Author Topic: Hypothetical legal questions (looking in Roy's general direction perhaps)  (Read 59368 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Re: Hypothetical legal questions (probably for Roy)
« Reply #90 on: April 19, 2013, 08:35:40 AM »

Offline Eja117

  • NCE
  • Bill Sharman
  • *******************
  • Posts: 19274
  • Tommy Points: 1254
Hey out of curiosity how do search warrants work on a day like today? What happens if an officer goes to a house and says "Can we check your house" and the owner is like "No way."?

Not trying to make a point here at all.
There has to be an imminent danger type situation to search a house without a warrant (or permission).  The police could do it anyway, but they run the risk of having all of the evidence tossed out and certainly open themselves up to potential liability by the home owner.  Now in the situation where you are looking for a person (and not evidence) the risk of getting evidence tossed out is diminished, but is still there (like say the person has a bunch of evidence on him).
Well the danger is very very imminent. This is the single most wanted alive man in the history of the country essentially. Other than maybe Jefferson Davis and John Wilkes Booth, but those guys weren't suspected of wearing suicide vests

Re: Hypothetical legal questions (probably for Roy)
« Reply #91 on: April 19, 2013, 08:39:54 AM »

Offline Eja117

  • NCE
  • Bill Sharman
  • *******************
  • Posts: 19274
  • Tommy Points: 1254
Hey out of curiosity how do search warrants work on a day like today? What happens if an officer goes to a house and says "Can we check your house" and the owner is like "No way."?

Not trying to make a point here at all.
There has to be an imminent danger type situation to search a house without a warrant (or permission).  The police could do it anyway, but they run the risk of having all of the evidence tossed out and certainly open themselves up to potential liability by the home owner.  Now in the situation where you are looking for a person (and not evidence) the risk of getting evidence tossed out is diminished, but is still there (like say the person has a bunch of evidence on him).
Well the danger is very very imminent. This is the single most wanted alive man in the history of the country essentially. Other than maybe Jefferson Davis and John Wilkes Booth, but those guys weren't suspected of wearing suicide vests
I wonder what the entrapment laws are in this case. Like all taxi service has been stopped. What if the police drive like 7 taxis under cover and pose as taxis and he gets in one?

Re: Hypothetical legal questions (probably for Roy)
« Reply #92 on: April 19, 2013, 09:09:59 AM »

Offline Moranis

  • James Naismith
  • *********************************
  • Posts: 33461
  • Tommy Points: 1533
Hey out of curiosity how do search warrants work on a day like today? What happens if an officer goes to a house and says "Can we check your house" and the owner is like "No way."?

Not trying to make a point here at all.
There has to be an imminent danger type situation to search a house without a warrant (or permission).  The police could do it anyway, but they run the risk of having all of the evidence tossed out and certainly open themselves up to potential liability by the home owner.  Now in the situation where you are looking for a person (and not evidence) the risk of getting evidence tossed out is diminished, but is still there (like say the person has a bunch of evidence on him).
Well the danger is very very imminent. This is the single most wanted alive man in the history of the country essentially. Other than maybe Jefferson Davis and John Wilkes Booth, but those guys weren't suspected of wearing suicide vests
This is imminent danger as such that would allow the police to forego the constitution.  Imminent danger, means immediate, like a fire, an assault, a weird chemical smell, medical emergencies, etc.  Hunting down a fugitive is not imminent danger unless said fugitive is taking hostages (which by all accounts these guys were not doing - though they did commit a robbery).

Say you are a homeowner minding your business and the cops ask to search your home for this person.  You don't have the person there, but maybe you have some pot out or maybe you have a sick child sleeping or maybe you just don't want a bunch of cops going through your house opening doors and looking for someone that just isn't there.  What if the cops damage your property, track mud all through your white carpet, etc.  How would you feel?  Your rights have been violated without cause and you could and many would sue. 

The U.S. is not a police state.  The law must and will be followed even when tracking down a fugitive.  And let's be clear this guy is a sick twisted individual, but he is no where near the most wanted fugitive in the history of the U.S.  That is such a gross exaggeration of the highest order.  I mean the kid in the Colorado shooting killed far more people and that was just last year.  McVeigh caused far greater damage and a much higher death toll with the OKC bombing in the 90's.  Don't get me wrong it was a horrific event, but the hyperbole is just crazy.
« Last Edit: April 19, 2013, 09:16:29 AM by Moranis »
2023 Historical Draft - Brooklyn Nets - 9th pick

Bigs - Pau, Amar'e, Issel, McGinnis, Roundfield
Wings - Dantley, Bowen, J. Jackson
Guards - Cheeks, Petrovic, Buse, Rip

Re: Hypothetical legal questions (probably for Roy)
« Reply #93 on: April 19, 2013, 09:16:50 AM »

Offline Eja117

  • NCE
  • Bill Sharman
  • *******************
  • Posts: 19274
  • Tommy Points: 1254
Hey out of curiosity how do search warrants work on a day like today? What happens if an officer goes to a house and says "Can we check your house" and the owner is like "No way."?

