Being Polite can get you in trouble.

[dogshawred]

Link Removed
~
The second highest in Ohio decided on Wednesday that police have no business searching a motorist during a routine traffic stop for being too polite. The Court of Appeals suppressed the evidence that allowed police to seize a .40 caliber Sig Sauer and a small bag of marijuana from Joshua A. Fontaine at 2:27 am on December 12, 2012.
*
On that day, Ohio State Highway patrolman Jared Haslar was running a speed trap on Pearl Road in Strongsville, where the speed limit is 35 MPH. Patrolman Haslar claims his radar gun clocked Fontaine at 45 MPH, so he pulled him over. In the course of the stop, Fontaine cheerfully handed over his license, proof of insurance, and registration. This caused the officer to suspect criminal activity.
*
“While speaking to Mr. Fontaine I felt that his body language and his behavior was a little bit unusual,” Patrolman Haslar testified. “He was extremely — like almost overly polite, and he was breathing heavily at times while I was talking to him.” :lol:
~
At what point does being polite become too polite, and at what point does being polite become suspicious?
~
http://www.thenewspaper.com/news/42/4273.asp
~
Ohio Court: Polite Drivers Are Not Suspicious
Ohio Court of Appeals throws out conviction of a man who was searched during a traffic stop because he was too polite.
*
Judge Mary J. BoyleThe second highest in Ohio decided on Wednesday that police have no business searching a motorist during a routine traffic stop for being too polite. The Court of Appeals suppressed the evidence that allowed police to seize a .40 caliber Sig Sauer and a small bag of marijuana from Joshua A. Fontaine at 2:27 am on December 12, 2012.
*
On that day, Ohio State Highway patrolman Jared Haslar was running a speed trap on Pearl Road in Strongsville, where the speed limit is 35 MPH. Patrolman Haslar claims his radar gun clocked Fontaine at 45 MPH, so he pulled him over. In the course of the stop, Fontaine cheerfully handed over his license, proof of insurance, and registration. This caused the officer to suspect criminal activity.
*
"While speaking to Mr. Fontaine I felt that his body language and his behavior was a little bit unusual," Patrolman Haslar testified. "He was extremely -- like almost overly polite, and he was breathing heavily at times while I was talking to him."
*
Patrolman Derek Feierabend was called in to bring a drug dog to sniff Fontaine's car while Patrolman Haslar wrote out a warning for speeding. Fontaine was ordered out of his car and searched for weapons.
*
"It's an officer's safety issue for the canine handler as he's walking the dog around because his attention is focused on running the dog around the vehicle, conducting a sniff, and it's difficult to be watching a person inside the vehicle and do the job with the canine as well," Patrolman Haslar testified.
*
The dog identified the small bag of marijuana in Fontaine's glove compartment. The three-judge appellate panel considered only the question of whether the initial search of Fontaine's car violated the Fourth Amendment protection against unreasonable searches. The court found that as soon as Patrolman Haslar finished writing the warning, he could not justify the search for drugs without some evidence that criminal activity was afoot.
*
"And here, we find that no such evidence exists," Judge Mary J. Boyle concluded. "We agree with the trial court that 'overly polite' and 'heavy breathing' are not sufficient indicators that give rise to a reasonable suspicion of criminal activity. These factors considered collectively simply do not support such a finding. Since Patrolman Haslar did not have a reasonable suspicion of criminal activity to warrant the canine sniff, the prolonged detention to do so violated Fontaine's constitutional Fourth Amendment rights."
*
A copy of the decision is available in a 45k PDF file at the source link below.
*
Source: PDF File Ohio v. Fontaine (Court of Appeals, State of Ohio, 11/27/2013)

 

[Paul_of_TX]

Unfortunately this is what happens when police departments violate our constitutional right first and then worry about a way to justify it afterwards. Next time the reason for an unconstitutional search will be because the guy was not polite enough, traveling on a public road (something criminals are known to do), had both hands on the steering wheel, looked wealthy enough to pay a fine and some fees to the city but not really rich enough to hire a really good attorney, driving exactly the same speed as the speed limit or operating a vehicle on a day that ends with a "y." They don't think they need a reason because you are probably guilty of something and they are sure they will be able to find it.

