Supreme Court Gives Police New Power To Act On Anonymous Tips
WASHINGTON (AP) - The Supreme Court says an anonymous tip can be sufficient to justify a decision by police to pull a car over on suspicion of reckless or drunken driving.
The justices voted 5-4 Tuesday [4-22-14] to uphold a traffic stop in northern California in which officers subsequently found marijuana in the vehicle. The officers themselves did not see any evidence of reckless driving.
Justice Clarence Thomas said the tip phoned in to 911 that a Ford pickup truck had run the caller off the road was sufficiently reliable to allow for the traffic stop without violating the driver's constitutional rights.
Justice Antonin Scalia wrote the dissent in which he called Thomas' opinion "a freedom-destroying cocktail."
***
[source] “A freedom-destroying cocktail.” - Here are some of Scalia’s points, in which he was joined by Justices Ruth Bader Ginsburg, Elena Kagan and Sonia Sotomayor:
1. Law enforcement agencies follow closely our judgments on matters such as this, and they will identify at once our new rule: So long as the caller identifies where the car is, anonymous claims of a single instance of possibly careless or reckless driving, called in to 911, will support a traffic stop. This is not my concept, and I am sure would not be the Framers’, of a people secure from unreasonable searches and seizures.
2. Anonymity is especially suspicious with respect to the call that is the subject of the present case. When does a victim complain to the police about an arguably criminal act (running the victim off the road) without giving his identity, so that he can accuse and testify when the culprit is caught?
3. The Court’s opinion serves up a freedom-destroying cocktail consisting of two parts patent falsity: (1) that anonymous 911 reports of traffic violations are reliable so long as they correctly identify a car and its location, and (2) that a single instance of careless or reckless driving necessarily supports a reasonable suspicion of drunkenness. All the malevolent 911 caller need do is assert a traffic violation, and the targeted car will be stopped, forcibly if necessary, by the police. If the driver turns out not to be drunk (which will almost always be the case), the caller need fear no consequences, even if 911 knows his identity. After all, he never alleged drunkenness, but merely called in a traffic violation—and on that point his word is as good as his victim’s.
4. Drunken driving is a serious matter, but so is the loss of our freedom to come and go as we please without police interference. To prevent and detect murder we do not allow searches without probable cause or targeted Terry stops without reasonable suspicion. We should not do so for drunken driving either. After today’s opinion all of us on the road, and not just drug dealers, are at risk of having our freedom of movement curtailed on suspicion of drunkenness, based upon a phone tip, true or false, of a single instance of careless driving.
------------------------------------------------------------------
Very simply, there is no other way to categorize this than to call it what it is: gestapo power. And to see in it a progression of a systematic attack on the Bill of Rights. Note especially the comment in section 1 above: "Law enforcement agencies....will identify at once our new rule".
Compare:
6-3-13 SCOTUS Rules 'Police State' Has More Right To Your DNA Than You Do - 6/3/13 "Washington (CNN) -- The Supreme Court has ruled criminal suspects can be subjected to a police DNA test after arrest -- before trial and conviction..."The court's opinion barely mentions the crucial fact about this case: the search here was entirely suspicionless. The police had no reason to believe King's DNA would link him to any crime."
4-12-12 NWO Update: SCOTUS Strips Americans Naked ""The Supreme Court ruled Monday that those arrested for even minor violations may be strip-searched before being admitted to jail, saying safety concerns outweigh personal privacy rights" - The symbolism here is obvious, and can only be NWO intentional. This new Supreme Court enabled strip-search 'right' for even the most minor of infractions realistically finalizes the transformation of America into a true police state. The symbolic message the kabalist NWO-ers are sending is that Americans have now been stripped naked - they have no more rights. "
Just over a year ago this systematic 'stripping' was openly and proudly flaunted in a 3-8-13 White House ceremony naming John Brennan as the new head of the CIA. Make no mistake, exactly as seen in yesterday's ruling and the two other examples above, what was symbolically playacted that day in the White House is exactly what is now being systematically 'acted out' - completely doing away with the Bill of Rights:
Brennan Takes CIA Oath On Pre-Legal 1787 Constitution Without Bill Of Rights; Teddy Roosevelt Symbolism 3-9-13 ""That means: No freedom of speech and of the press, no right to bear arms, no Fourth Amendment ban on “unreasonable searches and seizures,” and no right to a jury trial"...There is a name for government that does not recognize any "rule of law" other than a 'big stick'. It is called totalitarianism..." [see post]
It's 2014 and it's 666 or bust for the cabalistas. Be very very aware. Rev. 18:4
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
1Thes. 5:3 'For when they shall say, Peace and safety; then sudden destruction cometh upon them, as travail upon a woman with child; and they shall not escape' [the 'ZWO' will never stand]
WASHINGTON (AP) - The Supreme Court says an anonymous tip can be sufficient to justify a decision by police to pull a car over on suspicion of reckless or drunken driving.