Not trying to make a point here at all.
There has to be an imminent danger type situation to search a house without a warrant (or permission).  The police could do it anyway, but they run the risk of having all of the evidence tossed out and certainly open themselves up to potential liability by the home owner.  Now in the situation where you are looking for a person (and not evidence) the risk of getting evidence tossed out is diminished, but is still there (like say the person has a bunch of evidence on him).
Well the danger is very very imminent. This is the single most wanted alive man in the history of the country essentially. Other than maybe Jefferson Davis and John Wilkes Booth, but those guys weren't suspected of wearing suicide vests
This is imminent danger as such that would allow the police to forego the constitution.  He isn't running around shooting people and as far as I know there aren't any additional bomb plots.  Imminent danger, means immediate, like a fire, an assault, a weird chemical smell, medical emergencies, etc.  Hunting down a fugitive is not imminent danger unless said fugitive is taking hostages or something like that.

Say you are a homeowner minding your business and the cops ask to search your home for this person.  You don't have the person there, but maybe you have some pot out or maybe you have a sick child sleeping or maybe you just don't want a bunch of cops going through your house opening doors and looking for someone that just isn't there.  What if the cops damage your property, track mud all through your white carpet, etc.  How would you feel?  Your rights have been violated without cause and you could and many would sue. 

The U.S. is not a police state.  The law must and will be followed even when tracking down a fugitive.  And let's be clear this guy is a sick twisted individual, but he is no where near the most wanted fugitive in the history of the U.S.  That is such a gross exaggeration of the highest order.  I mean the kid in the Colorado shooting killed far more people and that was just last year.  McVeigh caused far greater damage and a much higher death toll with the OKC bombing in the 90's.  Don't get me wrong it was a horrific event, but the hyperbole is just crazy.
I only want to speak to the legal aspect. I'm sorry but I don't think a sleeping kid is reason to stop police from looking for this guy. The threat is extreme due to his brother being found with explosives on his body. This guy HAS to be taken alive or at least in tact as much as possible.  It's the equivalent at least of when there were active German spies in America during WW2.  This isn't a guy that just stole a car or something.  I'm not measuring the significance of this guy by how many people he hurt.

Legally I just don't know much about suspending the Constitution but this seems as close as you can get to that without troops being landed on the beaches

Re: Hypothetical legal questions (probably for Roy)
« Reply #94 on: April 19, 2013, 09:19:36 AM »

Offline Eja117

  • NCE
  • Bill Sharman
  • *******************
  • Posts: 19274
  • Tommy Points: 1254
Is it legal to cut a deal on TV where if he gives himself up and cooperates we won't execute? .....that would be a legal oral contract, right? If initiated by the authorities?
« Last Edit: April 19, 2013, 09:27:56 AM by eja117 »

Re: Hypothetical legal questions (probably for Roy)
« Reply #95 on: April 19, 2013, 10:13:05 AM »

Offline Eja117

  • NCE
  • Bill Sharman
  • *******************
  • Posts: 19274
  • Tommy Points: 1254
If the media tried to help the police purposely leak misinformation to help the search I have to wonder to what extent that's ok. I mean if they say "They are looking over here" and actually he's over there I wonder if that creates danger to citizens and you can't do that or if under the circumstances it's legit. This is pretty uncharted waters.

Re: Hypothetical legal questions (probably for Roy)
« Reply #96 on: April 19, 2013, 10:18:38 AM »

Offline Fafnir

  • Bill Russell
  • ******************************
  • Posts: 30859
  • Tommy Points: 1327
If the media tried to help the police purposely leak misinformation to help the search I have to wonder to what extent that's ok. I mean if they say "They are looking over here" and actually he's over there I wonder if that creates danger to citizens and you can't do that or if under the circumstances it's legit. This is pretty uncharted waters.
Law enforcement can lie to both the media and suspects if they choose. Not uncharted, but overall they avoid it due to bad PR.

