It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
The Second Court of Appeals in Fort Worth wasn't so eager to overlook what appeared to be a clear case of police misconduct and overturned the lower court's ruling.
But it's the Texas Court of Criminal Appeals that has the final say, and last week they agreed with the trial court. In a majority opinion, Judge Elsa Alcala wrote that, while Texas' "exclusionary rule" bans illegally seized evidence from trial, federal precedent dictates that it can be introduced if it was first confirmed by an independent source.
What if a neighbor calls cops and says they think you will do something with one of our weapons. Based on this ruling the police could kick in the door, seize your weapons and see how things turn out.
...Surely if someone said they were going to 'cook meth' then that's an admission of intent to commit a crime rather than a prediction?
...I mean if some said im going to kill the president wouldn't you expect them to be investigated?
Ironic that Texas the bastion of conservative thought would be the first state to institute "thought crime"...
Why am I not surprised?