Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: SmithL

A first year law student could probably get most of the evidence suppressed claiming unlawful searches and seizures. Best just to find the rightful owner and return the items.


42 posted on 09/19/2005 8:50:37 AM PDT by flada (Y2K? What are you selling, chicken or sex jelly?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]


To: flada

Exactly, with any halfway decent lawyer, none of these people could ever be convicted of ANYTHING.

You have houses being entered without warrants.
You have searches being done by non-law enforcement officers.
You have loot of untraceable origin.
You have homes that are forcibly abandoned.
You have extensive evidence of people entering and squatting in neighboring homes and buildings.

Any reasonable lawyers defense would read something like this, "Your honor, what really happened here is OBVIOUS. The original looter, whoever he was, must have discovered his own home flooded and took refuge in my clients home. When the looter faced starvation, he evacuated the city and left his loot behind".

Your job, as the prosecutor, is to prove that assertion FALSE. Good luck!

Of course, the looters we have on video will be MUCH easier to prosecute...if we can identify them. There's a big legal difference between having unidentified stolen goods show up on your abandoned property, and having video evidence of you actively stealing from closed businesses.


63 posted on 09/19/2005 9:28:22 AM PDT by Arthalion
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 42 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson