• The KillerFrogs

Sewo arrested, controlled substance

Hoosierfrog

Hoosierfrog

Tier 1
Billy Clyde said:
Laughing to keep from crying. Using your logic I could set up a task force on Bryant-Irvin at Mira Vista, ignoring all other parts of Fort Worth, catching people failing to come to a complete stop before turning right on red onto Bryant-Irvin... Thus proving conclusively that only Trinity Valley School people or Mira Vista residents commit traffic offenses. You'd agree that's what it would prove, right? It amazes me the contortions some people will put themselves through to defend the indefensible.
Click to expand...

It would highlight who was not coming to a complete stop, would it not? Talk about twisting language. Criminal defense But the FBI national stats don’t zero in on intersections or neighborhoods, at least as I understand it.
 
Eight

Eight

Member
i don't think it is a matter of athletes forgetting that people are watching, but collectively that for many athletes they have been able to avoid some of the same scrutiny as others because they have an ability we value.

the nfl has shown time and time again that if a prospect is talented enough they will forgive a transgression or two.

story really isn't new as for a centuries certain individuals have been granted favor and grace do to their talents, wealth, and looks.
 
tcudoc

tcudoc

Full Member
Frog-in-law1995 said:


phrasal-verbs-spanish.jpg
Click to expand...


I lol'ed out loud.
 
Atomic Frawg

Atomic Frawg

Full Member
Billy Clyde said:
No. You need probable cause for a search, at least in the context being discussed here. Reasonable suspicion only allows you to detain someone while you investigate the circumstances to see if there are additional factors that can be discovered to give you probable cause. If the officer can articulate specific facts which give him or her cause to fear for their own safety, they can do a pat-down of the person for weapons. But you can't just go rummaging through a vehicle looking for drugs without probable cause, absent consent.
Click to expand...
This, and never, EVER, consent to a search. Rule of thumb, if they have to ask then they don't have grounds. Asking is an admission that they don't have probable cause to search your vehicle. If they attempt to search you, ask them to "articulate" why they feel threatened and want to touch you. If the circumstances don't warrant a safety concern for the police, let them know you consider a search of your person as offensive, and thereby an assault. If they continue to attempt the search, allow it. Further, should you not find the fortitude in the moment to assert your right to deny a search and you consent, you can withdraw the consent and stop the search at any time, and the officer must stop the search. He who gives the authority can withdraw the authority.

If a cop believes he or she has probable cause to conduct the search, the cop will not bother to ask. Therefore, if you invoke your right to deny consent, AND THEN the officer decides he or she smells weed, you are setting the officer up for an official oppression charge and a motion to suppress. Police can detain you no longer than it takes to accomplish the initial purpose of the stop unless some action or circumstances, more than a hunch or fishing expedition, gives rise to further detention, and the exercising of a right does not qualify. So odd to read people's expressions on the "consequences" of exercising your rights as opposed to being more upset that the rights were violated in the first place. That's baffling.

As for Sewo, he was booked in yesterday on two charges, possession of drug paraphernalia (a ticket for which the bond was $271, and usually not an arrest-worthy offense) and for PCS 1-4g PG2 (for which the bond was $4k). He is not in jail, and expect the next report to state that his father got charged by the Kingwood County DA with ABI-FM for striking Sewo about the head and face with a closed fist.
 
Last edited:
Frog-in-law1995

Frog-in-law1995

Active Member
Atomic Frawg said:
This, and never, EVER, consent to a search. Rule of thumb, if they have to ask then they don't have grounds. Asking is an admission that they don't have probable cause to search your vehicle. If they attempt to search you, ask them to "articulate" why they feel threatened and want to touch you. If the circumstances don't warrant a safety concern for the police, let them know you consider a search of your person as offensive, and thereby an assault. If they continue to attempt the search, allow it. Further, should you not find the fortitude in the moment to assert your right to deny a search and you consent, you can withdraw the consent and stop the search at any time, and they officer must stop the search. He he gives the authority can withdraw the authority.

If a cop believes he or she has probable cause to conduct the search, the cop will not bother to ask. Therefore, if you invoke your right to deny consent, AND THEN the officer decides he or she smells weed, you are setting the officer up for official oppression charge and a motion to suppress. Police can detain you no longer than it takes to accomplish the initial purpose of the stop unless some action or circumstances, more than a hunch or fishing expedition, gives rise to further detention, and the exercising of a right does not qualify.
Click to expand...

I was gonna say all this, but I’m so high.
 
Billy Clyde

Billy Clyde

Active Member
Atomic Frawg said:
you can withdraw the consent and stop the search at any time, and the officer must stop the search. He who gives the authority can withdraw the authority.
.
Click to expand...

One of my favorite, "Would be hilarious if..." thoughts on searches is doing something along the lines of, "Sure no problem- You can search everywhere EXCEPT the console, glovebox, etc. Heeheehee." Another amusing variation would be, "You're getting WARMER / COLDER," and then withdraw consent. Of course I'd only suggest doing that if you are 100% clean, and have a good bit of time to kill.
 
ftwfrog

ftwfrog

Active Member
Atomic Frawg said:
This, and never, EVER, consent to a search. Rule of thumb, if they have to ask then they don't have grounds. Asking is an admission that they don't have probable cause to search your vehicle. If they attempt to search you, ask them to "articulate" why they feel threatened and want to touch you. If the circumstances don't warrant a safety concern for the police, let them know you consider a search of your person as offensive, and thereby an assault. If they continue to attempt the search, allow it. Further, should you not find the fortitude in the moment to assert your right to deny a search and you consent, you can withdraw the consent and stop the search at any time, and the officer must stop the search. He who gives the authority can withdraw the authority.

If a cop believes he or she has probable cause to conduct the search, the cop will not bother to ask. Therefore, if you invoke your right to deny consent, AND THEN the officer decides he or she smells weed, you are setting the officer up for an official oppression charge and a motion to suppress. Police can detain you no longer than it takes to accomplish the initial purpose of the stop unless some action or circumstances, more than a hunch or fishing expedition, gives rise to further detention, and the exercising of a right does not qualify. So odd to read people's expressions on the "consequences" of exercising your rights as opposed to being more upset that the rights were violated in the first place. That's baffling.

As for Sewo, he was booked in yesterday on two charges, possession of drug paraphernalia (a ticket for which the bond was $271, and usually not an arrest-worthy offense) and for PCS 1-4g PG2 (for which the bond was $4k). He is not in jail, and expect the next report to state that his father got charged by the Kingwood County DA with ABI-FM for striking Sewo about the head and face with a closed fist.
Click to expand...
No way I’m going to remember all this the next time I’m turnt up.
 

Latest posts

Top