- Joined
- Oct 22, 2002
- Messages
- 41,259
- Location
- Frozen in Michigan
- Gender
- Old Fart
- Basic Beliefs
- Don't be a dick.
-
Features
Law And Order President Advocates Illegal Stop-And-Frisk
- Thread starter ZiprHead
- Start date
Opoponax
Veteran Member
- Joined
- Mar 26, 2017
- Messages
- 1,384
- Location
- California Central Coast
- Basic Beliefs
- Apathetic Atheist
That our orange-painted fuckstick doesn't know anything about the law, or that he will ever bother to learn anything about it, isn't really news. What matters is that when it comes before the Supreme Court, the standard for a Terry Stop (stop and frisk) is going to change. A Terry stop is the detention of a person by police on reasonable suspicion of criminal activity but which doesn't rise to probable cause [for arrest]. Reasonable suspicion means that the cop must be able to articulate reasons as to why they stopped the person. That is, the cop must be able to articulate "specific reasonable inferences which he is entitled to draw from the facts in light of his experience."
In short, if the cop can come up with some plausible excuse as to why he stopped a person, the search is going to be legal. IOW, we're already walking a razor thin line between having at least some protection from capricious law enforcement and being subject to whatever law enforcement wants to do.
That said, we've been this close for a long time now because even if the cop didn't have reasonable suspicion in the first place, but then the suspect's behavior gives the cop nearly any reason to conduct a search of the suspect's person, well, that's good enough too. For example, a cop stops his car, comes up to you and starts asking you questions. You were just walking along the street on your way home. But then he tells you he's going to search you, which you understandably, but a little too vehemently object to. It now becomes permissible for the cop to search you for weapons if he has a reasonable belief that his safety is in jeopardy. You being agitated = reasonable belief on the cop's part. Thus, it becomes really easy for an officer to harass someone into a legally permissible search.
Then comes some pretty difficult 5th Amendment issues, and what seems a straightforward notion--that you have the right to remain silent--is actually a very complex problem fraught with dangers for even the most innocent person. Your right to an attorney? If you don't clearly assert your right to an attorney, they don't have to give you one. If you wait for the judge to appoint you one, you're already screwed.
Anyway, with such a solid conservative majority on the Court now, our 4th Amendment rights will be further eroded with the justification of being tough on crime. So in that regard, it doesn't matter what the fuck Trump says about the law. Disgustingly, what Trump said in the OP quote will actually become the law.
In short, if the cop can come up with some plausible excuse as to why he stopped a person, the search is going to be legal. IOW, we're already walking a razor thin line between having at least some protection from capricious law enforcement and being subject to whatever law enforcement wants to do.
That said, we've been this close for a long time now because even if the cop didn't have reasonable suspicion in the first place, but then the suspect's behavior gives the cop nearly any reason to conduct a search of the suspect's person, well, that's good enough too. For example, a cop stops his car, comes up to you and starts asking you questions. You were just walking along the street on your way home. But then he tells you he's going to search you, which you understandably, but a little too vehemently object to. It now becomes permissible for the cop to search you for weapons if he has a reasonable belief that his safety is in jeopardy. You being agitated = reasonable belief on the cop's part. Thus, it becomes really easy for an officer to harass someone into a legally permissible search.
Then comes some pretty difficult 5th Amendment issues, and what seems a straightforward notion--that you have the right to remain silent--is actually a very complex problem fraught with dangers for even the most innocent person. Your right to an attorney? If you don't clearly assert your right to an attorney, they don't have to give you one. If you wait for the judge to appoint you one, you're already screwed.
Anyway, with such a solid conservative majority on the Court now, our 4th Amendment rights will be further eroded with the justification of being tough on crime. So in that regard, it doesn't matter what the fuck Trump says about the law. Disgustingly, what Trump said in the OP quote will actually become the law.