That one is absurdly easy. You rescue the kid which is, after all, the
most important part of this whole thing. The kids parents report the
kid missing. You investigate based off of the missing childrens report
and are able to create a chain of custody that to find evidence that
does not include the traffic stop.

As for the drunk driver, if the guy is drunk then there is probable
cause based on the evidence that is front of the cops face...dude is
shit faced, can't keep his eyes open and reeks of alcohol. None of
that evidence requires any invasive search and is readily admissible.

This case really isn't rocket science. It takes a set of neocon
"justices" on the Supreme Court to torture the 4th amendment into
compliance with their world view. Strict constructionalists my ass.

Judah

On Fri, Jan 16, 2009 at 6:36 AM, G Money <[email protected]> wrote:
> On Thu, Jan 15, 2009 at 5:03 PM, Judah McAuley <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>> I honestly don't care what the guy was busted for.
>
>
> Hmmm....cop finds thousands of pictures of kiddie porn and a 6 year old kid
> bound and gagged in the trunk.
>
> oops....search was illegal...let the guy go with your apologies.
>
> You sure you don't care what he was busted for?
>
> A more realistic example, what if the guy is so drunk he can't even keep his
> eyes open?

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~|
Adobe® ColdFusion® 8 software 8 is the most important and dramatic release to 
date
Get the Free Trial
http://ad.doubleclick.net/clk;207172674;29440083;f

Archive: 
http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/cf-community/message.cfm/messageid:285157
Subscription: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/cf-community/subscribe.cfm
Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/unsubscribe.cfm?user=89.70.5

Reply via email to