Jump to content

leagal question


whirlwind

Recommended Posts

  • Replies 28
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

A police officer once told me that the visible empty beer bottles locked in the back of my pickup topper gave him enough probable cause to search the cab of my pickup.

 

Those beers were consumed many hours before at the end of a day of climbing at Falling Rock, SD. We thought we were being good sports by taking those few bottles with us instead of throwing them over the edge. Never again will I leave empties visible in my vehicle....anywhere.

 

edit: oh yeah, he told me he pulled me over because I drifted toward the center line as we met each other on outskirts of BFE, SD. Mind you, I wasn't speeding, nor did I cross the center line....just "drifted" toward the center line.

 

So in answer to your question, YES, they can pull you over even if you're doing absolutely nothing wrong because they can easily make something up or cite some obscure technicality.

Edited by Thinker
Link to comment
Share on other sites

an officer must have 'probable cause' to pull you over, but Thinker is correct that they can pretty much make up whatever they want as a justification if they really want to pull you over, such as "he was driving erratically." In the traffic stop context, probable cause only means that "the officer subjectively believes that the infraction occurred and that belief is objectively reasonable under the circumstances." In other words, they don't have to be right that you actually committed an infraction, they just have to have a reasonable belief that you did.

 

So the question is... why did the cop say he was pulling you over?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

he ran my plates and said he pulled me over because the registered owner of the vehicle had a suspened licence.

i did not break the law, other than not having a licence, my question on probable cuase was i guess should have been aimed at what is the proble cuase of running the plates of a vehicle, or is it simply SOP

Link to comment
Share on other sites

maybe under your totalitarian regime, but not down here in the People's Republic of Oregon, where checkpoints are unconstitutional.

 

If you can get auto insurance before your court date, and show up with proof of insurace, the judge may let you walk on that $570 ticket, or at least cut it significantly, but it sounds like it wasn't your car, so this gets even more complicated.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

an old climbing partner of mine had an interesting theory.

 

He opined that cops usually drive cars and usually screw with other people driving cars, and that the way to avoid 90% of the typical legal problems is simply not to drive.

 

Of course this guy, himself, had a suspended license and walked all over town in huge leather Scarpa mountaineering boots. He had much more time to think of those esoteric connections than most of us did.

 

It makes sense to me, though. It's much easier to walk home undetected thru the back streets after the bar closes than it is to drive home without problems.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.




×
×
  • Create New...