Re: Hypothetical legal questions (probably for Roy)
« Reply #97 on: April 19, 2013, 10:21:32 AM »

Offline Eja117

  • NCE
  • Bill Sharman
  • *******************
  • Posts: 19274
  • Tommy Points: 1254
If the media tried to help the police purposely leak misinformation to help the search I have to wonder to what extent that's ok. I mean if they say "They are looking over here" and actually he's over there I wonder if that creates danger to citizens and you can't do that or if under the circumstances it's legit. This is pretty uncharted waters.
Law enforcement can lie to both the media and suspects if they choose. Not uncharted, but overall they avoid it due to bad PR.
I can totally understand lying about something like "he's Chechen" but if they said "He's not armed" when he is...wow.  I can't imagine that happening but this whole thing is hard to imagine

Re: Hypothetical legal questions (probably for Roy)
« Reply #98 on: April 19, 2013, 06:55:09 PM »

Offline Roy H.

  • Forums Manager
  • James Naismith
  • *********************************
  • Posts: 58554
  • Tommy Points: -25636
  • Bo Knows: Joe Don't Know Diddley
Is it legal to cut a deal on TV where if he gives himself up and cooperates we won't execute? .....that would be a legal oral contract, right? If initiated by the authorities?

Only if it's extended by a prosecutor, I believe.  Promises made by the police to coerce surrender or a confession generally aren't enforceable.


I'M THE SILVERBACK GORILLA IN THIS MOTHER——— AND DON'T NONE OF YA'LL EVER FORGET IT!@ 34 minutes

Re: Hypothetical legal questions (probably for Roy)
« Reply #99 on: April 19, 2013, 07:01:02 PM »

Offline Eja117

  • NCE
  • Bill Sharman
  • *******************
  • Posts: 19274
  • Tommy Points: 1254
Is it legal to cut a deal on TV where if he gives himself up and cooperates we won't execute? .....that would be a legal oral contract, right? If initiated by the authorities?

Only if it's extended by a prosecutor, I believe.  Promises made by the police to coerce surrender or a confession generally aren't enforceable.
Soooo...in this case...that would be...the Attorney General of the US?

Re: Hypothetical legal questions (probably for Roy)
« Reply #100 on: April 19, 2013, 07:12:38 PM »

Offline Roy H.

  • Forums Manager
  • James Naismith
  • *********************************
  • Posts: 58554
  • Tommy Points: -25636
  • Bo Knows: Joe Don't Know Diddley
Is it legal to cut a deal on TV where if he gives himself up and cooperates we won't execute? .....that would be a legal oral contract, right? If initiated by the authorities?

Only if it's extended by a prosecutor, I believe.  Promises made by the police to coerce surrender or a confession generally aren't enforceable.
Soooo...in this case...that would be...the Attorney General of the US?

Yeah, or somebody from his office.


I'M THE SILVERBACK GORILLA IN THIS MOTHER——— AND DON'T NONE OF YA'LL EVER FORGET IT!@ 34 minutes

Re: Hypothetical legal questions (probably for Roy)
« Reply #101 on: April 19, 2013, 07:17:26 PM »

Offline Eja117

  • NCE
  • Bill Sharman
  • *******************
  • Posts: 19274
  • Tommy Points: 1254
Is it legal to cut a deal on TV where if he gives himself up and cooperates we won't execute? .....that would be a legal oral contract, right? If initiated by the authorities?

Only if it's extended by a prosecutor, I believe.  Promises made by the police to coerce surrender or a confession generally aren't enforceable.
Soooo...in this case...that would be...the Attorney General of the US?

Yeah, or somebody from his office.
Bery bery eenteresting. Thank you very much


Re: Hypothetical legal questions (probably for Roy)
« Reply #103 on: March 20, 2014, 10:27:09 AM »

Offline Eja117

  • NCE
  • Bill Sharman
  • *******************
  • Posts: 19274
  • Tommy Points: 1254
If I'm out for a walk on a public trail and I find a historical artifact that's kinda cool and unique (but not George Washington's teeth or anything) can I sell it legally, or is that a no-no?  Thanks

Re: Hypothetical legal questions (probably for Roy)
« Reply #104 on: August 17, 2014, 07:38:35 AM »

Offline Eja117

  • NCE
  • Bill Sharman
  • *******************
  • Posts: 19274
  • Tommy Points: 1254
Does anyone know the legality of a Ferguson style curfew?  Don't you have a Constitutional right to assembly and to protest that is 24/7?