Police Harrassment

[PreacherRich]

I was sitting for most the weekend at the Kansas City Petro. I got a chance to meet a couple expedited drivers and spent most of the day talking about politics and life in a cargo van.

Sunday night one of the guys decided to grab a hotel room, I decided to head to St Louis and the other guy decided he was going to run to Chicago all of us getting ready to grab that Monday morning load.

Well my new friend heading to Chicago got stopped in Springfield, IL by some officers that appearantly should have chosen a different career. They were convinced that my friend was running drugs or something, they removed him from the vehicle physically shook him, had him sit on the ground for an hour and a half while they completely shredded his van, pulled all his personal belongings apart, his bunk got disassembled and everything turned upside down. When the officers couldnt find anything they told my friend "You may have gotten lucky this time but we will get you next time". He asked them to speak with their supervisor and they refused.

After being allowed back in his totally trashed van he immediately hit his OnStar button and got ahold of the shift supervisor and spent a half hour on the phone explaining what happened and the fear he had about running into those officers again after their "We'll get you next time" threat. The shift boss gave him a number to call in case he was ever pulled over again in that area and my friend spent the rest of the day Monday putting himself and his van back together after arriving in Chicago after daylight.

This guy is probably one of he nicest, hardest working men you would ever want to meet. He is a man that knows why he is expediting with specific goals for his family. The kind of guy that every company wishes they had working for them. I was very proud of the way he handled himself he showed a great amount of restraint and professionalism.

This just makes my blood boil. I am sitting here in St Louis and didnt get my Monday load so I was going to to head to Chicago but after talking to my friend, do I want to risk having to go through the same crap? We should not have to live in fear of egocentric little control freaks that hate their lives so much that they have to try and make everyone else pay. I have family that are police officers and have a great deal of respect for the badge and those that serve honorably. These two really need to find a new career and I hope they don't pull you over the next time you are going through Springfield, IL.

We shouldn't have to worry about protecting ourselves from those we pay to protect us.

 

[ChrisGa23]

Dang that sucks. He should of never allowed them a search of his van. But these days it wouldnt of mattered cause all the cops could of said is they have "probable cause" and no warrant is needed.

 

[PreacherRich]

Made a personal decision not to let this stuff get to me after some prayer and reflection. But what do you do to protect yourself in that situation? Has anyone ran into this before?

 

[scottm4211]

Rich just curious, does his van have any company logos or markings on it?

 

[Monty]

While it is illegal to "profile", such as young Arab men saying their prayers before boarding the airplane, it isalive and well in the "war on drugs."

Something about his van triggered them. Their attitude was their own!

They could not have searched that van without permission, or probable cause.

I will never submit to a search of my vehicle.

My reherased response wii be, "No Officer, you do not have my permission to search my vehicle. However I will not interfer with any LEGAL action you may deem necessary."

If they have probable cause, they're going to search it anyway. Otherwise we will just sit there at the roadside and wait on the search warrant. btw, they can not tow that vehicle, or remove you from it's sight, without that warrant.

That is why they search them at roadside, which to me is simply stupid, (from a safety standpoint), But to do otherwise will corrupt any case they may think they have against you. Planted evidence, etc ...

 

[greg334]

Rich just curious, does his van have any company logos or markings on it?

I'm wondering the same thing.

As for what to do, ask for a warrant and say no.

And I'm thinking that this may not be police harassment, but something that happens a bit more than we hear about it. We have Border Patrol pulling people over on i75 all the time here, as far south as Toledo and they patrol Telegraph and other roads as far west as Ann Arbor.

 

[OntarioVanMan]

I'm wondering the same thing.

As for what to do, ask for a warrant and say no.

And I'm thinking that this may not be police harassment, but something that happens a bit more than we hear about it. We have Border Patrol pulling people over on i75 all the time here, as far south as Toledo and they patrol Telegraph and other roads as far west as Ann Arbor.

An old article but still applies...

100-mile radius raises debate over Constitution, civil rights

Customs and Border Protection, which falls under the Department of Homeland Security, was authorized by Congress nearly 50 years ago to operate within a “reasonable distance” inside the border, which it designates as a 100-mile radius. The agency operates 33 checkpoints, and the ACLU said complaints about the checkpoints have risen since Sept.11.

But border patrol officials say that the checkpoints are anything but unconstitutional.

“The 100-mile zone absolutely is not a Constitution-free zone,” said Jason Ciliberti, a supervisory border patrol agent with the U.S. Customs and Border Protection. “Those 100 miles are what essentially is said to be a reasonable distance from the boundary from the United States, and the Supreme Court has come down firmly on our side and said that what we’re doing is not unreasonable.”

 

[bubblehead]

An old article but still applies...

