEARCH nor a SEIZURE". The spokesperson went on to say that Mr. Washington could have refused to answer or lie.
Justice Frank Sullivan questioned whether we WANT our citizens to lie or be disrespectful to law enforcement officers (got news for you, Judge...they ALREADY ARE...take a ride sometime and see for yourself). Justice Theodore Boehn asked what the LIMIT is on HOW MANY QUESTIONS an officer could ask before courts draw a line,
Did you rob a bank?
Do you have any drugs at home?
Are you wearing underwear?
What is your favorite color?
What is the average speed of a barn swallow?
(Shades of Monty Python) - You get the idea...
The attorney for Washington argued that the officer had NO "reasonable" suspicion or probable cause to ask about drugs (I guess all that swerving really IS NORMAL on Fort Wayne streets - I know it IS on MINE). The attorney said that Washington was being forced to incriminate himself (and if he didn't HAVE and pot on him, we wouldn't be having this conversation, would we, Mr. Ambulance-Chaser).
The state spokesperson said: "An officer doesn't need reasonable suspicion to ask a FIVE SECOND QUESTION" (and I agree with that much). Sullivan countered with: that her question was one of enormous importance (yeah, we'll wind up passing over all these people carrying drugs for one thing).
The court has taken the case under advisement and will rule in the coming months.
(whew)...Wasn't that one of the WORST instances of CRANIAL-RECTAL INVERSION you have seen lately?
It's bad enough we have to MIRANDIZE everyone (and many use the "I didn't hear it properly" BS line to get out of that).
And we have the "racial profiling" BS line ("they pullin' me ovah 'cuz ahhm BLACK...'an $hit") when you know, and I know it's called CRIMINAL PROFILING, and some groups use this as a crutch to further emasculate the police. Hell, we've done AS MUCH with our EDUCATORS (all in the name of and for the sake of "better understanding and self esteem of the students"). And we've all seen how well THAT has worked (not)...right?
I'm just wondering when the police will be asked to hand over their firearms for the sole purpose of "not harming these unfortunate individuals who SOCIETY has dealt a bad hand to", and instead use the Biblical phrase: "Come, let us reason together".
Cripes, carrying a GUN and wearing a shield doesn't even faze many of these career thugs as it is, so what makes ANYONE dare to think that asking a QUESTION is that blatantly harmful to someone's psyche?
Like I said...cranial-rectal inversion.
it's alive, and well, and living in the hallowed halls of "justice" these days.
Let the police DO THE DAMN JOB we've hired them and paid them to to for Christ's sake. It's bad enough out there with ALL the disrespect, ALL the lies, ALL the people afraid to "snitch", and ALL the criminals that KNOW they can basically get away with damn near everything up to, and including murder.
Even considering this whole "police-question" thing should, if anything ask MORE pertinent questions about WTF is going on in this world, when we're abrogating safety issues with officers for the sake of some idiot wanting to be left alone.
No one "NEEDS" to be left alone THAT BADLY...for ANY reason.
I want to be left alone (by all the mooks around here), but I can't always get what *I* want. And if a police officer conducts a random car stop, who the hell am I to tell him to piss the hell off?
I've got nothing to hide, and will tell the truth without hesitation.
But then again, I had REAL PARENTS that instilled a sense of VALUES, ETHICS, and RESPECT for those in authority that have the right to ask me a question when conditions warrant it.
Someone needs to grab a copy of J. Shane Creamer's book: The Law of Arrest, Search, and Seizure.
And learn to READ.
Stay safe out there and avoid black cats, walking under ladders, and spilling the salt shaker...LOL!And above all...
DO have a good weekend.
5 comments:
It's rare that I disagree with you B.G., but this is one occasion. A lot of sudies that I respect conclude that it is extremely difficult for anyone to drive even 4 or 5 miles without arguably violating one or more traffic laws. Those possible infractions should not be a reason for police to engage in general interrogations of stopped citizens.
From what I have read of your blog, and that of Phil Marx, there are plenty of locations in Fort Wayne where twenty minutes of real police work would give probable cause to stop AND ask these kinds of questions.
I remember my high school days in FW: Get pulled over. Nothing illegal going on. They ASK you if they can search your car. There really is no right answer, is there? "No, officer. I don't want you to search my car." Surprise! They search your car. OR "Sure, I have nothing to hide." You're outside watching them rifle through your personal belongings. I had a friend one time who just said, "Do what you've got to do, Sir." I think the officer was shocked. He told us to move along. In most respects, however, I do agree with your perspective -- especially if you reside on the SE side of FW. Whew! On another interesting note: Have you been to the Indiana statehouse? There's a statue of Lady Justice that looks nothing like the traditional version. She has no scales or blindfold. She just carries a sword. Interesting. When my dad saw that he said, "Yeah, and she says 'Give me your money!'"
