Supreme Court: Police may stop drivers based on "anonymous" tips.

page: 1
22
<<   2  3 >>

log in

join

posted on Apr, 23 2014 @ 12:02 PM
link   

Supreme Court gives police new power to rely on anonymous tips.


The U.S. Supreme Court ruled Tuesday that police can stop and search a driver based solely on an anonymous 911 tip.

The court has long held that officers can make stops based on anonymous tips, but the information in those tips must provide enough detail to give rise to a reasonable suspicion of criminal activity.

In a scathing dissent, fellow conservative Scalia called the Thomas opinion a "freedom-destroying cocktail" that would encourage "malevolent" tipsters to make false reports.

"After today's opinion," said Scalia, "all of us on the road, and not just drug dealers, are at risk ... "

Now anyone can be stopped for any reason. The police simply have to say that they received an "anonymous tip"...

And the police state marches on...



edit on 23-4-2014 by gladtobehere because: thread title




posted on Apr, 23 2014 @ 12:10 PM
link   

originally posted by: gladtobehere

...In essence, anyone can be stopped for any reason. The police simply have to say that they received an "anonymous tip"...

And the police state marches on...



That's how I interpreted it. They won't even need an "actual" anonymous call. Now they can just make it up as they go along (which they are really good at already).



posted on Apr, 23 2014 @ 12:10 PM
link   
To me, this is the final nail in the coffin of USA liberty.

They have progressively step up ways to get into a persons vehicle for over 25 years.

Now it appears they (the police) have gotten their way. You watch how many "AnoN" calls start coming in.

This decision just sealed the normal joe blows faith. May as well start walking...



posted on Apr, 23 2014 @ 12:12 PM
link   
a reply to: gladtobehere

If this is being interpreted properly, I as a police officer disagree with this decison.

In no way should an anonymous tip be considered reliable, and it definitely shouldn't be considered reasonable suspicion.

So basically someone that dislikes you can say that they saw you driving recklessly. When an officer finds you they can then pull you over. They didn't witness the reckless driving (because it didn't occur) so they can't write a ticket for that. Well what if you forgot your registration or insurance card that day. You are then written a ticket. That is wrong on so many levels.

The stop was improper because the officer did not witness the violation. Therefore the ticket should be thrown out. Fruit of the poisonous tree.

This will cause so many issues. This needs to be overturned.



posted on Apr, 23 2014 @ 12:13 PM
link   
Awesome....My Ex Wife is gonna make it about twenty feet an hour!



posted on Apr, 23 2014 @ 12:19 PM
link   
They are winning the war.

This is terrible news.

My home town of in Florida has condos along the beaches. Most of the residents are retirees from out of state, some out of country. Most just sit back and enjoy the weather. A few of them watch everything with their binoculars and telescopes and will call the police for just about anything, and the police are obligated to respond because of they do not those residents will make a big fuss about it at the city hall meeting. Our society has many people who are constantly spying on each other and will call the authorities for any reason they deem suspicious.

It is time for a revolution.



posted on Apr, 23 2014 @ 12:23 PM
link   
Seems simpler than some of the other anti-freedom laws passed lately, but I could see this being one of the straws that breaks the camel's back.

Its easy for most people to ignore the loss of other people's freedoms. But this one could affect anyone and everyone. I drive a red mustang. SO if they get an anonymous tip about a red mustang, I can be pulled over and searched.

More every day people are going to be hit by this, and it could get very ugly.


+8 more 
posted on Apr, 23 2014 @ 12:28 PM
link   
a reply to: gladtobehere

Now anyone can be stopped for any reason.


Yep...so, until they turn this ruling over, and they will, use it to your advantage.


Don't like the way your local government rep is handling issues, call it in from a pay phone.

Don't like the way the DA handles business, write down the license plate and call in an anon tip - just make sure to dial *67 before you make the call.

Don't like this ruling, get Thomas's plate numbers and call it in from a pay phone/*67 - every day for a month.


Sooner than later - they will see the error of their ways, or at least get so frustrated with bogus calls, they scrap the program.


