Dismiss Notice

Welcome To CK5!

Registering is free and easy! Hope to see you on the forums soon.

Score a FREE t-shirt and membership sticker when you sign up for a Premium Membership and choose the recurring plan.

unfair warning

Discussion in 'The Lounge' started by Z3PR, Apr 27, 2002.

  1. Z3PR

    Z3PR Banned

    Joined:
    Mar 30, 2002
    Posts:
    19,217
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    Everywhere
    The state Legislature has given police power to search your home without
    telling you why.
    April 24, 2002
    Two new laws, which took effect Monday as part of anti-terror efforts, also
    shield from public scrutiny the reasons for police searches. Defense lawyers
    and civil libertarians are outraged at the laws, which make search warrants
    and supporting documents such as affidavits non-public records. "If you think
    the police did secretive work before, just wait," defense attorney William
    Cataldo said. "It gives more power to the ignorant and more power to those
    who would take your rights." Defense lawyer Walter Piszczatowski said: "This
    is nuts, this is beyond nuts. "What happened to the Fourth Amendment? We're
    living in a police state." That means the public, the press, and in some
    cases even the person accused of the crime, can't know why the police entered
    a home without permission. Under previous laws, the records were public,
    unless a judge ordered them sealed for a specific reason. In federal courts,
    that remains the case. But now, search warrants in state courts are
    automatically closed to public view. "I think this is absolutely
    unconstitutional," said Dawn Phillips, a First Amendment lawyer with the
    Michigan Press Association. "We objected to it at the time. This thing passed
    like greased lightning." The House portion of the bill passed unanimously and
    the Senate version passed 27-8. The chief sponsor of the bill in the state
    senate was Shirley Johnson (R-Royal Oak) while Bill Bullard (R-Highland
    Township) was a cosponsor. In the state House, Nancy Cassis (R-Novi) was
    among 20 sponsors. The American Civil Liberties Union also objected to the
    law's change. ACLU spokeswoman Wendy Wagenheim said the group is reviewing
    the law. Law enforcement supported the changes. Oakland County Prosecutor
    David Gorcyca said the laws protect victims, witnesses and confidential
    informants. Gorcyca said the procedure for obtaining a search warrant didn't
    change, nor did the rights of the defendant to challenge a bad warrant or the
    ill-gotten gains of an illegal search. "When affidavits are filed, previously
    they divulged a large portion of the investigation and where it was heading
    and that could hamper the investigation and the direction of the
    investigation," Gorcyca said. "It doesn't mean you can circumvent the
    judicial process. All we're doing is suppressing the contents of the
    affidavit. It does prevent the public and the media from obtaining
    information during the investigation but it doesn't prevent the defendant and
    the defense attorney from challenging the search warrant." Gorcyca cited drug
    conspiracy cases as those where witnesses are frequently in danger unless
    their identity is kept private during the investigation. "In the drug world,
    witnesses are fearful all the time," he said. "Those are reluctant witnesses
    who are afraid to come forward and testify. In those cases, fear and
    intimidation is real. That's why grand juries are so vital. And this provides
    the same secrecy as a grand jury and does not impugn anyone's rights." Civil
    libertarians say those goals can be met with a much narrower approach, like
    the one used in federal court. "A judicial finding needs to be made on a
    case-by-case basis," said David Moran, a constitutional law professor at
    Wayne State University in Detroit. When police are investigating a crime and
    they believe evidence is stored in someone's home, car or other private
    place, they must submit a sworn affidavit to the court spelling out their
    case. A judge reviews the document, then decides if there is enough evidence
    to search without the owner's permission. The Fourth Amendment to the U.S.
    Constitution requires "probable cause" to issue a warrant and notes they must
    be written "particularly describing the place to be searched and the persons
    or things to be seized." The changes are contained in two new laws - public
    acts 112 and 128. State Court administrator John Ferry Jr. spelled out the
    changes to courts across the state in a memo last Friday. Public act 112
    makes "all search warrants, affidavits and tabulations in any court file or
    record retention system nonpublic," according to Ferry's memo. The memo goes
    on to say that public act 128 "provides for suppression of a search warrant
    affidavit upon a showing that it is necessary to protect an ongoing
    investigation or the privacy or the safety of a victim or witness." When
    contacted Tuesday for clarification on the memo, a spokeswoman for the state
    court administrator's office declined comment. Marcia McBrien said the laws
    could appear before the Supreme Court for interpretation and it would be
    improper for her to offer one in advance. The new laws could also create
    headaches for court record keepers. In many courts, search warrants are filed
    along with the case file. It's unclear how clerks will keep the two separate.
    The new law also affects the rights of people who are searched. According to
    a analysis of the law done in the House of Representatives, the state Court
    of Appeals ruled that affidavits be given along with a warrant at the time of
    a search. The new law changes that. "An officer executing a search is not
    required to give a copy of the affidavit to the person or leave a copy at the
    place from which the property was taken," according to Ferry's memo.
     