 

[Coyote Blue]

Ohio has brought us several forum worthy police procedure discussion situations! The "Terry Stop" comes to mind in 1963. Affirmed for Ohio by SCOTUS in 1968. Of course, so have many other states.:lol:

 

[JohnLM]

Am I the only one thinking B.S on the part of the police officer?:wub:

 

[leadsender]

A LE buddy of mind says that there are hundreds of little things that they can pull a driver over for. They can pull you over but, that does not mean that they can search your car just because. This office was out of line. My probable cause for searching your car is that you where too polite and nice. Sounds crazy because it was crazy and it should have been thrown out. Being nice and polite usually keeps you alive when coming in contact with law enforcement.

 

[superprincess]

Obviously, there is something going on with LEOs in America, this is becoming more common than ever before. Illegal searches are becoming so common, I am beginning to think, the laws maybe changing, and this is going to become the new law of the land. I hope I am wrong, and is their consequences when an illegal search is performed??? What happens after the fact, does the LEO receive time off or a write up??? Do we as American citizens, not have any protection from illegal searches??? Or is this just something which happens in the small towns of America??? Can someone please tell us what is going on???

 

[SR40c]

I've got news for everyone... If a LEO want's to do an illegal search, he will. They will make sh!t up when they want to. It's happened to me.

 

[unintentionalracist]

I've got news for everyone... If a LEO want's to do an illegal search, he will. They will make sh!t up when they want to. It's happened to me.

And every cop in the country will get behind that thin blue line and back him up. The tree of liberty is thirsty.

Sent from my Desire HD using Tapatalk 2

 

[Coyote Blue]

So much of the police 4th Amendment encroachment concerns began with the landmark "Terry Stop" case that I singled out in post #3. In an almost universal decision, the Supreme's in 1968 upheld for the State of Ohio, several challenges made by Terry and other parties. So much of what is wrong with police procedures today began there.

Terry v. Ohio, 392 U.S. 1 (1968), was a landmark decision by the United States Supreme Court which held that the Fourth Amendment prohibition on unreasonable searches and seizures is not violated when a police officer stops a suspect on the street and frisks him or her without probable cause to arrest, if the police officer has a reasonable suspicion that the person has committed, is committing, or is about to commit a crime and has a reasonable belief that the person "may be armed and presently dangerous."[1]

For their own protection, police may perform a quick surface search of the person’s outer clothing for weapons if they have reasonable suspicion that the person stopped is armed. This reasonable suspicion must be based on "specific and articulable facts" and not merely upon an officer's hunch. This permitted police action has subsequently been referred to in short as a "stop and frisk," or simply a "Terry frisk". The Terry standard was later extended to temporary detentions of persons in vehicles, known as traffic stops; see Terry stop for a summary of subsequent jurisprudence.

The rationale behind the Supreme Court decision revolves around the understanding that, as the opinion notes, "the exclusionary rule has its limitations." The meaning of the rule is to protect persons from unreasonable searches and seizures aimed at gathering evidence, not searches and seizures for other purposes (like prevention of crime or personal protection of police officers)

I worked daily for almost 20 years with dozens of cops, most of whom are good citizens. But there are always a few, in any department, of any size,that go off those rails constantly, and make LEO's overall look like ego driven, power trip enforcers. It's sad, but true. The negatives always get the most play.

 

[Peggy Reist]

Obviously, there is something going on with LEOs in America, this is becoming more common than ever before. Illegal searches are becoming so common, I am beginning to think, the laws maybe changing, and this is going to become the new law of the land. I hope I am wrong, and is their consequences when an illegal search is performed??? What happens after the fact, does the LEO receive time off or a write up??? Do we as American citizens, not have any protection from illegal searches??? Or is this just something which happens in the small towns of America??? Can someone please tell us what is going on???

I'd say it was less in the small towns. At least it rarely happens around here unless it happens only to out of area vehicles. I've never heard anyone I know complaining about it anyway. We have a shortage of LEOs though, so they've got better things to do.

 

[Peggy Reist]

I've got news for everyone... If a LEO want's to do an illegal search, he will. They will make sh!t up when they want to. It's happened to me.

Well yeah. I bet you were grinning at him just like your little avatar, weren't you? And I hope you know I'm just kidding.
What happened?

 

[telpinaro]

I'd say it was less in the small towns. At least it rarely happens around here unless it happens only to out of area vehicles. I've never heard anyone I know complaining about it anyway. We have a shortage of LEOs though, so they've got better things to do.

Same in this small town. Not sure about the police departments here, but in this area our sheriffs actually fight for our gun rights.

