Jump to content



Photo

Anal probes ordered after traffic stop

new mexico x-rays american civil liberties union drug interdiction sniffing dog vaginally probed

  • Please log in to reply
54 replies to this topic

#16 DocM

DocM

    Neowinian Senior

  • 17,809 posts
  • Joined: 31-July 10
  • Location: Michigan

Posted 07 November 2013 - 13:33

I can't say I'm surprised to see you defending such a blatant violation of the 4th Amendment. Your respect for the US Constitution seems rather inconsistent, especially given your vigorous defence of the 2nd Amendment.

I'm just reporting how it is vs. how you think it should be while not even living here.

Fact: parolees (guessing he is one based on the article) have very few privacy rights. They can he searched at any time, and no probable cause is required. Period.

Fact: borders & international terminals are different than normal police interactions. The agencies are different. The probable cause standard is different.

Fact: the Appellate & Supreme Courts, the real judges of what's Constitutional vs. you, say these pass muster.

Deal with it.


#17 Shadrack

Shadrack

    Neowinian Senior

  • 15,179 posts
  • Joined: 20-December 01

Posted 07 November 2013 - 13:56

I'm just reporting how it is vs. how you think it should be while not even living here.

Fact: parolees (guessing he is one based on the article) have very few privacy rights. They can he searched at any time, and no probable cause is required. Period.

Fact: borders & international terminals are different than normal police interactions. The agencies are different. The probable cause standard is different.

Fact: the Appellate & Supreme Courts, the real judges of what's Constitutional vs. you, say these pass muster.

Deal with it.


Excuse me sit. I live and love my southwest. You have no idea what you are talking about. How dare you say that my rights should be scooted to the side because of where I live. I'm still a citizen of the USA. What kind of person are you to suggest otherwise. Wow. Absolutely dispicable.

#18 theyarecomingforyou

theyarecomingforyou

    Tiger Trainer

  • 16,452 posts
  • Joined: 07-August 03
  • Location: Terra Prime Profession: Jaded Sceptic
  • OS: Windows 8.1
  • Phone: Galaxy Note 3 with Galaxy Gear

Posted 07 November 2013 - 14:00

 

I'm just reporting how it is vs. how you think it should be while not even living here.

Fact: parolees (guessing he is one based on the article) have very few privacy rights. They can he searched at any time, and no probable cause is required. Period.

Fact: borders & international terminals are different than normal police interactions. The agencies are different. The probable cause standard is different.

So being taken to two hospitals (one of which refused to carry out the procedures), having an anal probe, three enemas, two body X-rays and a colonoscopy doesn't qualify as unreasonable search and seizure to you?  :| That's strange when you consider the slightest call for gun restrictions a violation of the Second Amendment. The reality is you only care for the US Constitution when it suits you.



#19 Deleted Bye

Deleted Bye

    Neowinian Senior

  • 3,781 posts
  • Joined: 17-June 09

Posted 07 November 2013 - 14:01

Endoscopes are sterilized before use and it's done under a light anesthesia, similar to what dentists use. Rectal exams are done with lubricated gloved fingers.

The man who was under scrutiny I can understand if the report of him previously having been caught hiding drugs in his rectum is true. It's very possible he was still on probation, in which case he had no expectation or right to privacy and can be searched for a parole violation at any time. This is nothing new - a very old practice.

The woman we haven't enough information about, but at border crossing & TSA terminals for international passage the rules are VERY different than for usual police interactions. You are now dealing with the Feds: Border Patrol, DHS, FBI, DEA, whatever - not the locals. They CAN search someone, especially if instruments or dogs register a "hit."

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.



#20 Lord Method Man

Lord Method Man

    Banned

  • 3,758 posts
  • Joined: 18-September 12

Posted 07 November 2013 - 14:14

I dunno, it actually sounds like they had PC.



#21 McKay

McKay

    Neowinian Stallion

  • 6,000 posts
  • Joined: 29-August 10
  • Location: 308 Negra Arroyo Lane
  • OS: Windows 8.1
  • Phone: LG G3

Posted 07 November 2013 - 14:23

My only concern is even if they had suspicion of holding drugs, abd a history. How can they be made to pay for all the procedures that were forced upon them?



#22 Praetor

Praetor

    ASCii / ANSi Designer

  • 2,878 posts
  • Joined: 05-June 02
  • Location: Lisbon
  • OS: Windows Eight dot One dot One 1!one

Posted 07 November 2013 - 14:23

No drugs were found in either of the cases, and both people are now being billed for thousands of dollars by the hospitals, according to attorneys, who say the cases raise serious question about law enforcement practices along the border.

 

Dude, WTF???

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

this is very wrong.



#23 +Bryan R.

Bryan R.

    Neowinian Senior

  • 4,607 posts
  • Joined: 04-September 07
  • Location: Palm Beach, FL

Posted 07 November 2013 - 14:28

I heard this on the radio yesterday... Almost thought it was a second story :p



#24 Syanide

Syanide

    From here to infirmary.

  • 4,176 posts
  • Joined: 05-February 03
  • Location: /home

Posted 07 November 2013 - 14:32

Disturbing.



#25 fusi0n

fusi0n

    Don't call it a come back

  • 3,763 posts
  • Joined: 08-July 04
  • OS: OSX 10.9\Elementary OS
  • Phone: LG G3

Posted 07 November 2013 - 14:37

This is really ######ed up. 



#26 DocM

DocM

    Neowinian Senior

  • 17,809 posts
  • Joined: 31-July 10
  • Location: Michigan

Posted 07 November 2013 - 14:45

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.

#27 McKay

McKay

    Neowinian Stallion

  • 6,000 posts
  • Joined: 29-August 10
  • Location: 308 Negra Arroyo Lane
  • OS: Windows 8.1
  • Phone: LG G3

Posted 07 November 2013 - 15:01

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



#28 vcfan

vcfan

    Doing the Humpty Dance

  • 5,031 posts
  • Joined: 12-June 11

Posted 07 November 2013 - 15:18

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



#29 theyarecomingforyou

theyarecomingforyou

    Tiger Trainer

  • 16,452 posts
  • Joined: 07-August 03
  • Location: Terra Prime Profession: Jaded Sceptic
  • OS: Windows 8.1
  • Phone: Galaxy Note 3 with Galaxy Gear

Posted 07 November 2013 - 15:58

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.



#30 Shadrack

Shadrack

    Neowinian Senior

  • 15,179 posts
  • Joined: 20-December 01

Posted 07 November 2013 - 17:00

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.