100-mile radius raises debate over Constitution, civil rights

Customs and Border Protection, which falls under the Department of Homeland Security, was authorized by Congress nearly 50 years ago to operate within a “reasonable distance” inside the border, which it designates as a 100-mile radius. The agency operates 33 checkpoints, and the ACLU said complaints about the checkpoints have risen since Sept.11.

But border patrol officials say that the checkpoints are anything but unconstitutional.

“The 100-mile zone absolutely is not a Constitution-free zone,” said Jason Ciliberti, a supervisory border patrol agent with the U.S. Customs and Border Protection. “Those 100 miles are what essentially is said to be a reasonable distance from the boundary from the United States, and the Supreme Court has come down firmly on our side and said that what we’re doing is not unreasonable.”

I frequently see the Border Patrol SUVs on I75 in Florida...guess they are using the International Maritine border as their reference. Their numbers have been noticebly increasing this year.

 

[Yesteryear]

Sorry Preacher Rich but having been married to a retired 23 year veteren police officer (during the entire 23 years of his career) I would wager this did not happen! lol I think you need to be more cautious about who you are befreinding! Unless given permission to search, which an officer would not ask for unless there was some indication of something being wrong such as the smell of wacky weed, alcohol, suspicious behavior on the part of the driver like excessive nervousness, impaired behavior ect) the officer does not just pull a car over and search without cause. If asked you do not have to let the officer search and no they are not going get a search warrant. If an officer ask to search and you say no the officer will then send in a canine unit to see if a hit can be made. If the dog hits on the vehicle then the officer has "just cause" and can search the vehicle without your consent. If the dog does not hit on your vehicle then the officer cannot search your vehicle and must let you go. lol Sounds like your freind likes to make up stories OR is only telling a small fraction of the actual story. Illinois lol that is a good one, lol Cook County Sheriffs Acedemy is where my husband originally started his career so many years ago. Spent the first 2 years as a Chicago cop. Got to love these stories from the bad guys prespective. lol

 

[greg334]

"the Supreme Court has come down firmly on our side and said that what we’re doing is not unreasonable.”

Actually not really firmly on the side of the BP.

They have the same limited powers as do any cop and have to observe the same limitations set in the court case US v. Brignoni-Ponce - summing it up with this;

To approve roving-patrol stops of all vehicles in the border area, without any suspicion that a particular vehicle is carrying illegal immigrants, would subject the residents of these and other areas to potentially unlimited interference with their use of the highways, solely at the discretion of Border Patrol officers. The only formal limitation on that discretion appears to be the administrative regulation defining the term "reasonable distance" in § 287 (a) (3) to mean within 100 883*883 air miles from the border. 8 CFR § 287.1 (a) (1975). Thus, if we approved the Government's position in this case, Border Patrol officers could stop motorists at random for questioning, day or night, anywhere within 100 air miles of the 2,000-mile border, on a city street, a busy highway, or a desert road, without any reason to suspect that they have violated any law.

We are not convinced that the legitimate needs of law enforcement require this degree of interference with lawful traffic. As we discuss in Part IV, infra, the nature of illegal alien traffic and the characteristics of smuggling operations tend to generate articulable grounds for identifying violators. Consequently, a requirement of reasonable suspicion for stops allows the Government adequate means of guarding the public interest and also protects residents of the border areas from indiscriminate official interference. Under the circumstances, and even though the intrusion incident to a stop is modest, we conclude that it is not "reasonable" under the Fourth Amendment to make such stops on a random basis.

 

[AMonger]

Yesteryear, you're so charmingly naive. I don't know how long ago your husband was a cop, but things have changed. At some point, cops decided they were soldiers, or actually it was decided for them, and departments now recruit and train for the soldier persona. If your husband was a good cop, I'm glad to hear it. But he'd be shocked at the situation today.

--

You know the problem with bad cops? They make the other 5% look bad.

 

[AMonger]

While it is illegal to "profile", such as young Arab men saying their prayers before boarding the airplane, it isalive and well in the "war on drugs."

Something about his van triggered them. Their attitude was their own!

They could not have searched that van without permission, or probable cause.

I will never submit to a search of my vehicle.

My reherased response wii be, "No Officer, you do not have my permission to search my vehicle. However I will not interfer with any LEGAL action you may deem necessary."

The best phraseology, according to lawyers, is "I do not consent to any search." Nothing more. "Do not consent" is specifically the words to use.



--

You know the problem with bad cops? They make the other 5% look bad.

 

[PreacherRich]

Rich just curious, does his van have any company logos or markings on it?

No, he didn't have any logos or markings on it.