Anon:
Love your Dad's comment on that statue...
Having NO blindfold OR scales bothers me to no small end, I must confess.
Guess justice "ain't blind no mo", eh?
To comment on the "driving" gig...
I've only been pulled over ONCE since moving here in 1997.
And believe me, I gave that officer a LOT of "reasons" to search me and my car.
First off, I just got here from Philly & Ohio, so I had a Philly LICENSE (which was STILL valid).
Then, my INSURANCE was from Columbus, OH, where I just moved from (and it was STILL VALID)as were my LICENSE PLATES.
My ADDRESS was listed in FORT WAYNE, however (Willow Creek Apts).
Now imagine the officer trying to put ALL that crap into some sort of perspective when he pulled me over for going 40 in a 35 zone!
I was going to a job interview, and was figuring my way around this town (the map was still on the seat). I even gave him the phone # to call to check my story out.
He let me go with NO citation....BUT...he sure as hell had plenty to search me on...I mean how "weird" is all that I just related, eh?
I figure if you've got no business being in BAD areas, then expect to get pulled over UNLESS the police KNOW you live near there (which they usually do not).
And if you give them pause to scoope you out, then you might get pulled over as well.
There's the BIG proble, though. Having officers NOT live in certain areas assures that they never REALLY get to know the area intimately (like I have).
Ther police need to be around places like mine 24/7, and the best way to do that is to LIVE here.
Anyway...that's the "short" version...LOL
Thanks for the comments!
It IS appreciated.
B.G.
I was once pulled over by a FWPD officer and asked the gun question. My response was "Yes I do, and I have a permit to carry it. Would you like to see my permit?" Without responding to my question, another officer tried to open my passenger side door (which was locked). While he was jerking on my door handle, I asked the other officer "I haven't done anything wrong. Do you have the right to enter my vehicle?" His response was "Since you told me that you have a gun, I have the right to examine it."
So I unlocked the door and told the officer exactly where my gun was located. Of course he took a few minutes to rummage around through my belongings before actually getting to the gun. When they finished with this, the officer then asked if I had any drugs in my car. Gee, you were just inside it, did you see anything?
I didn't have anything to worry about though, because I hadn't violated any law. But their actions still disturbed me. I think the next time I find myself in such a situation, I'll just lawyer up and say "What is your reason for asking that question, officer?"
I've also had some experiences with Officer Hoffman. The first time I met him, I was walking from my house to my truck. He and his buddy pulled up and jumped out of their cars and shouted "What are you doing down here?" as they were running towards me. I simply responded that I live here, and pointed to my house.
After checking my documents, he called a local drug dealer over who was just walking out of the alley. I had to wait a bit longer to get into my truck, as Officer Hoffman put this guy against my truck to frisk him. As he left, Officer Hoffman explained that "We just thought you were some crackhead down here buying dope."
I will give Hoffman credit on one account. His partner said something that implied that I was responsible for the drug dealing activities in front of my house. I responded angrily "Your supervisor has told me that if they're in my yard I can address the issue, but if they're on the sidewalk I should just mind my own business. You need to take this issue up with your supervisor." This cop looked visbly shaken, as if he was about to punch me. Hoffman quickly acted to decrease the obvious tension by making a joke about the drug dealers lack of hygiene.
Phil:
I was going to mention that time you were confronted by the FWPD in FRONT of your house, but I figured it's best left to you (as you tell it so well).
I do believe that "some" officers OVERreact, and that leads to what we used to call (back in Philly) "The John Wayne Syndrome"...aka a YAHOO-cowboy attitude (and I really like John Wayne).
Nowadays,you'd probably call it the RAMBO mentality.
Same thing - different eras.
Used to be the VETERAN officers took precautions, but made sure to not OVERSTEP their authority in matters of proper search & seizure.
And that was even PRE-Miranda!
Our times and how they have changed over the last 30-40 years (with regard to increasing violence) might have much to do with the manner in which officers conduct themselves TODAY.
And I can understand their wanting to protect THEMSELVES first, but caution always HAS to always be tempered with REASON.
Can't have it lop-sid4ed one way OR the other...that WILL cause problems.
Thanks for commenting, Phil...always a pleasure to see you stop by here.
B.G.
Post a Comment