The justices voted 5-4 Tuesday [4-22-14] to uphold a traffic stop in northern California in which officers subsequently found marijuana in the vehicle. The officers themselves did not see any evidence of reckless driving.
Justice Clarence Thomas said the tip phoned in to 911 that a Ford pickup truck had run the caller off the road was sufficiently reliable to allow for the traffic stop without violating the driver's constitutional rights.
Justice Antonin Scalia wrote the dissent in which he called Thomas' opinion "a freedom-destroying cocktail."
***
[source] “A freedom-destroying cocktail.” - Here are some of Scalia’s points, in which he was joined by Justices Ruth Bader Ginsburg, Elena Kagan and Sonia Sotomayor:
1. Law enforcement agencies follow closely our judgments on matters such as this, and they will identify at once our new rule: So long as the caller identifies where the car is, anonymous claims of a single instance of possibly careless or reckless driving, called in to 911, will support a traffic stop. This is not my concept, and I am sure would not be the Framers’, of a people secure from unreasonable searches and seizures.
2. Anonymity is especially suspicious with respect to the call that is the subject of the present case. When does a victim complain to the police about an arguably criminal act (running the victim off the road) without giving his identity, so that he can accuse and testify when the culprit is caught?
3. The Court’s opinion serves up a freedom-destroying cocktail consisting of two parts patent falsity: (1) that anonymous 911 reports of traffic violations are reliable so long as they correctly identify a car and its location, and (2) that a single instance of careless or reckless driving necessarily supports a reasonable suspicion of drunkenness. All the malevolent 911 caller need do is assert a traffic violation, and the targeted car will be stopped, forcibly if necessary, by the police. If the driver turns out not to be drunk (which will almost always be the case), the caller need fear no consequences, even if 911 knows his identity. After all, he never alleged drunkenness, but merely called in a traffic violation—and on that point his word is as good as his victim’s.
4. Drunken driving is a serious matter, but so is the loss of our freedom to come and go as we please without police interference. To prevent and detect murder we do not allow searches without probable cause or targeted Terry stops without reasonable suspicion. We should not do so for drunken driving either. After today’s opinion all of us on the road, and not just drug dealers, are at risk of having our freedom of movement curtailed on suspicion of drunkenness, based upon a phone tip, true or false, of a single instance of careless driving.
------------------------------------------------------------------
Very simply, there is no other way to categorize this than to call it what it is: gestapo power. And to see in it a progression of a systematic attack on the Bill of Rights. Note especially the comment in section 1 above: "Law enforcement agencies....will identify at once our new rule".
Compare:
6-3-13 SCOTUS Rules 'Police State' Has More Right To Your DNA Than You Do - 6/3/13 "Washington (CNN) -- The Supreme Court has ruled criminal suspects can be subjected to a police DNA test after arrest -- before trial and conviction..."The court's opinion barely mentions the crucial fact about this case: the search here was entirely suspicionless. The police had no reason to believe King's DNA would link him to any crime."
4-12-12 NWO Update: SCOTUS Strips Americans Naked ""The Supreme Court ruled Monday that those arrested for even minor violations may be strip-searched before being admitted to jail, saying safety concerns outweigh personal privacy rights" - The symbolism here is obvious, and can only be NWO intentional. This new Supreme Court enabled strip-search 'right' for even the most minor of infractions realistically finalizes the transformation of America into a true police state. The symbolic message the kabalist NWO-ers are sending is that Americans have now been stripped naked - they have no more rights. "
Just over a year ago this systematic 'stripping' was openly and proudly flaunted in a 3-8-13 White House ceremony naming John Brennan as the new head of the CIA. Make no mistake, exactly as seen in yesterday's ruling and the two other examples above, what was symbolically playacted that day in the White House is exactly what is now being systematically 'acted out' - completely doing away with the Bill of Rights:
Brennan Takes CIA Oath On Pre-Legal 1787 Constitution Without Bill Of Rights; Teddy Roosevelt Symbolism 3-9-13 ""That means: No freedom of speech and of the press, no right to bear arms, no Fourth Amendment ban on “unreasonable searches and seizures,” and no right to a jury trial"...There is a name for government that does not recognize any "rule of law" other than a 'big stick'. It is called totalitarianism..." [see post]
It's 2014 and it's 666 or bust for the cabalistas. Be very very aware. Rev. 18:4
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
1Thes. 5:3 'For when they shall say, Peace and safety; then sudden destruction cometh upon them, as travail upon a woman with child; and they shall not escape' [the 'ZWO' will never stand]
No comments :
Post a Comment