It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

1 month of jail for having a spoon in your vehicle? ETA: NM field test showed meth

page: 4
11
<< 1  2  3    5 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Sep, 27 2014 @ 09:49 AM
link   
a reply to: MichiganSwampBuck

Understood.

However the cop did not decide the punishment, the court system did.

I agree strongly that there needs to be legislative, executive, and judicial change in this country.




posted on Sep, 27 2014 @ 09:52 AM
link   
a reply to: BasementWarriorKryptonite

Awesome!

Thanks for the high quality thread contributions you made on this one!

Way to provide relevant sources and pertinent information to the subject matter. Star for you.

I don't know where this thread would of went without you.


edit on 27-9-2014 by TorqueyThePig because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 27 2014 @ 09:56 AM
link   
Guilty until proven innocent.



posted on Sep, 27 2014 @ 10:37 AM
link   

originally posted by: TorqueyThePig
a reply to: Bedlam

I am not sure how and to what extent potential drug evidence is tested by a lab.

Sounds like what you stated are all possibilities.


I don't know either but I can guarantee that a lab test would be 1000X more accurate than a field test kit.



posted on Sep, 27 2014 @ 01:39 PM
link   
a reply to: TorqueyThePig




According to the police the substance did test positive for meth. When it was sent to the lab to be verified by a second source the test was inconclusive. That does not mean it didn't have meth residue on it. There may have not been enough residue left to test positive a second time.


But the result was not inconclusive, it was shown to be spaghetti sauce, like she claimed.

I love this little insight into a cop's mind, I mean is this not the personification of "guilty until proven innocent"?

You are even trying to find ways to still make her guilty after it was proven that there wasn't any meth on it, and that there was spaghetti sauce on it.

Nice.
edit on 27-9-2014 by AntiDude because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 27 2014 @ 02:21 PM
link   
a reply to: AntiDude

If you read the follow up article the police department said the residue field tested positive for meth.

If you are not familar with field test kits I will give you this link for an example
www.fieldforensics.com...

They are used on scene by a law enforcement officer.

A positive field test is sufficent evidence to make a custodial arrest.

When it was tested a second time to be verified it showed that the substance was not meth. The second test that produced negative results does not mean that there NEVER was meth residue on the spoon.

There could of been residue and there wasn't a sufficient amount to test positive a second time (perhaps that is why the test only indicated spaghetti sauce) or the field test could of created a false positive (not the officer's fault), or the officer could of absolutely falsified charges against the woman.

YOU are the one that is jumping to conclusions and automatically placing blame on the officer with nothing other than reading a freaking news article.

I was simply trying to view the situation from BOTH the police and the woman's perspective. I was trying to interject my knowledge from my personal experience as somebody who actually works in law enforcement.

Not one damn time did I ever say I knew 100% the girl was guilty and the cop was not. So please spare me from your useless drivel.

A this point it doesn't matter to me anymore. You can assume whatever you want about me. I am used to it. Matter of fact I am beginning to expect it.

So much so I am about at my wits end posting on ATS. It doesn't seem like many members want to remain impartial. I am sick and tired of wasting my time.
edit on 27-9-2014 by TorqueyThePig because: (no reason given)

edit on 27-9-2014 by TorqueyThePig because: (no reason given)

edit on 27-9-2014 by TorqueyThePig because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 27 2014 @ 02:43 PM
link   
a reply to: TorqueyThePig

Field testing should never be used as the reason to jail someone, perhaps a reason to pursue a certified lab test. The failure rate of field testing should be zero, and until field tests are that reliable I think that filling jail cells at taxpayers expense, and often times ruining a persons life is an awfully high price for all of us to pay for the privileges that law enforcement and our justice systems have bestowed upon themselves, like no accountability....ever..... even when they murder us.



posted on Sep, 27 2014 @ 02:53 PM
link   
a reply to: Witness2008

I don't think field tests fail very often. I have never had one fail in my personal experience. I don't make many drug arrests though.

That being said I agree that the system is due for some changes.



posted on Sep, 27 2014 @ 02:56 PM
link   

originally posted by: Witness2008
a reply to: TorqueyThePig

Field testing should never be used as the reason to jail someone, perhaps a reason to pursue a certified lab test. The failure rate of field testing should be zero, and until field tests are that reliable I think that filling jail cells at taxpayers expense, and often times ruining a persons life is an awfully high price for all of us to pay for the privileges that law enforcement and our justice systems have bestowed upon themselves, like no accountability....ever..... even when they murder us.



Personally I think field tests should be inadmissible in court, they're designed to be quick tests anyone can do. Their failure rates aren't perfect. Scoring positive on a field test should be sufficient reason to get a warrant and look for other proof. If the only proof after such a search is what the field test was performed on then a court date should be issued for a time after the substance can be tested in a real lab and the person should be free to go.

