Great White Shark
Posts: 2074
Joined: Tue Dec 14, 2004
Sand$: 6,223.28
I am really surprised that the prevailing viewpoint is that it is fine to blanket strip search innocent people based on a police officer's discretion. I advise you to be meek and completely deferential to all requests an officers of the law makes of you, legal or not, lest you irritate one of them and he decides you are going to have a very bad day.
User avatar
Supreme Megalodon
Posts: 33836
Joined: Wed Oct 26, 2005
Sand$: 27,500.16
Magyc wrote:I am really surprised that the prevailing viewpoint is that it is fine to blanket strip search innocent people based on a police officer's discretion. I advise you to be meek and completely deferential to all requests an officers of the law makes of you, legal or not, lest you irritate one of them and he decides you are going to have a very bad day.


Again, you're bringing an issue that is irrelevant into the conversation.

No one is debating what should or should not land you in jail. The SC decision is limited ONLY to what is allowed IF you are booked into a jail.
_______________________________________

What about beans?
User avatar
Supreme Megalodon
Posts: 44532
Joined: Sat May 16, 2009
Sand$: 11,734.72
feral pig wrote:
Magyc wrote:I am really surprised that the prevailing viewpoint is that it is fine to blanket strip search innocent people based on a police officer's discretion. I advise you to be meek and completely deferential to all requests an officers of the law makes of you, legal or not, lest you irritate one of them and he decides you are going to have a very bad day.


Again, you're bringing an issue that is irrelevant into the conversation.

No one is debating what should or should not land you in jail. The SC decision is limited ONLY to what is allowed IF you are booked into a jail.


This. Whatever causes me to land there, if I'm being incarcerated, I fully expect it. It wouldn't make me happy, but it wouldn't come as a surprise.

It's also the least of my worries at that point.
User avatar
Supreme Megalodon
Posts: 45355
Joined: Sun Sep 11, 2005
Sand$: 42,811.96
feral pig wrote:
625james wrote:
tjusmc wrote:
Magyc wrote:
tjusmc wrote:Only unreasonable people see a strip search upon being booked into jail as an unreasonable search.


Reasonable searches have always happened. It's the policy of blanket strip searching anyone that is outrageous.

Anyone being booked into jail. Perfectly reasonable. Hell I thought that was already the practice

It was, this case is about some clown who didn't pay his traffic tickets on time and they went to warrant. He then paid them, but didn't keep a copy of his paid tickets and warrant dismissal. In some jurisdictions there is a delay in the municipal court computer system notifying the police computer system that the warrant has been dismissed. In the lag time this clown manages to get himself stopped by city police twice. He got arrested and strip searched both times for the warrant that had already been dismissed. Had the idiot kept the paperwork showing his warrant had been dismissed he would have never been arrested once much less twice :F


I'm sure money was the primary motivation in this suit. There is plenty of case law holding cities/police departments aren't liable for accidentally arresting someone due to a delay in computer systems communicating between one another.



Actually, he was suing not because he claimed he shouldn't have been arrested, but based on the claim that the strip search was unreasonable.

And his claim was quite properly denied.

The point of why he was arrested, and whether or not he deserved to be jailed, is a completely different discussion.


And if they decided Person A doesn't have to be strip searched and Person B does then it probably would end up in a law suit.

I agree that being booked for a crime meets minimum standards to me to have to spread 'em.
_______________________________________

34-17/ 29-7 / 34-13 / 27-17 / 31-17

2010 & 2011 Baseball National Champs

Cause if my eyes don't deceive me, there's something goin' wrong around here.
User avatar
Great White Shark
Posts: 8775
Joined: Thu Aug 30, 2007
Sand$: 16,714.50
Elmagister wrote:
feral pig wrote:
Magyc wrote:I am really surprised that the prevailing viewpoint is that it is fine to blanket strip search innocent people based on a police officer's discretion. I advise you to be meek and completely deferential to all requests an officers of the law makes of you, legal or not, lest you irritate one of them and he decides you are going to have a very bad day.


Again, you're bringing an issue that is irrelevant into the conversation.

No one is debating what should or should not land you in jail. The SC decision is limited ONLY to what is allowed IF you are booked into a jail.


This. Whatever causes me to land there, if I'm being incarcerated, I fully expect it. It wouldn't make me happy, but it wouldn't come as a surprise.

It's also the least of my worries at that point.


I don't see why some are having such a hard time understanding this.


If you get jailed you get strip searched, that is perfectly reasonable.

If you get jailed unjustly, your problem is not that you got strip searched, your problem is that you got jailed unjustly.
_______________________________________

It was purgatory.
User avatar
Supreme Megalodon
Posts: 33836
Joined: Wed Oct 26, 2005
Sand$: 27,500.16
tjusmc wrote:
If you get jailed unjustly, your problem is not that you got strip searched, your problem is that you got jailed unjustly.


