Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News Editorials & Other Articles General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search
 

Lee-Lee

(6,324 posts)
28. This kind of stuff is done on the local level too
Fri Aug 9, 2013, 12:01 PM
Aug 2013

I am against it as it is being done here, for sure. But police in every department will use pretext stops to stop a vehicle they have information that may have drugs, the driver have warrants, be drunk, etc.

One example- a bartender at a biker bar would often drop a text if she thought somebody was leaving the bar DUI. No way she could have stopped them in that environment, and had the officers listed her as the informant she would have at a minimum lost her job and not been able to help get more drunks off the road, if not saw repercussions from the clientele there.

So when she reported one they looked for it, watched until they had a good, legitimate reason to initiate a traffic stop, and went from there.

The key was making sure that the reason for the traffic stop was good enough to stand on its own in court.

The big difference here is this was a person voluntarily reporting observations of behavior in a public place, and not info gathered from deep spying on people.

Recommendations

0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):

Wait ProSense Aug 2013 #1
So if any of this happened after 2008, you are against it, right? Warren Stupidity Aug 2013 #2
There is that "if" ProSense Aug 2013 #3
I see once again you cannot answer a simple question. Warren Stupidity Aug 2013 #7
What does it matter when it started? It's still going on!!!!! dkf Aug 2013 #6
The info was pulled in 2007, and you ProSense Aug 2013 #8
SOD is still in use today and is reviewed annually. dkf Aug 2013 #9
"They declined to provide Reuters with a copy of their most recent review." ProSense Aug 2013 #10
Well you seem to think its old news and is no longer going on or something. dkf Aug 2013 #11
I notice that your interlocator has moved on, and didn't answer the question. leveymg Aug 2013 #12
Must be hard to live with all the dissonance. dkf Aug 2013 #13
It's a strain on the psyche to be a True-Believer or a True-Fan----. leveymg Aug 2013 #16
It's a 2005 document pulled in 2007. Pointing to a non-response ProSense Aug 2013 #14
From two current DEA officials: dkf Aug 2013 #15
Thanx for that. Helps if you read the article, instead of just posting for effect. leveymg Aug 2013 #17
You keep posting from the same article ProSense Aug 2013 #19
Whoa are you asserting the entire Federal justice system is informing all defendants when FAA info dkf Aug 2013 #20
LOL! So now you decide to dismiss the point? ProSense Aug 2013 #21
I am not aware of a single case where it has been cited. When the first incidence pops up... dkf Aug 2013 #22
Who doesn't want their intelligence all nice and squeaky clean? n/t Fumesucker Aug 2013 #4
K & R !!! WillyT Aug 2013 #5
K & R GiaGiovanni Aug 2013 #18
K&R woo me with science Aug 2013 #23
This is the type of behavior we used to use woo me with science Aug 2013 #24
This is what totalitarian states do. woo me with science Aug 2013 #25
That's the best description of it Recursion Aug 2013 #26
kick woo me with science Aug 2013 #27
This kind of stuff is done on the local level too Lee-Lee Aug 2013 #28
You hit it on the head...A true anonymous tip is a legitimate tool. dkf Aug 2013 #29
knr cui bono Jan 2014 #30
Latest Discussions»General Discussion»"Parallel construction" i...»Reply #28