55 posts in this topic

Dude, WTF???

so if they didn't complied they get arrested; if they did they get billed?

this is very wrong.

Not knowing the specifics, there is one possibility. In the case of the male -

if indeed he were a parolee (past drug contact made cops suspicious) then any testing necessary to assure his compliance with the conditions of his parole are his responsibility. Normally if he were to go to the parole office he'd pay for drug tests, service fees, any court costs, incarceration costs for while he were imprisoned etc. Variable by state.

It's conceivable the court would add these nonscheduled compliance costs to his tab, or.just hand him the bill.

Here in Michigan a DUI could result in >$10,000 in fees, probation compliance costs etc. over and above the fines etc.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

That seems grossly unfair. Any testing is his responsibility? Its the Police's. They're the ones who demanded the tests. 

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

getting arrested, raped with metal instruments, then billed for it. fun.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

That seems grossly unfair. Any testing is his responsibility? Its the Police's. They're the ones who demanded the tests. 

Only in the US could they find a way to privatise the police state and bill innocent people after subjecting them to unreasonable searches.

 

This is one of my biggest frustrations with this forum, most people here never think "past" the story to see WHY it was done and the history of the individual and the circumstances around it, they just jump to the conclusion of what ever the story is swinging.

Even those convicted of crimes have rights and should not be subjected to such unreasonable searches. We're talking about seven procedures here (1x anal probe; 3x enemas; 2x full body X-rays; and 1x colonoscopy), some of which are incredibly invasive and have risks attached to them. This is a clear violation of the Fourth Amendment. Further, it is absolutely unacceptable to charge people for the medical tests they are required to take.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This is one of my biggest frustrations with this forum, most people here never think "past" the story to see WHY it was done and the history of the individual and the circumstances around it, they just jump to the conclusion of what ever the story is swinging.  Nice to see someone thinking outside the box.

 

 

Its happened at least twice now.  Same officers involved.  Same K-9 dog that was NOT re-certified and trained to respond to the handler not identify drugs (certification expired 2011).  Same judge rubber stamping the warrant.  Same out-of-jurisdiction hospital.

 

At some point you do have to look pass the story and see that there are officers working the Deming police department that are abusing their power.  They need to be locked up.

 

It would be some irony if you were driving through Deming, and this same thing happened to you... wouldn't it?  Maybe the officer will pull YOU over and decide he likes your ass.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

Only in the US could they find a way to privatise the police state and bill innocent people after subjecting them to unreasonable searches.

 

Even those convicted of crimes have rights and should not be subjected to such unreasonable searches. We're talking about seven procedures here (1x anal probe; 3x enemas; 2x full body X-rays; and 1x colonoscopy), some of which are incredibly invasive and have risks attached to them. This is a clear violation of the Fourth Amendment. Further, it is absolutely unacceptable to charge people for the medical tests they are required to take.

 

it may not say it, but what i am betting happened is this. Upon getting stopped, the police of course pull up your plate # and see your info and can see prior criminal history. When they asked him for licence and registration, they probably asked as well if he had any drugs or weapons on his person. Being the type of character that would do this, he probably said "yes, officer, up my ass" in sarcasm. After any mis-read sarcastic remark, the office assumed he was serious (or thought maybe if he said it was there, maybe I won't actual check there) and took him for the checks. As for the # of checks performed, the anal checks are NOT separate instances, but rather all a check. After manual finger inspection, the guy most likly was still going on his "screw authority" and after said "are you sure you didn't find anything? better dig deeper, they are there" .... knowing full well he was trying to gain as much ammo as possible for a lawsuit or media story. Xrays are also done back-back and are NOT separate incidences, Even if so, xrays sometimes must be re-taken for accuracy, maybe the first bunch didn't turn out.

 

separate note: you don't even like the US Constitution, why now do you defend it?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Its happened at least twice now.  Same officers involved.  Same K-9 dog that was NOT re-certified and trained to respond to the handler not identify drugs (certification expired 2011).  Same judge rubber stamping the warrant.  Same out-of-jurisdiction hospital.

 

At some point you do have to look pass the story and see that there are officers working the Deming police department that are abusing their power.  They need to be locked up.

 

It would be some irony if you were driving through Deming, and this same thing happened to you... wouldn't it?  Maybe the officer will pull YOU over and decide he likes your ass.

or how about "ulterior motive"? if i was running drugs, and this one particular officer/judge kept cutting into my bottom line, I too would do something like this to get him fired/transferred/punished etc, what ever it took to get the heat off my back. Sorry dude, I just will never side with the drug pushers, you can if you want but not I.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

or how about "ulterior motive"? if i was running drugs, and this one particular officer/judge kept cutting into my bottom line, I too would do something like this to get him fired/transferred/punished etc, what ever it took to get the heat off my back. Sorry dude, I just will never side with the drug pushers, you can if you want but not I.