 

[vernsimpson]

I have a cop for a neighbor and I tried to get along with him for 14 years. He has always seemed to think he could do whatever he wanted to go. Even his kids seemed to think the same thing. I finally got tired of his crap and now we do not get along.

That is the way it is in the bigger cities. I came from a small town and they can not get away with this type of crap. In small towns most everyone is either related to others who are in charge or are good friends with them. So if any cop tried this type of crap they would get bounced out of their cushy jobs, the Chief would lose his and the Mayor would lose his job too!!!!!

 

[SR40c]

Well yeah. I bet you were grinning at him just like your little avatar, weren't you? And I hope you know I'm just kidding.
What happened?

No Peggy, I wasn't smiling and here is the shorter version of the story. I left out the verbal sparring with the fascists that happened throughout the BS.

Girlfriend and I were headed back to Iowa for vacation from San Diego and we were traveling on I70 through Utah. We were out in no mans land at about 2:30 a.m. and supposedly due to road construction, we were shuffled off the interstate a.k.a. detour. We were lit up shortly after, allegedly for speeding. The usual questions were asked, "where you from?" "where ya headed" etc. Then he asks to look in the car. I figure, ok, he's gonna check the back seat, console, glove box, and trunk and then be done with us. So I said it was ok. I just wanted to get going. He goes back to his car, comes back shortly and just stands there. I'm like; "Let's get this over with, we have a long drive yet." He's saying; "It will be a couple minutes, some others are on the way".

To shorten up a long story, an hour and 15 minutes after the initial stop, we were on our way. Looking back on it, I really do get it. Young white couple, in at the time, a brand new Buick Grand National passing through at 2:30 in the morning. Profiling, I get it. However, looking back on it now, I was damn lucky they didn't plant anything because I could tell they were pissed because they didn't find anything. Another thing that's funny, there was no mention of the alleged 10 over that I was supposedly doing. I did ask them why they really pulled me over. That's what they told me. "Young couple, nice car, California plates, headed east at 2:30 a.m."

One last thing, drug sniffing dogs are a ruse as well. If they want them to "hit", they will.

 

[kelcarry]

Obviously, there is something going on with LEOs in America, this is becoming more common than ever before. Illegal searches are becoming so common, I am beginning to think, the laws maybe changing, and this is going to become the new law of the land. I hope I am wrong, and is their consequences when an illegal search is performed??? What happens after the fact, does the LEO receive time off or a write up??? Do we as American citizens, not have any protection from illegal searches??? Or is this just something which happens in the small towns of America??? Can someone please tell us what is going on???

I will be glad to tell you what is happening. We have "changes" going on in this country that are rapidly dissolving the social and legal fabric of this country and bringing more anarchy and disregard of the law--as evidenced by our godking who ignores what he does not like in the law and makes his own laws as he sees fit. Unfortunately the LEOs in this country are on a front line and almost always alone when confronting a citizen who, almost by definition, has done something that is or appears to be a violation. I have gone on "ride alongs" in our town, which are encouraged and allowed anytime and anywhere and it is an eye opener. Not saying there are not "bad and abusive" LEOs--there are, but I would be willing to bet that the number of bad and illegal interractions with LEOs is less than 1% or all interractions with LEOs, but "it bleeds it leads" is the name of the game and "the squeaky wheel gets the grease" hold true. It is only the 1% that get treated to a spectacle in the news and even on this forum. Who wants to read about a good LEO? My opinion--heck that is what this forum is all about. No need to reply--I have said my piece and have no time to further review this thread.

 

[dogshawred]

No Peggy, I wasn't smiling and here is the shorter version of the story. I left out the verbal sparring with the fascists that happened throughout the BS.

Girlfriend and I were headed back to Iowa for vacation from San Diego and we were traveling on I70 through Utah. We were out in no mans land at about 2:30 a.m. and supposedly due to road construction, we were shuffled off the interstate a.k.a. detour. We were lit up shortly after, allegedly for speeding. The usual questions were asked, "where you from?" "where ya headed" etc. Then he asks to look in the car. I figure, ok, he's gonna check the back seat, console, glove box, and trunk and then be done with us. So I said it was ok. I just wanted to get going. He goes back to his car, comes back shortly and just stands there. I'm like; "Let's get this over with, we have a long drive yet." He's saying; "It will be a couple minutes, some others are on the way".