See..! Two wrongs do indeed make a right.





posted on Apr, 23 2014 @ 12:34 PM
link   
Yep too much of a good thing can be a bad thing if youll all get off yer asses and start calling in just about everyone you can think of....we should be out getting vehicle descriptions of every one of people like Harry Reids vehicles.....even his wifes and kids cars too....why not go for broke..........



posted on Apr, 23 2014 @ 12:47 PM
link   
a reply to: gladtobehere

Ok, so there has been a new precedent set. Reading the article I see that Thomas asserts that because 911 calls can be tracked and traced , there is only a conditional level of anonymity. So, if I am Joe banker, and an anonymous call comes through about me, and they discover drugs in my car, I have the money to hire a very competent lawyer and investigative team to look into that 911 call. I can determine where and when the call came from, and probably even who made it. By examining the recording of the call combined with time and location data, I CAN mount a defense to this and possibly get the evidence thrown out because of a misleading tip from an anonymous caller . I really do think that if something like this arose, and it went all the way back to the SCOTUS, then we may in fact see a reversal.

edit on 23-4-2014 by azdaze because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 23 2014 @ 12:47 PM
link   
a reply to: gladtobehere

Can't help but think about the "swatting" thing it this context.
edit on 23-4-2014 by greencmp because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 23 2014 @ 12:57 PM
link   
One step closer to having your neighbors inform on you to the Gestapo...

Papers please laws, Check.

Informants being okay anonymously...

Laws trying to make the 1st amendment only apply to Licensed people... They are working on it.



posted on Apr, 23 2014 @ 01:11 PM
link   
a reply to: azdaze

So long story short, throw a bunch of $$$ at it and the problem will go away. Glad to hear that is still how it works



posted on Apr, 23 2014 @ 01:13 PM
link   
Oh man...911 is about to be slammed.

This is like a nightmare for everyone, including the police, who I highly doubt will be pursuing everyone's ex-wives and ex-husbands based on unsubstantiated anonymous calls.

There will no doubt be more structure placed around this. Maybe. One would hope. No?



posted on Apr, 23 2014 @ 01:21 PM
link   
a reply to: Sremmos80

That's what I was getting at. Laws only apply to those who can't pay their way out it seems.



posted on Apr, 23 2014 @ 01:23 PM
link   
I think the anonymous call should become the next "Viral Craze" in the USA.....
Meanwhile back at the ranch the interpretation will and can be implemented till an injunction or similar is decreed in the event of a challenge by the peoples.....
So in effect this is a call for a concerted effort against anyone who "may pose a threat to national security" either real or imaginary....
The For profit prison system will be overjoyed at the ruling as it virtually Guarrantees a brisk turnover....



posted on Apr, 23 2014 @ 01:27 PM
link   
This is akin to the "welfare check" ruse that is used to gain entry into private residences for illegal searches. We need to come in to make sure everyone is OK... but while we are here, what is that? Contraband? Off to jail...

Now they can use this same sort of tactic (in this case the anonymous tip) to get in and search your vehicle... "I pulled you over on a tip, now I have legal authority to search your vehicle... "

It is insanity on an epic scale...



posted on Apr, 23 2014 @ 01:38 PM
link   
Well this is not anything new. Per that very article


The court has long held that officers can make stops based on anonymous tips, but the information in those tips must provide enough detail to give rise to a reasonable suspicion of criminal activity.


In this case a truck ran a woman off the road. She called 911 and told them what had happened but did not give her name. This gave the police the belief the driver was driving drunk and they pulled him over. This so far has always been help up in the courts as legal. When they searched the vehicle the found 30 lbs of pot.

So in this case the driver fought the charges because the tip was not about drugs. He lost even though the call was about reckless driving. Of course this covers only anonymous tips called into 911


Relying on 911 tipsters is reasonable, he said, because "a 911 call has some features that allow for identifying and tracking callers," and the calls can be recorded.


So a random cop could not just stop you and claim he had a tip. So in all the Supreme Court simply upheld what many courts have before them for many years.
edit on 23-4-2014 by MrSpad because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 23 2014 @ 01:39 PM
link   
...and the police state marches on.

Cry me a friggin' river, folks. Who, in our infinite wisdom, decided that not being involved in governing our own nation was the way to go?

Oh, yeah...

Most of us. We don't vote. We don't attend city council meetings. ...But, hey, when things aren't as we think they should be, we squall like a cat with its tail under a rocking chair.

Spare me. Just spare me. We're getting exactly, and I mean exactly what we deserve. So enjoy it. We've earned it.



posted on Apr, 23 2014 @ 01:39 PM
link   
a reply to: gladtobehere

On the flip side of this issue is the obvious. If a police officer wants to pull you over they probably will anyway. I was riding with a friend a few years back coming home from an out of town trip. It was around 1 am. He noticed that a police cruiser was following us. About a mile or 2 down the road they turned their lights on and pulled us over. The offense? Too much variation in speed between 45 and 55 mph gave the officers reasonable suspicion that he may have been intoxicated. He wasn't. We were sent on our way actually. But they found a reason to pull us over nonetheless.





new topics
top topics
 
22
<<   2  3 >>

log in

join