Thank you.
_______________________________________

What about beans?
User avatar
Supreme Megalodon
Posts: 31563
Joined: Sat Jul 9, 2005
Sand$: 10,654.12
tjusmc wrote:
Magyc wrote:
tjusmc wrote:Only unreasonable people see a strip search upon being booked into jail as an unreasonable search.


Reasonable searches have always happened. It's the policy of blanket strip searching anyone that is outrageous.

Anyone being booked into jail. Perfectly reasonable. Hell I thought that was already the practice


_______________________________________

ImageImage
User avatar
Megalodon
Posts: 16965
Joined: Sun Oct 18, 2009
Sand$: 40,101.72
http://usnews.msnbc.msn.com/_news/2012/ ... rches?lite

Milwaukee police accused of performing illegal body cavity searches
By Elizabeth Chuck, msnbc.com

Seven officers and a supervisor at the Milwaukee police department have had their badges taken away after allegations surfaced that police have been conducting body cavity searches on suspects with no authority to do so.

Follow @msnbc_us

Reports of officers arresting suspects then subjecting them to cavity searches first surfaced in local media in March. On Monday, after getting access to a police report, The Milwaukee Journal Sentinel reported that officers allegedly performed these searches on a routine basis.

One Milwaukee officer, Michael Vagnini, "had a reputation" for forcing suspects he believed had drugs in their body cavities to bend over for him, said defense attorney Alex Cossi, who handled a July 2011 case that alleges Vagnini searched his client and another suspect in the booking room.

"This was not a rogue happenstance. This was a tacit acceptance of strip searches without proper procedures or supervision," Cossi told The Journal Sentinel.

Vagnini found suspected cocaine "between (their) butt cheeks," the police report said.

Strip searches, which Wisconsin state law defines as searching "a detained person's genitals, pubic area, buttock or anus, or a detained female person's breast," can only be performed by a doctor, physician's assistant or registered nurse. The state law requires written permission before a strip search is conducted, unless there's probable cause to believe the suspect is hiding a weapon.

Cossi said his client was not provided with written documents before Vagnini performed the cavity search, which is a strip search involving penetration, on him. Because improper tactics were used to find the cocaine, the drug dealing charge against Cossi's client was thrown out, The Journal Sentinel reported.

It's not clear how many allegations of cavity searches the Police Department is facing....
_______________________________________

viewtopic.php?f=47&t=336835
11th Annual Kicker Defense Challenge
Can you win a yahoo public league picking DEF/K in the 1st 2 rounds?

500 sand entry fee
2015 winners
Endzoneview
Craphead
Crackhead Bob
PMG
Palmerac
User avatar
Supreme Megalodon
Posts: 33836
Joined: Wed Oct 26, 2005
Sand$: 27,500.16
625james wrote:http://usnews.msnbc.msn.com/_news/2012/05/29/11939457-milwaukee-police-accused-of-performing-illegal-body-cavity-searches?lite

Milwaukee police accused of performing illegal body cavity searches
By Elizabeth Chuck, msnbc.com

Seven officers and a supervisor at the Milwaukee police department have had their badges taken away after allegations surfaced that police have been conducting body cavity searches on suspects with no authority to do so.

Follow @msnbc_us

Reports of officers arresting suspects then subjecting them to cavity searches first surfaced in local media in March. On Monday, after getting access to a police report, The Milwaukee Journal Sentinel reported that officers allegedly performed these searches on a routine basis.

One Milwaukee officer, Michael Vagnini, "had a reputation" for forcing suspects he believed had drugs in their body cavities to bend over for him, said defense attorney Alex Cossi, who handled a July 2011 case that alleges Vagnini searched his client and another suspect in the booking room.

"This was not a rogue happenstance. This was a tacit acceptance of strip searches without proper procedures or supervision," Cossi told The Journal Sentinel.

Vagnini found suspected cocaine "between (their) butt cheeks," the police report said.

Strip searches, which Wisconsin state law defines as searching "a detained person's genitals, pubic area, buttock or anus, or a detained female person's breast," can only be performed by a doctor, physician's assistant or registered nurse. The state law requires written permission before a strip search is conducted, unless there's probable cause to believe the suspect is hiding a weapon.

Cossi said his client was not provided with written documents before Vagnini performed the cavity search, which is a strip search involving penetration, on him. Because improper tactics were used to find the cocaine, the drug dealing charge against Cossi's client was thrown out, The Journal Sentinel reported.

It's not clear how many allegations of cavity searches the Police Department is facing....



