data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/25994/25994bc1a3d307baebb8c824a419a550a461513b" alt="Royal Queen Seeds Cannabis Seeds Royal Queen Seeds Cannabis Seeds"
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/0f6f4/0f6f47c18073233936368127ba67954d2a2c3679" alt="Please support our sponsors."
Welcome to the Growery Message Board! You are experiencing a small sample of what the site has to offer. Please login or register to post messages and view our exclusive members-only content. You'll gain access to additional forums, file attachments, board customizations, encrypted private messages, and much more!
|
johnm214
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/09979/0997974a5cc94e8145fac13d3674678b820903b3" alt=""
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/b0660/b06607bbbb84446926a20df049d0559543e4f290" alt=""
Registered: 04/20/08
Posts: 17
|
Re: Knowing your rights: Surviving police encounters [Re: Sativus]
#4521 - 04/21/08 04:06 AM (16 years, 10 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
Sativus said:
Quote:
FurrowedBrow said: *Searches of a person - An officer may "pat down" a person being detained in order to check for weapons. This is known as a [wikipedia]Terry frisk. However, unless the officer has permission from the person being detained, has probable cause that person being searched is in possession of illegal items, or is arresting the person, the officer may not search.
My question is, what constitutes probably cause here? I've run into this situation, where a cop asked to search me, and I told him no. He said he had to pat me down to check for weapons.
I didn't have any weapons on me, but he felt an Altoid tin (which happened to have a joint in it), and asked if he could see the contents. I told him no, I'm just on my way home, I don't think you've stopped me for any reason besides the fact that it's 2 in the morning, and I'd like to be on my way.
He let me go (after trying to badger me into letting him see the Altoid tin for a few more minutes), thankfully. But I've always wondered, would it have been within his rights to demand to see the contents?
for a frisk they only need a reasonable suspicion you may be dangerous. To detain you for the frisk the same standard applies. As to the search of the tin, probably couldn't be justified, but you may have lost that anyways, as it seems courts don't give a fuck, around here anyways.
The search is supposed to be circumscribed to the needs of the officer for safety. Its hard to see how the tin could have impacted this.
| |
|
|