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

Skip to comments.

Accused drug dealers get off - Judge agrees racial profiling was at play
THE NEWS-TIMES ^ | May 31, 2006 | Karen Ali

Posted on 05/31/2006 7:49:33 AM PDT by LurkedLongEnough

click here to read article


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-4041-6061-8081-91 next last
Here's a classic Fourth Amendment case, I think. Also a precedent for race-based decision-making for the defense lawyer, according to the article.

Come hence, libertarians.

1 posted on 05/31/2006 7:49:35 AM PDT by LurkedLongEnough
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: LurkedLongEnough

dog-bites-tail.


2 posted on 05/31/2006 7:52:13 AM PDT by the invisib1e hand (whatever)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: LurkedLongEnough

Would love to know what the probable cause was in this case...


3 posted on 05/31/2006 7:55:18 AM PDT by Army MP Retired (There Will Be Many False Prophets)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: LurkedLongEnough

Rather ironic that they managed to hit major pay dirt.


4 posted on 05/31/2006 7:56:20 AM PDT by AppyPappy (If you aren't part of the solution, there is good money to be made prolonging the problem.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: LurkedLongEnough

Here is a perfect example of where guilt or innocence dont mean Jack Sheit.

Turn them boys loose they is just a couple of poor old black boys being caught because they was black. Sure they was dealing dope, but what difference does that make?

I still say when caught with drugs make the perp eat what they have on them.


5 posted on 05/31/2006 7:59:15 AM PDT by sgtbono2002
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Army MP Retired

Apparently none, so the case was tossed.


6 posted on 05/31/2006 7:59:42 AM PDT by Blueflag (Res ipsa loquitor)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: LurkedLongEnough

I don't know anything about this case or judge..but I wouldn't want to be stopped simply because I was a white guy in a black neighborhood. Unless a cop can show good cause to stop someone, as hard as it is, they should be let go..watched like a hawk for the NEXT time to be sure but no one should be stopped without just cause IMHO.


7 posted on 05/31/2006 8:06:46 AM PDT by conservativehusker (GO BIG RED!!!!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: LurkedLongEnough
quote "If my client was a white male walking out of the Sheraton hotel with a suitcase in his hands, he never would have been stopped and searched"

BS ! If some white guys covered in tattoo's wearing gang style clothes with their pants hanging down to their knees, gold chains around their necks and pagers on their hips came out of the hotel carrying bags while looking suspicious and guilty while sweating profusely and constantly sniffing... they sure as heck would of been stopped and searched!
8 posted on 05/31/2006 8:09:01 AM PDT by conservative physics
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: LurkedLongEnough
Aren't law enforcement professionals trained to recognize suspicious activity?
I don't have a criminal mind but I imagine that if I had something illegal in my possession I might act abit more cautious around others. If the perps didn't have drugs with them they wouldn't have been arrested.
Seems the police used their training. If the perps were carrying suitcase bombs these professionals would be receiving awards for their police work
9 posted on 05/31/2006 8:10:42 AM PDT by The Brush
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: LurkedLongEnough


Meanwhile racial profiling in the form of Affirmative Action will continue and be expanded...


10 posted on 05/31/2006 8:30:09 AM PDT by Tzimisce (How Would Mohammed Vote? Hillary for President! www.dndorks.com)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: conservativehusker

"...but I wouldn't want to be stopped simply because I was a white guy in a black neighborhood. Unless a cop can show good cause to stop someone,..."

That would make you suspicious in my book. You likely have no legitimate business there.


11 posted on 05/31/2006 8:39:06 AM PDT by bk1000 (A clear conscience is a sure sign of a poor memory)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: LurkedLongEnough

I'd be suspicious of anybody driving on Beaver Street.


12 posted on 05/31/2006 8:41:38 AM PDT by toddlintown
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: nutmeg

For your ping list...