To shorten up a long story, an hour and 15 minutes after the initial stop, we were on our way. Looking back on it, I really do get it. Young white couple, in at the time, a brand new Buick Grand National passing through at 2:30 in the morning. Profiling, I get it. However, looking back on it now, I was damn lucky they didn't plant anything because I could tell they were pissed because they didn't find anything. Another thing that's funny, there was no mention of the alleged 10 over that I was supposedly doing. I did ask them why they really pulled me over. That's what they told me. "Young couple, nice car, California plates, headed east at 2:30 a.m."

One last thing, drug sniffing dogs are a ruse as well. If they want them to "hit", they will.

You didn't say when this occurred and what part of I-70. I was wondering if the officer's name was Turner

 

[Coyote Blue]

I will be glad to tell you what is happening. We have "changes" going on in this country that are rapidly dissolving the social and legal fabric of this country and bringing more anarchy and disregard of the law--as evidenced by our godking who ignores what he does not like in the law and makes his own laws as he sees fit. Unfortunately the LEOs in this country are on a front line and almost always alone when confronting a citizen who, almost by definition, has done something that is or appears to be a violation. I have gone on "ride alongs" in our town, which are encouraged and allowed anytime and anywhere and it is an eye opener. Not saying there are not "bad and abusive" LEOs--there are, but I would be willing to bet that the number of bad and illegal interractions with LEOs is less than 1% or all interractions with LEOs, but "it bleeds it leads" is the name of the game and "the squeaky wheel gets the grease" hold true. It is only the 1% that get treated to a spectacle in the news and even on this forum. Who wants to read about a good LEO? My opinion--heck that is what this forum is all about. No need to reply--I have said my piece and have no time to further review this thread.

All is not lost, kelcarry! If you read my post #9 in this thread, you can see we share many thoughts. I have a greater understanding of cops attitudes,emotions and practices than most on this forum, due to my everyday proximity, in a fair sized city, with over 150 officers, for almost 20 years.

To state again, most cops are decent guys, (even in the Miami area! :biggrin want to do a professional job of work,inter-act well with their fellow citizens that they encounter every day,and like all of the rest of us, get home safely at the end of the working shift. Every profession has its bad seeds. LEO's stand out due to their arrest powers,the uniform, and the badge of authority.

The entertainment business has put them on a pedestal (for the most part) during the past 80 years. In 1930 and before, very few parents wanted their children to go into LE. Like the military, it was considered a bottom rung position, socially and financially. All that has changed in the last 4 generations. My small town of 7,000 has its own SWAT team and 15 officers plus the Chief! Does it need it? I don't think so. But competition within LE itself has brought it to the quasi-military cop state we see today, along with so much assistance from our pervasive Federal Government.

Off the soapbox now and forward to Happy Hour at 4! :smile:

 

[Warrior1256]

So much of the police 4th Amendment encroachment concerns began with the landmark "Terry Stop" case that I singled out in post #3. In an almost universal decision, the Supreme's in 1968 upheld for the State of Ohio, several challenges made by Terry and other parties. So much of what is wrong with police procedures today began there.



I worked daily for almost 20 years with dozens of cops, most of whom are good citizens. But there are always a few, in any department, of any size,that go off those rails constantly, and make LEO's overall look like ego driven, power trip enforcers. It's sad, but true. The negatives always get the most play.

Agreed.

 

[SR40c]

You didn't say when this occurred and what part of I-70. I was wondering if the officer's name was Turner

Well, I can tell you it was 1988. Where on I70, no clue. It's just been too long ago. As far as the names of the Utah Patrolmen, no clue either. There were too many and again, too long ago. All I know now is, that if they tried exact thing today, I would probably end up in jail. Because if I know I'm not speeding, which I wasn't then, and they try that sh!t today, the windows would be up and the doors locked. F'em.

 

[dogshawred]

Well, I can tell you it was 1988. Where on I70, no clue. It's just been too long ago. As far as the names of the Utah Patrolmen, no clue either. There were too many and again, too long ago. All I know now is, that if they tried exact thing today, I would probably end up in jail. Because if I know I'm not speeding, which I wasn't then, and they try that sh!t today, the windows would be up and the doors locked. F'em.

Post-Turner era, Turner was a state trooper who was a cop's cop and patrolled West I-70 across the Salt Flat area like it was his own. Lived in Utah during the 70's and knew him through a friend, during several of my trips back East to Ohio, I had truckers ask over the CB if my name was Turner since I was running Utah plates and that was East of the Mississippi River. He was that well known by truckers who he used to target. Just curious.