 

You're happy to throw away all liberties in the name of the war on drugs?  Wow.  :o

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You're happy to throw away all liberties in the name of the war on drugs?  Wow.  :o

the "liberties" involved are variable, dependent on time/situation/circumstance etc... as with all law.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Only in the US could they find a way to privatise the police state and bill innocent people after subjecting them to unreasonable searches.

It's usually not privatized but part of the Department of Corrections. Lab and maintenance work may be contracted out though.

Even those convicted of crimes have rights and should not be subjected to such unreasonable searches.

They are still technically in custody, just released. Their privacy rights are little changed from an incarcerated prisoner who can have their cell searched at any time. They screw up one little bit and it's straight back to prison. Do not pass GO, do not collect $200. Tight leash.

We're talking about seven procedures here (1x anal probe; 3x enemas; 2x full body X-rays; and 1x colonoscopy),

>

Multiple parts to one thorough cavity exam. Enemas are a routine prep to the endoscopy & rectal exams, and the x-raus would have to be multiple to cover the full length of the neck, chest, and abdomen because the films are only 17" long. I'd order 3 frontals initially and a side view of any suspicious regions.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

when the police fail to prove anything from the probe, its the police who should foot the bill.

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If you can't do the time, or bear the cost of the probation, don't do the crime.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If you can't do the time, or bear the cost of the probation, don't do the crime.

 

So you think it's fair and just to be forced into multiple procedures and forced to pay for them? Even when innocent of the suspected crimes?

2 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

when the police fail to prove anything from the probe, its the police who should foot the bill.

earlier i suggested how it could have went down, If these exams were under the suspects false admission, and caused by his lying intentionally to have them done, he should have to bear the cost.

 

example: if someone calls and lies about a building on fire, and the fire department comes, the caller who made the intentionally fake fire call is liable for all costs of the emergency call out.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

earlier i suggested how it could have went down, If these exams were under the suspects false admission, and caused by his lying intentionally to have them done, he should have to bear the cost.

That's complete speculation and there is absolutely no evidence to suggest that. Further, even if that were the case the sheer number of the procedures, the fact that nothing was found, the fact that the first hospital refused to carry out the procedures on ethical grounds and that the suspect was faced with medical bills clearly demonstrates the unreasonable nature of the incident. Nobody, whether a convicted criminal or not, should have to undergo such invasive procedures without merit and be forced to foot the bill.

 

It saddens me that anyone considers this sort of behaviour reasonable or justifiable.
 

If you can't do the time, or bear the cost of the probation, don't do the crime.

According to the article the man was "known" for carrying drugs inside his body but it doesn't mention any arrests or parole. Further, he was refused a phone call and the search warrant wasn't valid in the region in which it was carried out. The police were clearly at fault here. As for the woman, there was no search warrant against her and no mention of any arrests or parole.

 

The US appears to be modelling its criminal justice system on that of Nazi Germany.

2 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Now that's what I call, a ###### situation!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

That's complete speculation and there is absolutely no evidence to suggest that. Further, even if that were the case the sheer number of the procedures, the fact that nothing was found, the fact that the first hospital refused to carry out the procedures on ethical grounds and that the suspect was faced with medical bills clearly demonstrates the unreasonable nature of the incident. Nobody, whether a convicted criminal or not, should have to undergo such invasive procedures without merit and be forced to foot the bill.

isn't it also speculation that his story is accurate? (in the sense of how things happened)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

isn't it also speculation that his story is accurate?

That has no relevance as I made no such speculation.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

All this probing going on sounds more like an Alien invasion :D

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

well, this news and the other that went out today "proving" that Obama is gay...

just connect the dots. :laugh:

 

seriously, if i was on parole and could be anal probed and still paying the medical bill for every suspicion, i wouldn't leave my house until the paroled ended; knowing cops from my country as they are, they would most likely stop me as soon as i leave home. everyday. :woot:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

That has no relevance as I made no such speculation.

if you didn't, then how do you agree with what happened to him (and the manner) was wrong?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

if you didn't, then how do you agree with what happened to him (and the manner) was wrong?

The medical procedures used against the suspects aren't in dispute, which is what my comments were based on.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

And we have presented circumstances where the police actions would be legal and proper.

I fail to see how you cannot understand that if he were known to the cops to carry drugs anally he would,

1) have been charged in that previous incident,

2) given the US laws long probations are common so it's very possible he would still he under supervision,

3) while on probation your right to refuse searches are drastically curtailed, including cavity searches since that was his MO in the first instance.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!


Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.


Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 0

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.