13 posted on 05/31/2006 8:48:48 AM PDT by CT-Freeper (Said the perpetually dejected Mets fan.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

Comment #14 Removed by Moderator

To: bk1000

"...but I wouldn't want to be stopped simply because I was a white guy in a black neighborhood. Unless a cop can show good cause to stop someone,..."

That would make you suspicious in my book. You likely have no legitimate business there.

***
BUT THIS IS AMERICA AND HE IS FREE, AS AM I AS A BLACK WOMAN, TO BE IN ANY NEIGHBORHOOD AT ANY TIME - white, black, asian, latino, mixed, etc. It gives no cop the right to stop and search. It does not equal probable cause.


15 posted on 05/31/2006 8:58:45 AM PDT by Ganymede
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: LurkedLongEnough
"If my client was a white male walking out of the Sheraton hotel with a suitcase in his hands, he never would have been stopped and searched," Diamond said.

I am a WHITE MALE and I HAVE BEEN stopped and searched at an airport. This is a simple racist lie by this person named Diamond and it makes me sick!

This is yet another example of how wrong it is to dismiss truthful evidence. I oppose deleting evidence because of how it was gained. If something was done improperly then punish those that did such a thing after a trial shows that they indeed gained the evidence in some wrongful way. Noon but a criminal is served when truthful evidence is kept from a jury. Hiding truth is the undoing for the rule of law. We should address this issue by any means needed to stop the hiding of truthful evidence.
16 posted on 05/31/2006 9:04:24 AM PDT by BlueStateDepression
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: CT-Freeper

Thank you! I'll ping the CT list now...


17 posted on 05/31/2006 9:04:59 AM PDT by nutmeg ("We're going to take things away from you on behalf of the common good." - Hillary Clinton 6/28/04)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: RaceBannon; scoopscandal; 2Trievers; LoneGOPinCT; Rodney King; sorrisi; MrSparkys; monafelice; ...

Connecticut ping!

Please Freepmail me if you want on or off my infrequent Connecticut ping list.

18 posted on 05/31/2006 9:05:27 AM PDT by nutmeg ("We're going to take things away from you on behalf of the common good." - Hillary Clinton 6/28/04)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Ganymede
"white, black, asian, latino, mixed, etc. It gives no cop the right to stop and search. It does not equal probable cause."

Sure it does! The cop is looking for things out of place. A black guy in a white neighborhood or a white guy in a black neighborhood looks out of place. Neither has any likely legitimate business there. Neither likely wandered there by mistake. Chances are good that in either case someone is up to something. But then, I want to search muslim-looking people trying to board airplanes. Yes, you have the 'right' to be in any neighborhood, but that 'right' won't stop me from getting beaten up just for being a white guy in a black neighbohood and it won't prevent the cops from scrutinizing black people wandering through white neighborhoods. In a mixed neighborhood, things are different.There are rights and then there are responsibilities. And there is common sense as well. PC seldom allows the application of the latter, however.
19 posted on 05/31/2006 9:13:52 AM PDT by bk1000 (A clear conscience is a sure sign of a poor memory)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: BlueStateDepression; LurkedLongEnough
I oppose deleting evidence because of how it was gained. If something was done improperly then punish those that did such a thing after a trial shows that they indeed gained the evidence in some wrongful way.

The problem here, as I see it, is this: the police had no reason to detain these men in the first place. They were investigating a wholly separate crime---they weren't patrolling the area on the lookout for drug dealers. They had no probable cause to detain these men on suspicion of the crime they were investigating, so that detention was unjustified. Anything the police discovered as a result of that detention would never have been known or realized had not that detention taken place, and since that detention was unjustified, it's as if the evidence against them never existed.

And this is the way it should be. Otherwise, the police would have carte blanche to stop anyone, for any reason, absent suspicion, and search them. That notion should be completely abhorrent to freedom-loving people.


20 posted on 05/31/2006 9:16:06 AM PDT by 54-46 Was My Number (Right now, somebody else got that number)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-4041-6061-8081-91 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

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