She looks so innocent. Must be a hormonal thing. Someone should buy the poor girl some Proactiv.

Yikes! Bet the ugly stick looks better than that when it got done...

Let's be clear.

No one is proclaiming her innocence.

This thread is not about the cops.

This is about a corrupt 'justice' system.

The scary thing is, I'm hearing a bunch of 'well, if you have nothing to hide....' people... That's scary...

The court ruled based on the facts of the case. Her claim was unreasonable search and seizure. The evidence presented was not enough to show the officer acted in an unreasonable manner. What are you exactly at odds with?

Well, unfortunately for her t's a crime in Cochise County, New Mexico to have enough for her to get busted with intent to distribute. Not sure how much that is but it was probably more than a joint or two.

She should've planned better.

it is scary to you because you have very aggressive feelings towards police forces stepping over what you think is what they should be. Have you been down there to witness how cbp has to operate differently down there than up here? Are you a cbp down there? Do you know what they see everyday that gives them red flags on something fishy? Those are retorical questions we all know the answers are no for all. Shit down there is a whole nother animal. My friend lived down in that area and left because it was getting real bad. He was driving on a highway one night and say a body that was just a torso and stumps. He's seen tons of drugs just driving, literally tons. That's the shit they have to deal with and are fighting on a daily basis. Most of us here are smart enough to understand that the shit is in the fan and that they have to operate differently. You wouldn't last 2 days doing that job. May I suggest that you take a chill pill, sit down take a break, and adjust your attitude. Because at the end of the day you are the one that is "scary".

Ooooh...these unfair justice system (not about cops) threads are so fun!

Please don't stop...some "comms" (not security) guy will be along expediently to straighten us all out and make sure that we have it all correct.

Meth users are so easy to spot...just walking down the sidewalk by the way they are moving.


"I'm not using...I swear"

The difference between a tweaker and a drunk....a drunk will steal your wallet and blow all your money on booze, gambling and whores. Then when he sobers up feel guilty and apologize for being a shitball. A tweaker will steal your wallet...and then spend the next 3 days "helping" you look for it. Not ever feeling guilty.

The funny thing is, New Mexico is a "safe haven" state for illegals, you can get a drivers license with no social security number. I see Technos point. It is a sad day in America, when you can get pulled over for looking a certain way. It is that slippery slope we all dread so much, but fuck meth heads. No sympathy.

what else is new? a rent-a-cop is starting another thread about what he perceives as wrong. for whatever his personal reasons are, he has a bone to pick with law enforcement. wanna spill why you're sooooooooooo against law enforcement and how they deal with shit bags? what's eating at technoweenie's heart and mind? that's what i wonder! /rolls eyes/

This sad day thing, about being profiled by the cops........it's much better now that it was in the past. Only difference is, the white guy is feeling it now, too. Shitty place to be, huh? Nobody ever says it, but it's exactly what is going on.

This whole universal equality thing means a couple points: Don't look suspicious, don't act suspicious, you probably won't be considered suspicious. If you want to get away with shit, blend in and go about your day.

Seriously. Cut the rent-a-cop , security guard, wannabe , bullshit. Never been a security guard, never been a cop, never wanted to be either. It's getting old, and quite annoying.

This thread has to do with courts, and the justice system. Not the cops. Get it right. Good try though, trying to push the 'HE HATES COPS OMGZ' agenda. Get off it.

I'm against corruption and tyranny. I'm pro-constitution, pro-freedom, anti government intrusion, etc etc. Ya know, a constitutional libertarian.

Lemme ask you this... Would you feel any different if the vehicle was one of that of a family on vacation, going camping? Being pulled over 'in the middle of nowhere, slowing down when approaching a cop, driving properly, with 'weird' tint, and out of state plates' ?

Or should the family get pulled over too, because, clearly, the vehicle is 'suspicious'...?

It was a sad day then, nobody ever says that either. Profiling works, but it has never been the "right" thing to do. It goes against the 4th amendment no matter how good of a tool it is. Universal background checks may work, but they still violate one of our fundamental rights as does profiling. And I would have never bet on that girls nationality, she looks pretty fucked up.

These are words exactly as I say them.
I have been lightly chastised for agreeing with TW before... But if this is the gist of his message, then I say unabashedly that I agree with him.

TW has had a bit of an issue in presenting his concerns in a way that is palatable to many, including me. This should not get in the way of an honest appraisal of our double standard regarding LE and non-LE.
It should not get in the way of being shocked and OFFENDED by illogical "rulings" from a clearly biased judicial system.

There are so many illogical rulings laid down by judges that the shock and offense of them seems to be wearing off...
Why?

The conversation that I had with a LE officer about this very case opened my eyes a bit regarding the details... It isn't as simple as TW's headline makes it out to be. It isn't as simple as "Sweet old lady driving her '74 Caddy home from the grocery store with her hands at 2 and 10 was pulled over and beaten with nightsticks because a dumb cop decided she looked suspicious for driving too slow."

But that would be a helluva headline!

The point of this post is that an illogical ruling was laid down.

In my humble opinion, the LE officer should never have mentioned that her hands were at 2 and 10, and she was driving at exactly the right speed and therefore he found that suspicious.
If his training and intuition told him that this character driving so carefully was suspicious, he should have had a different story ready.

Has it occurred to any of us that IF this nonsensical rule is put in place in other jurisdictions that we can get pulled over for driving to work and following all the rules? And the reason could be "The accused was driving 55 MPH in a 55 MPH zone, and appeared to be trying too hard to avoid drawing my attention" ?

Don't say that this couldn't happen because of common sense... There is now a court precedent.

I generally skip TW's posts unless I see some other names pop up in the respondents side, generally of people who's opinion I enjoy reading.

I'll toss this out there : If you are NOT concerned about the militarization of our great nation's police forces then you are missing something.
If you are NOT concerned about the widening line between law enforcement and non-law enforcement, then you may be missing something.

It's been pointed out to me that I have come across as anti-LE... and therefore I take a little more time than I used to when discussing these issues. I may have had my pendulum swing too far when the 4 Vancouver PD officers pulled their weapons and aimed them right at me as I sat in my car in the parking lot listening to Philosophy Talk ...

But I like to think that I woke up. Because before that incident it never occurred to me that something like that could happen to a law abiding and LE supporting individual like myself.

PMB if McDonald's gets your order wrong at one store by one employee is it safe to say all McDonald employees are out to get you? Or maybe just maybe that employee screwed up that day/order? I am proud to say I support McDonald's

I know quite a few officers, and each one I asked, said they'd pull over someone going 60 and not 65.... Because 'the guy going the speed limit is afraid of getting pulled over, he has something to hide'...

Makes perfect sense, and I don't disagree with the logic. I disagree with the implementation. There are rules to the 'game', spelled out in our constitution. These rules are to protect the innocent from overbearing gov't. It has been said 'let 1000 guilty men go free before we imprison 1 innocent man' (or words to that effect). Going on fishing expeditions is taking a dump on the 4th amendment, and all it stands for. Of course, if you cast a big enough net, you'll catch some fish. That's not the point. You're supposed to be spearfishing.



Judicial, Legislative, Executive. Supposed to be COMPLETELY separate. Checks and balances. Problem is, they're not so balanced... any way you wanna look at it...


The problem is the system, which protects itself.. Politicians make laws to benefit themselves and keep themselves in power, courts uphold the laws, because they're appointed by the politicians, and police enforce the unjust laws, upheld by the corrupt courts appointed by the corrupt politicians.

Make sense?