Loud sex enough for cops to search your home, court rules

reply to post by jam321


I see your point, but where does that end?

Will we one day have cops doing routine searches of every home, citing they're investigating possible kidnappings in the area?

reply to post by WhiteDevil013


It doesn't end. Plain and simple.

People will try to play the emotion chords for cases like these, then play the "I didn't say that" card. Justifying illegal search and seizure under the pretense that there "could be a kidnapped young girl" on the premises. Yeah, that's not a loaded emotional statement with an agenda or anything...

reply to post by ProtoplasmicTraveler


Let's go to your article.

New Jersey state troopers arrived at McGacken's home, responding to an anonymous 911 call complaining of screams coming from McGacken's home.

Screaming!!!!!!! Says nothing about loud sex. Imagine being a cop and being asked to respond to this situation.

Do you really think a cop is responding thinking that it is just a case of loud sex?

The man never told the cops to go away or stay outside.

The man got what was coming to him.

Here is some advice from the ACLU.

IN YOUR HOME

1. If the police knock and ask to enter your home, you don't have to admit them unless they have a warrant signed by a judge.

2. However, in some emergency situations (like when a person is screaming for help inside, or when the police are chasing someone) officers are allowed to enter and search your home without a warrant.

3. If you are arrested, the police can search you and the area close by. If you are in a building, "close by" usually means just the room you are in.

We all recognize the need for effective law enforcement, but we should also understand our own rights and responsibilities -- especially in our relationships with the police. Everyone, including minors, has the right to courteous and respectful police treatment.

If your rights are violated, don't try to deal with the situation at the scene. You can discuss the matter with an attorney afterwards, or file a complaint with the Internal Affairs or Civilian Complaint Board.

www.aclu.org...

reply to post by Magnum007

If I find something in the process then too bad for you! Don't break the law by growing illegal plants and you won't get in trouble, my concern is the safety of other potential victims...

So why bother with the plants if your concern is for other potential victims.

Marijuana has been proven to have many beneficial medicinal purposes, and hemp itself is capable of making stronger plastics than petroleum, and can even be made to be a cheaper fuel than gasoline, and paper that lasts far longer with out yellowing, decomposing or tearing with out having to cut down rain forests to get it.

There is a difference between illegal and unlawful.

The search was unlawful.

[edit on 16/3/10 by ProtoplasmicTraveler]

If your going to grow illegal drugs, and an amount OBVIOUS for selling, then I would think you SHOULD be smart enough to know your rights. Especially if the place you decide to grow said illegal drug is in your house. May wanna brush up on what leverage you got when cops knock...

As for the search itself, if this is appealed it MAY get squashed by the higher court. I personally, if responding to this scene, would of asked to come in and look around and make sure it WAS just sex. Had the home owner denied me concent to search, at that point I simply would of been done with the call and left.

In my opinion, having worked drug interdiction, this was a planned event and not as random as one may think.

EDIT TO ADD: The behavior of the couple would also weigh in on how comfortable I would be to take their "it was us having sex" reason for getting the call.

[edit on 3/16/2010 by rcwj1975]

reply to post by ProtoplasmicTraveler

They could have confiscated the Marijuana if it was in plain site but they could not have charged him.

Chances are the Warrant would have limited the search in a similar way so the cops would have been happy to take that deal if they were truly interested in just seeing that the home was a secure and safe environment for anyone inside.

We can seize and charge people for things that are not mentioned in a warrant if they are deemed to be illegal and found within the search's scope. Ex:

Searching for a gun with a warrant. I look in the closet and on the floor on the right side I find a suitcase. I can look inside for the gun, but I find 20 pounds of Marijuana... DAMN STRAIGHT I'm going to charge the person with possession with intent to traffic...

Magnum

reply to post by jam321


That's crap and you know it.

The cop does whatever he pleases and just says the person never told him he couldn't enter without a warrant. The judge and media believe the cop, no contest. No proof otherwise, just hearsay.

Cops do it all the time with homes and vehicles, saying they were "let in", when they were not.

How is the person supposed to prove otherwise?

reply to post by ProtoplasmicTraveler

He should have pre-negotiated the scope of the search. If they were concerned about others being in the house under captivity or duress he should have made the Officers sign a quid pro quo agreement allowing them to search the home but only for those things.

And the fact they could have been searching for a person would allow them to search anywhere a person could be hidden. Bathroom, closet, basement, etc.

They could have confiscated the Marijuana if it was in plain site but they could not have charged him.

Why was he convicted again? Oh that is right. Marijuana. I can tell you right now, once they found the Marijuna, they locked the house down, got a warrent to search for drugs and continued the search.

Chances are the Warrant would have limited the search in a similar way so the cops would have been happy to take that deal if they were truly interested in just seeing that the home was a secure and safe environment for anyone inside.

See above.

However without a legitimate complainant they really had no grounds to search the home. At most the neighbor could have claimed noise ordinances were being exceeded which is hard to measure the decibel level of and certainly doesn’t warrant a search of the home.

They had a legal right to be there. The question is, why did they choose to investigate further. The neighbor said they heard screaming, that was enough to place officers at the scene and give them legel standing to be at the residence. What matters most is why they chose to investigate further.

Had he refused to let them search the house chances are that they would have just waited outside the house for the warrant prohibiting him from removing anything from the house?

