Tweet
Best way to put an end to 99% of the bullshit is to make all drugs legal. In fact take all the money that is spent on the "War on drugs" and make drugs free. By doing this you would see a major decrease in other crimes. It would also free up and speed up the courts for other more important issues.
-
-
Private prison unions say that's a bad idea! Marijauna is the devil.Originally posted by cyclonescott View Postازدهار رأسه برعشيتComment
-
does it matter that they used the fake account to catch her boyfriend's criminal associates?
btw they cooked crack in the same apartment where she and the kids livedComment
-
No, it doesn't. If you follow their logic then they should be able to impersonate anyone they arrest in an attempt to lure other people into some bullshit charge. If they arrest a guy for robbing a liquor store can they then call his mom, impersonate him, confess and then attempt to nail his mom for some conspiracy charge when she doesn't turn him in?Originally posted by John -- '02 HAWK View Post
No...just fucking no. These people can't be trusted to NOT abuse every bit of power they are given. How many times do they have to show they can't be trusted?Originally posted by racrguyOriginally posted by racrguyComment
-
My only question is where are the fucking piksComment
-
Milk?!?! My question is; can you sue to get the officers fired for life, I don't want the departments money, I want the officer and his direct supervisor fired. Why take the hard earn tax payers money? If people sue, it should only be to know these officers will never again be officers.Comment
-
Cant really be enforced since i'm sure that some law exists where you can't limit a persons ability to work. Since most of the guys only went to the police academy or have a useless associates degree, they can't get a job anywhere besides being a cop.Originally posted by Bad A$$ Coupe View Post
Comment
-
-
Taking someone's civil rights, or abusing the law is breaking it right, don't we treat felons the same way?Originally posted by 03mustangdude View PostComment
-
Seems lately the thought is violate a few rights of the small folks to nab the greater reward of the bigger fish in the end.Comment
-
Originally posted by David View Post
It's the absolute worst sort of Utilitarianism there is. And it seems like a large percentage of people with that VERY flawed philosophical view of the world decide to get into law enforcement for some reason, which is the worst possible place for them.Comment
-
http://thefreethoughtproject.com/chp...arch-warrants/
Film the police and make them look like idiots, now they get a warrant and take your phone and computer and make youtube take the video down.
Ladies and gentleman we have arrived at the police state.ازدهار رأسه برعشيتComment
-
I have been trying to figure this one out a little. Personally I think this particular one is a top down problem. If you have LEO A trying to do right and LEO B through Z (Different ranks...etc) doing wrong, making wrong policies and government backing it - LEO A is going to have a hard time.Originally posted by talisman View Post
Meanwhile, LEO A is part of the 20% doing 80% of the good work and is still looking bad in the public eye because of B through Z.
Also from a career perspective, it would be a losing battle (futile really) for LEO A to try to police internally and keep things correct. If not termination, certainly there will be severely reduced opportunities for promotion, raises and so forth.
Of course, this is just speculation on my part. I really don't know how the police departments work - but I'd not doubt there is quite a bit of fact in my speculation.Originally posted by MR EDDComment
-
When the government pays, the government controls.Comment
-
Looks like the taxpayers will once again get to foot the bill for these dumbasses.
WASHINGTON - The Drug Enforcement Administration set up a fake Facebook account using photographs and other personal information it took from the cellphone of a New York woman arrested in a cocaine case, to trick her friends and associates into revealing incriminating drug secrets.
The Justice Department initially defended the practice in court filings but now says it is reviewing whether the Facebook guise went too far.
Sondra Arquiett's Facebook account looked as real as any other. It included photos of her posing on the hood of a sleek BMW and a close-up with her young son and niece. She even appeared to write that she missed her boyfriend, who was identified by his nickname.
But it wasn't her. The account was the work of DEA Agent Timothy Sinnigen, Arquiett said in a federal lawsuit. The case is scheduled for trial next week in Albany, New York.
Justice Department spokesman Brian Fallon said in a statement Tuesday that officials are reviewing both the incident and the practice, although in court papers filed earlier in the case, the federal government defended it. Fallon declined to comment further because the case is pending.
Details of the case were first reported by the online news site Buzzfeed.
Arquiett was arrested in July 2010 on charges of possession with intent to distribute cocaine. She was accused of being part of a drug distribution ring run by her boyfriend, who had been previously indicted.
In a court filing in August, the Justice Department contended that while Arquiett didn't directly authorize Sinnigen to create the fake account, she "implicitly consented by granting access to the information stored in her cellphone and by consenting to the use of that information to aid in ... ongoing criminal investigations."
The government also contended that the Facebook account was not public. A reporter was able to access it early Tuesday, though it was later disabled.
A spokesman for Facebook declined Tuesday to comment on the legal dispute. Facebook's own policies appear to prohibit the practice, telling users that "You will not provide any false personal information on Facebook, or create an account for anyone other than yourself without permission."
Lawyers for Arquiett did not immediately respond to email and telephone messages from The Associated Press. Arquiett did not immediately respond to an email asking to discuss the case.
Arquiett said in her filing that she suffered "fear and great emotional distress" and was endangered because the fake page gave the impression that she was cooperating with Sinnigen's investigation as he interacted online with "dangerous individuals he was investigating."
The fate of Arquiett's fight against the government's use of her identity online is unclear.
A staff attorney at the Electronic Frontier Foundation - a civil liberties organization - Nate Cardozo, said the government's rationale was "laughable."
"If I'm cooperating with law enforcement, and law enforcement says, 'Can I search your phone?' and I hand it over to them, my expectation is that they will search the phone for evidence of a crime - not that they will take things that are not evidence off my phone and use it in another context," Cardozo said,
Lawrence Friedman, a privacy and constitutional law professor at New England Law-Boston, a law school, said the Arquiett's "privacy claim rises and falls on the extent to which she consented to what it is the government says she consented to."
If Arquiett agreed to cooperate with an ongoing investigation and allow her phone to be used as part of that probe - as the government alleged in its court filing - then it would be harder for her to prove that her privacy rights were violated, Friedman said. If her phone were seized without consent, then she would have an easier claim.
"Basically, when you strike that kind of deal, you kind of have to play by the government's rules," Friedman said. "This is not the ordinary situation in which the person walking down the street can have their identity stolen by the government," he said. "She was involved in a criminal investigation."
Comment
Comment