Ok, obviously pot smoking 2 year olds is wrong...Follow

Well they were black, right? They *musta* been up to something.

Nexa

I once smoked with this dude who shotgunned the blunt to his little kids. They were probably right around the same age as these little black chaps. It wasn't really that funny, and I was way stoned.

If he does that to his own kids in front of you, what do think he does when nobody is around. Drop a dime on him, clear your conscience, it still bugs you to this day doesn't it.

That would be my first assumption, since the police generally do not search through video tapes at a home of a burglary victim (except perhaps surveilance tapes), but *do* search such things at the home of a suspect. Why did you assume differently?

Why do you assume they were burglary suspects?

Oh yeah, they were black. What a surprise.

Either way, searching a house for stolen goods isn't PC for watching video tapes, unless video tapes were the things stolen.



Edited, Mar 6th 2007 9:16pm by Smasharoo

I thought marijuana was medicinal? Are those making the accusations qaulifed MDs? Depending on where they're charged I'd rip them to a not guilty verdict faster than you could say Johnny COckrahn.

You don't know what was stolen. You also don't know what sort of warrant may have been issued for the search. Quite often, electronic media are *automatically* included in a search warrant


Almost never, actually, but if your entire knowledge of 4th amendment issues came from 'Law and Order' I could see how you'd arrive at that conclusion.

He took an ethics course once, remember?

Also apparently watches a lot of TV!

"We have a search warrant for a stolen van, open your refigerator."

All of which is irrelevant to the point that there was a burglary investigation and as part of that investigation, these video tapes were found.

Actually it's fairly relevant if the videotapes weren't proffered freely or part of the warrant or 'in plain sight', which here would mean literally playing on the television when the cops showed up.

Because if not, there's this minor obstacle called the Constitution of the United States that's going to get in the way of prosecuting this case with absolutely no evidence.


Silly me for assuming the most likely explanation which is that the home was being searched in conjunction with that investigation and the search included videotapes. Or do you think that the cops randomly decide to watch hours of random people's home movies for their health?

I think police abuse their powers of search and seizure almost constantly. Maybe they asked to watch them and someone said "sure". Who knows? Regardless. it just seemed an odd way to break this sort of crime. CPS swooping in and 'rescuing' the kids is another discussion entirely, I'm not sure I'm ok with that either, if this is the extent of the evidence. None of the people charged were the guardians of the kids. Do they take kids away from parents when the baby sitter punches them in the face?

Well, if it contributed to the children being removed from the home, I'm gonna say Jesus put those tapes in the cop's hadns and be done with it. We all know there is no arguing against Jesus.