Why would they need a warrant to get inside the house? What judge would sign a warrant based simply on screams?

Chances are who ever called in the complaint shared another few choice tidbits with the police to arouse their suspicion…”And he drives a motor cycle and has tattoos and his eyes are always red and his sheep are always scared!”.

That still doesn't give them enough to enter the home.

reply to post by jam321

Do you really think a cop is responding thinking that it is just a case of loud sex?

Yes I do believe the thought would cross their mind, because I can gaurantee you if one of my neighbors called 9-11 and said that there were loud screams coming from my house the first thing the dispatrcher would say "and what this is new?" the second thing they would say is "He's having loud sex" and if they dispatched the call the officers would likely bring a bag of ice and some cocktail weenies!

Training the local police and dispatchers to protect and serve isn't that hard if you choose a small municpality to live in!

Remember the police are like dogs, you can't let them jump up on the couch one day and expect them to be happy on the floor the next.

Also keep in mind, getting a warrant to look for marijuana is basically a permission slip to look through EVERYTHING in your house. MJ can be packaged small, which means all small places would be within the scope of the search.

Not to mention if we see MJ in plain sight, that too allows us to look anywhere...the scope of the search is all based off the items being looked for and if its reasonable to think it could "fit" there.

Originally posted by ProtoplasmicTraveler
reply to post by Magnum007

 

If I find something in the process then too bad for you! Don't break the law by growing illegal plants and you won't get in trouble, my concern is the safety of other potential victims...

So why bother with the plants if your concern is for other potential victims.

Marijuana has been proven to have many beneficial medicinal purposes, and hemp itself is capable of making stronger plastics than petroleum, and can even be made to use cheaper fuel than gasoline, and paper that lasts far longer with out yellowing, decomposing or tearing with out having to cut down rain forests to get it.

There is a difference between illegal and unlawful.

The search was unlawful.

The search was lawful as it was to look for other possible victims and in the process something illegal was found. It's like saying that during a call for a conjugal violence I can't seize a grenade launcher, bomb making materials, and what looks like anthrax because I have no grounds to search when I am looking for a possible second victim in the house...

Come on, common sense should prevail here!!!

Magnum

reply to post by EMPIRE

They had a legal right to be there.

Strongly disagree the Constitution protects us from unreasonable searches and seizures.

No crime occured and screaming is not a crime, otherwise half of everyone who appears on the Jerry Springer Show would still be in jail today!

reply to post by ProtoplasmicTraveler


They had a legal right to be at the residence. I didn't say they had a legal right to be inside the home.

reply to post by SyphonX

The cop does whatever he pleases and just says the person never told him he couldn't enter without a warrant.

Don't most cops use a consent to search form nowadays?

How is the person supposed to prove otherwise?

Your correct. It is hard to prove. I won't deny that.

Originally posted by jam321
reply to post by SyphonX

 

The cop does whatever he pleases and just says the person never told him he couldn't enter without a warrant.

Don't most cops use a consent to search form nowadays?

How is the person supposed to prove otherwise?

Your correct. It is hard to prove. I won't deny that.

Thats why we have mic packs that record all audio and then we don't have to get into the he said she said...

Also, let's get something straight.

If cops show up at someone's door, and they decide to barge in without reason, or warrant, then the police are trespassing. They become trespassers, plain and simple. If cops barged into my home, just because they wanted to, then I'm stopping them, no question.

I don't let anyone just barge into my house, cop or not. If they have reason to be in my home, and I understand what they are looking for, so be it. But if cops barge into my home "looking for something", then.. well, it's gonna get ugly. I have no idea what they could be up to.

Originally posted by ProtoplasmicTraveler
reply to post by EMPIRE

 

They had a legal right to be there.

Strongly disagree the Constitution protects us from unreasonable searches and seizures.

No crime occured and screaming is not a crime, otherwise half of everyone who appears on the Jerry Springer Show would still be in jail today!

Then technically, if the police hear a woman screaming in a house but is not saying help, the police cannot enter to make sure she is ok? What do you tell her family after? "Sorry, the constitution says that you are aloud to scream so I couldn't go in because she wasn't saying 'help'..." I'm sure that will give the population more confidence in the police...

Originally posted by LadySkadi
Dude should have told the cops to come back with a warrant

and go back to his girlfriend - and be even louder during round 2

why did he let them in?

Sux for him

I think that's the point. The screams were being used as "probable cause" to justify searching the house without a warrant.

Originally posted by SyphonX
Also, let's get something straight.

If cops show up at someone's door, and they decide to barge in without reason, or warrant, then the police are trespassing. They become trespassers, plain and simple. If cops barged into my home, just because they wanted to, then I'm stopping them, no question.

I don't let anyone just barge into my house, cop or not. If they have reason to be in my home, and I understand what they are looking for, so be it. But if cops barge into my home "looking for something", then.. well, it's gonna get ugly. I have no idea what they could be up to.

I usually can't stand your posts...lol....but this one is correct and I agree 100%, even as a cop. We as cops should never barge in just because...there are legal ways:

Hot Persuit
Warrant
Concent

Real easy actually....but again I agree...any cops that just go in do make themselves look bad, not to mention make it hell on the DA to prosecute such poor approaches.

[edit on 3/16/2010 by rcwj1975]