 

[Monty]

I'm not so sure Preacher was not correct in his telling og the stop. It does happen. Ever seen the "Drug Task Force" vehicles all over the south?

They work in groups of as many as 5-6 vehicles.

Here is an interesting video of a person't property being violated by some government employee, while the officers stood by and allowed it.

Indiana Citizen Rights Violated By Officer Recklessly Allowing Illegal Trespass Over Objections - YouTube

How about these truckers?

Video Shows Officer Offering Truckers Freedom For Cash - NewsChannel5.com | Nashville News, Weather & Sports

Judge Questions Drug Cop's Story About Hispanic Traffic Stop - NewsChannel5.com | Nashville News, Weather & Sports

Seems News 5 is a bit concerned over these, apparently, baseless stops to gather money.

There are more than severeal videos on this page, watch for yourself.

NC5 Investigates: Policing for Profit - NewsChannel5.com | Nashville News, Weather & Sports

And before you go there, yesteryear, I am also the sposue of a police officer, with 28 years, she retires in just a few days.

So I am not attacking police officers, per se, but some are out there, and theyneed to be exposed.

 

[PreacherRich]

Sorry Preacher Rich but having been married to a retired 23 year veteren police officer (during the entire 23 years of his career) I would wager this did not happen! lol I think you need to be more cautious about who you are befreinding! Unless given permission to search, which an officer would not ask for unless there was some indication of something being wrong such as the smell of wacky weed, alcohol, suspicious behavior on the part of the driver like excessive nervousness, impaired behavior ect) the officer does not just pull a car over and search without cause. If asked you do not have to let the officer search and no they are not going get a search warrant. If an officer ask to search and you say no the officer will then send in a canine unit to see if a hit can be made. If the dog hits on the vehicle then the officer has "just cause" and can search the vehicle without your consent. If the dog does not hit on your vehicle then the officer cannot search your vehicle and must let you go. lol Sounds like your freind likes to make up stories OR is only telling a small fraction of the actual story. Illinois lol that is a good one, lol Cook County Sheriffs Acedemy is where my husband originally started his career so many years ago. Spent the first 2 years as a Chicago cop. Got to love these stories from the bad guys prespective. lol

So you are questioning my intelligence and the honesty of my new friend? If the police officer is the average honest Joe you are correct. You are deceived if you think some don't stretch the rules. The "bad guys perspective"? Really? unbelievable....

 

[purgoose10]

What Yesteryear stated is true. My drivers as well as myself are not to consent to search. They are told "Sir the only way I will consent is with a warrant or a dog". When they ask why? "Not that I don't trust you sir it's the crooked cops I don't trust." We also carry pocket recorders to record every conversation you might have with officers.
I don't trust any of them.

 

[Monty]

If I had this officer, sitting beside me for miles, I might be a bit nervous also. And the video clearly shows the officer was the one drifting all over the roadway.

This was shot from News5's helicopter ...

Video here

 

[AMonger]

What Yesteryear stated is true. My drivers as well as myself are not to consent to search. They are told "Sir the only way I will consent is with a warrant or a dog". When they ask why? "Not that I don't trust you sir it's the crooked cops I don't trust." We also carry pocket recorders to record every conversation you might have with officers.
I don't trust any of them.

If they have a warrant or a dog alert, consent is irrelevant. Consent is when you're approving the search absent a warrant or articulable cause. According to civil rights lawyers, the proper response is, "I do not consent to any search. Am I free to go?"

--

You know the problem with bad cops? They make the other 5% look bad.

 

[Yesteryear]

The best phraseology, according to lawyers, is "I do not consent to any search." Nothing more. "Do not consent" is specifically the words to use.



--

You know the problem with bad cops? They make the other 5% look bad.

Amonger, my husband left the department 5 years ago. He still talks almost daily to his friends in the department. Including childhood friends that are currently Chicago police officers today. He was an officer for a long time to include patrol officer, narcotics and prostitution detective, and homicide detective. Also, including holding the position of police chief for 7 years. So unless you can top his credentials I think I will choose to believe him over you. Charming ahhhhh yes I am aren't I lol naive, after 23 years as an officers wife, nawww, I don't think so!

 

[Yesteryear]

What Yesteryear stated is true. My drivers as well as myself are not to consent to search. They are told "Sir the only way I will consent is with a warrant or a dog". When they ask why? "Not that I don't trust you sir it's the crooked cops I don't trust." We also carry pocket recorders to record every conversation you might have with officers.
I don't trust any of them.

Way to go! That is absolutely the correct answer and the correct action! Not all cops are good and there are bad ones! Even hubby agrees with purgoose!

Hubby even suggested to me that a recorder for some of these DOT officers might just be the thing. We absolutely cannot believe their behaviors or how they get away with it!