Sitting in jail for a month or longer while you prove your innocence is ridiculous.


originally posted by: TorqueyThePig
a reply to: Witness2008

I don't think field tests fail very often. I have never had one fail in my personal experience. I don't make many drug arrests though.

That being said I agree that the system is due for some changes.


It varies by the drug but the average failure rate is about 2.1% however certain substances have a much higher failure rate when tested as specific drugs. For example chocolate almost always tests positive as hash apparently with the field test kit. Here's a couple articles on it:
stopthedrugwar.org...
www.nhtsa.gov...
edit on 27-9-2014 by Aazadan because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 27 2014 @ 03:03 PM
link   
a reply to: TorqueyThePig




When it was tested a second time to be verified it showed that the substance was not meth. The second test that produced negative results does not mean that there NEVER was meth residue on the spoon. There could of been residue and there wasn't a sufficient amount to test positive a second time (perhaps that is why the test only indicated spaghetti sauce)


Really? I think the fact that there was spaghetti sauce found on it is a nice indicator that she didn't use it for meth. You are suggesting that at the time of the field test, there was both meth and spaghetti sauce on the spoon, and in the lab the meth had dissapeared but the sauce hadn't.



posted on Sep, 27 2014 @ 03:07 PM
link   
a reply to: AntiDude

Perhaps it was used for meth and when they were pulled over for the traffic violation she hid it in the container with the spaghetti sauce.



posted on Sep, 27 2014 @ 03:07 PM
link   
a reply to: TorqueyThePig

Forgot to address this.....


There could of been residue and there wasn't a sufficient amount to test positive a second time

I wonder what the cost of testing RESIDUE is, and then the cost of the ritualistically judicial dismantling of someones life and character. The price tags are paid by everyone. What happens to a family who's income is gotten by the guy sitting in jail for possible drug RESIDUE? How can anyone, even a cop, defend throwing a person in jail for drug RESIDUE?



posted on Sep, 27 2014 @ 03:11 PM
link   
a reply to: Witness2008

I think a lot of officers feel that putting a meth addict or crack addict in jail serves a valid moral purpose.

That person off the street may equal less burglaries, thefts, or frauds that an innocent person may become a victim of during an addicts search for funding off their habbit.

Of course just because a person is addicted to meth doesn't mean they are going to commit other crimes. However all to often it does.



posted on Sep, 27 2014 @ 03:23 PM
link   
a reply to: TorqueyThePig


That person off the street may equal less burglaries, thefts, or frauds that an innocent person may become a victim of during an addicts search for funding off their habbit.


Ahhh, pre-crime detection. Are you justifying locking someone up for what they might do?



posted on Sep, 27 2014 @ 03:23 PM
link   
a reply to: kosmicjack
I think the spoon was in a travel bag with her name on it, the police asked to search the vehicle and consent was given as I understand the story now.



posted on Sep, 27 2014 @ 03:24 PM
link   

originally posted by: TorqueyThePig
a reply to: AntiDude

Perhaps it was used for meth and when they were pulled over for the traffic violation she hid it in the container with the spaghetti sauce.


Maybe she was actually eating from the container?

Or are you saying that she had the container of spaghetti sauce laying around opened to dip her meth spoon in, in case they got pulled over?



posted on Sep, 27 2014 @ 03:28 PM
link   
a reply to: Witness2008
What happened to "proof beyond all reasonable doubt" I don't think the legal system should be run on what ifs and probablies, which seems to be the trend.



posted on Sep, 27 2014 @ 03:29 PM
link   
a reply to: TorqueyThePig




YOU are the one that is jumping to conclusions and automatically placing blame on the officer with nothing other than reading a freaking news article.



I didn't blame that officer at all. Maybe you didn't get my post.

I was criticising you.



posted on Sep, 27 2014 @ 03:41 PM
link   
a reply to: AntiDude

I think that TorqueyThePig is a good example of how our justice system can not let go. They have to be right all of the time, and will go to absurd lengths to justify what are blatantly obvious blunders. The woman was arrested for having something on her person that allowed a cops imagination to run wild. It maybe one of the reasons that law enforcement agencies look for a more mediocre intellect when hiring.


Law makers dropped the maximum IQ requirements a whole 30 points from an average score of 90 to 60, an IQ that is only marginally higher than that of a person with down-syndrome.

http://_national_report_dot_net_/mccormick-sc-police-force-drastically-lowers-required-iq-minimum-new-officers/



posted on Sep, 27 2014 @ 03:49 PM
link   
a reply to: vonclod

There is plenty of justice out there if you can afford it.




top topics



 
11
<< 1  2  3    5 >>

log in

join