You do realize that this case has nothing whatsoever to do with the Supreme court decision, which was restricted to a case where the strip search is legally authorized and normal procedure, don't you?
_______________________________________

What about beans?
User avatar
Megalodon
Posts: 16965
Joined: Sun Oct 18, 2009
Sand$: 40,101.72
feral pig wrote:
625james wrote:http://usnews.msnbc.msn.com/_news/2012/05/29/11939457-milwaukee-police-accused-of-performing-illegal-body-cavity-searches?lite

Milwaukee police accused of performing illegal body cavity searches
By Elizabeth Chuck, msnbc.com

Seven officers and a supervisor at the Milwaukee police department have had their badges taken away after allegations surfaced that police have been conducting body cavity searches on suspects with no authority to do so.

Follow @msnbc_us

Reports of officers arresting suspects then subjecting them to cavity searches first surfaced in local media in March. On Monday, after getting access to a police report, The Milwaukee Journal Sentinel reported that officers allegedly performed these searches on a routine basis.

One Milwaukee officer, Michael Vagnini, "had a reputation" for forcing suspects he believed had drugs in their body cavities to bend over for him, said defense attorney Alex Cossi, who handled a July 2011 case that alleges Vagnini searched his client and another suspect in the booking room.

"This was not a rogue happenstance. This was a tacit acceptance of strip searches without proper procedures or supervision," Cossi told The Journal Sentinel.

Vagnini found suspected cocaine "between (their) butt cheeks," the police report said.

Strip searches, which Wisconsin state law defines as searching "a detained person's genitals, pubic area, buttock or anus, or a detained female person's breast," can only be performed by a doctor, physician's assistant or registered nurse. The state law requires written permission before a strip search is conducted, unless there's probable cause to believe the suspect is hiding a weapon.

Cossi said his client was not provided with written documents before Vagnini performed the cavity search, which is a strip search involving penetration, on him. Because improper tactics were used to find the cocaine, the drug dealing charge against Cossi's client was thrown out, The Journal Sentinel reported.

It's not clear how many allegations of cavity searches the Police Department is facing....



You do realize that this case has nothing whatsoever to do with the Supreme court decision, which was restricted to a case where the strip search is legally authorized and normal procedure, don't you?


Yes

This story lends some credence to the concern some sharks expressed towards law enforcement officers abusing the power to perform strip searches. I also found it interesting how many more restrictions there were on strip searches in Wisconsin vs Texas.
_______________________________________

viewtopic.php?f=47&t=336835
11th Annual Kicker Defense Challenge
Can you win a yahoo public league picking DEF/K in the 1st 2 rounds?

500 sand entry fee
2015 winners
Endzoneview
Craphead
Crackhead Bob
PMG
Palmerac
User avatar
Megalodon
Posts: 14886
Joined: Mon May 31, 2004
Sand$: 31,148.60
Vagnini was cavity searched.


huh huh uh huh huh huh


Anyway, I disagree that it lends credence to that sentiment. One is a case about the legality of strip searching criminals entering prisons. This one is cops illegaly searching free citizens.
User avatar
Supreme Megalodon
Posts: 36281
Joined: Tue Sep 6, 2005
Sand$: 147,595.12
I believe the original is concerning entering jail not so much prison.. big difference.. I'd have to read back to clarify.. I'm not going to read back.

oh,, and if a search is being conducted the citizen is anything but 'free', no?



and a big hip-hip-hurray to the Milwaukee PD!.. bunch of crooked clowns.
_______________________________________

"This whole world would be successful if everybody stopped quitting." - Evander Holyfield
User avatar
Great White Shark
Posts: 4800
Joined: Mon Sep 5, 2005
Sand$: 9,105.00
jail? prison? bah.... how about right here, at the side of the road, in front of the squad car headlights.

http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=e34_1355877149
_______________________________________

"If it doesn't make sense, it's usually not true."
User avatar
Megalodon
Posts: 24934
Joined: Mon Sep 30, 2002
Sand$: 12,546.50
"Spread your cheeks and lift your sack!"

User avatar
Supreme Megalodon
Posts: 45355
Joined: Sun Sep 11, 2005
Sand$: 42,811.96
MadLove wrote:jail? prison? bah.... how about right here, at the side of the road, in front of the squad car headlights.

http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=e34_1355877149


Is it just me or did she seem pretty comfortable during the butt search? :oops:

Cop's a moron, looks to me. Really, what's she allegedly hiding, a few grams of pot?

He'll be fired and she'll win a big lawsuit.
_______________________________________

34-17/ 29-7 / 34-13 / 27-17 / 31-17

2010 & 2011 Baseball National Champs

Cause if my eyes don't deceive me, there's something goin' wrong around here.

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: canadianraiderfan and 1 guest