sgresso
Long hair Dork
not yet
the papers have been really quiet on what the full story is.
If i hear any more info I i will definally post it for you all.
Illegal Trespass ...???!!!!!
- Thread starter mwilson788
- Start date
not yet
the papers have been really quiet on what the full story is.
If i hear any more info I i will definally post it for you all.
That's not necessarily true. I don't have anything in my home to hide but if the cops, inspectors, or any other gov. agent came knocking they'd damn well better have a warrant. Just because they are "authority" figures doesn't mean I have to invite them in for a Jack and coke and allow them to rummage through my stack of porno mags and KY.
All joking aside....
I think whether the woman was in the right or not as a gov. agent it was her responsibility to handle the situation professionally. It couldn't have taken more than a day for her to go and get a warrant. That old hippy didn't appear to be in any huge hurry to cover that shit up until he got finished suckin the hookah.
Texas Cop
Cavalry Scout
That's just the thing, she didn't have a warrant because she didn't need one, and wasn't enforcing any legal action at that point; be it taking the person into custody (an arrest warrant) or searching for and seizing property described within the warrant (search warrant, which could also be an arrest warrant in Texas)..No warrant is involved in any of this because she is not there to place anyone or anything in custody, it is not a criminal action in other words..
She was there to inspect whatever it was that was passing off the neighbors, and in her capacity as (whatever) she was fullfiling her duty to the public by entering the property and inspecting whatever it was (for example a restraunt being inspected for sanitary reasons, done without permission or prior knowledge of the proprietor at times, building inspections during construction, etc.)....
That's the way I understand it anyways, but again, I wouldn't be happy if I was the guy here, and the woman should have probably returned to whatever agency authorized her inspection, told them of the problem, and returned with some paperwork to pacify the guy...
drew
cvm4
BoM - July '05 & Dec. '10
Kinda hard to hide a big ass hole in your yard though. They never went into his house so that point is rather moot. Like Drew said, she was inspecting and not necessarily confiscating anything.
PetersCreek
Brother Borealis
Guess I'm guilty as hell in your book, then. I have nothing illegal to hide (well, mostly) but I guard my rights jealously. If I have nothing to hide, they have nothing to look for...and the onus is on them to prove otherwise. Not me. Them. Excercising your rights is not an admission of guilt.
That said, as far as I understand, this is a markedly different area of law than criminal law enforcement, warrants, and probable cause. My non-lawyerly understanding is that certain workers and officials are typically authorized reasonable access to publicly accessible portions of private property when required. But it seems to me that any offical doing so had damned well better be prepared to precisely cite his or her authority and purpose.
cvm4
BoM - July '05 & Dec. '10
It'd be a different story if the police wanted to search, I'm with ya there Brett. But you could clearly see what he was doing from the road and I don't believe the lady needed a warrant to look at what he was doing in detail.
Texas Cop
Cavalry Scout
As I said, the situation was pretty jacked up, and she did not handle it well, I probably would have met her at my property line with a gun unless she could actually describe to me what she was doing, and under what authority she was doing it. I would've told the deupty to get a clue or get back into his car, and I would've told her to come back when she could tell me WTF she was doing. She should've left the minute she perceived a confrontation and come back with a few more friends and a better explanation for the guy. Or hell, just got back in her car, made a phone call, and had some people come out to explain it. That, I think, was the whole damned problem. She wouldn't/couldn't explain to the property owner what she was doing, and on what authority she was doing it. That would've pissed me off as well. But his demands for a warrant, as I explained, make no sense, as no warrant is involved in this matter....
drew
drew
Greg
BoM October 2006
I don't think a gun would be necessary to handle that woman. She could have easily been removed by force.
Now, if you're going to pull a gun on that deputy, whether he's on your property or not....Well let's just say that would be a very big mistake. If he came into your house threatening you, that's a different issue all together.
Now, if you're going to pull a gun on that deputy, whether he's on your property or not....Well let's just say that would be a very big mistake. If he came into your house threatening you, that's a different issue all together.
Pulling a gun on anyone in that situation is a bad idea. That deputy looked just redneck enough to pop a few off in you whether or not he had a good reason.
He prolly goes home at night and whacks off to old copies of G&A
He prolly goes home at night and whacks off to old copies of G&A
Texas Cop
Cavalry Scout
I didn't say I'd pull it on anybody, just said I'd have met them with one. I am on my property, I can carry a gun all I want (hell, for that matter I can carry one almost *everywehre* in the state, with just a few exceptions)....
That deputy is a danger to himself, and the people he is trying to protect, ignorance is one thing, but showing your ignorance, and acting on it is a recipe for disaster. Like I said, he should get a clue, or get back in his car. He should've never agreed to accompany the woman unless he knew the situation (seems like even he didn't know WTF the woman was there for) and the possible legal ramifications of it. just my not so humble opinions here..
That deputy is a danger to himself, and the people he is trying to protect, ignorance is one thing, but showing your ignorance, and acting on it is a recipe for disaster. Like I said, he should get a clue, or get back in his car. He should've never agreed to accompany the woman unless he knew the situation (seems like even he didn't know WTF the woman was there for) and the possible legal ramifications of it. just my not so humble opinions here..
I think that is what this whole situation boils down to is ignorance on the part of the authorities. They may have technically been in the right to search the premises but they went about it in a manner that made it look worse than it should have.
Quadry
Master Shake
He just spouts off a law and then number and people shut up. Make others feel stupid and this happens. I have a feeling this guy was waiting on something like this, so he could bring up the laws.
I do agree that he should not let them on.
I do agree that he should not let them on.