  2. ChevyHuny

    ChevyHuny 1/2 ton status

    Joined:
    Aug 17, 2001
    Posts:
    2,279
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    Washington State
    Isnt this unconstitutional?
     
  3. Z3PR

    Z3PR Banned

    Joined:
    Mar 30, 2002
    Posts:
    19,217
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    Everywhere
    I would have thought so !!!
     
  4. newyorkin

    newyorkin 1 ton status

    Joined:
    May 8, 2001
    Posts:
    16,555
    Likes Received:
    157
    Location:
    Los Estados Unitos
    Hmmm...
     
  5. Prembird

    Prembird 1/2 ton status

    Joined:
    May 15, 2001
    Posts:
    811
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    kc, mo.
    where did you get this story from... I would like to go to the web page you pulled it from.. Thanks
     
  6. bigblue

    bigblue 1/2 ton status

    Joined:
    Dec 6, 2000
    Posts:
    658
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    southern california
    Don't believe it...
     
  7. Z3PR

    Z3PR Banned

    Joined:
    Mar 30, 2002
    Posts:
    19,217
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    Everywhere
    A friend emailed it to me. I didn't keep it after I copied and pasted it here.
     
  8. Z3PR

    Z3PR Banned

    Joined:
    Mar 30, 2002
    Posts:
    19,217
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    Everywhere
    Belive it, it's true !!!
     
  9. Capman2k

    Capman2k 3/4 ton status

    Joined:
    Jun 22, 2001
    Posts:
    5,070
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    dg
    When someone sends me something like that in an email I disregard it as false if I bother to open it in the first place... I'll believe it when a cop is able to get in my house without a warrant in his hand!
     
  10. Z3PR

    Z3PR Banned

    Joined:
    Mar 30, 2002
    Posts:
    19,217
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    Everywhere
    It was sent with the link. I should have copied and pasted that aswell. This is no joke, it's real.
     
  11. AGM73k5

    AGM73k5 1/2 ton status

    Joined:
    Feb 17, 2000
    Posts:
    1,246
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    Portland OREGON
    You might change your topic to reflect the fact that there is now a link with that story /forums/images/icons/smile.gif That way people who dismissed it will be able to come back and find the link.

    Link:
    http://www.zwire.com/site/news.cfm?newsid=3936063&BRD=982&PAG=461&dept_id=467992&rfi=6

    <sarcasm>
    Oh my gosh the government would never do anything bad. I don't believe it at all.
    </sarcasm>


    A few more links:
    They can track your cars /forums/images/icons/smile.gif
    http://www.lasvegassun.com/sunbin/stories/nevada/2002/apr/25/042510142.html

    Dragnet approach not working /forums/images/icons/smile.gif
    http://www.newsday.com/news/nationworld/nation/ny-usjust262684101apr26.story

    Porno-scanners at the airport /forums/images/icons/smile.gif
    http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&u=/020425/170/1g8h8.html
     
  12. Z3PR

    Z3PR Banned

    Joined:
    Mar 30, 2002
    Posts:
    19,217
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    Everywhere
    Thank you for the links
     
  13. potato76

    potato76 1/2 ton status

    Joined:
    Mar 21, 2002
    Posts:
    922
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    phoenix, AZ
    The government is satan im convinced!
     
  14. AGM73k5

    AGM73k5 1/2 ton status

    Joined:
    Feb 17, 2000
    Posts:
    1,246
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    Portland OREGON
    No prob /forums/images/icons/smile.gif I pulled that link and the others from www.whatreallyhappened.com. If you choose to edit the title of this post you can do so by clicking edit on your first post and then changing the post title.

    -Aaron
     
  15. Cusm

    Cusm 1/2 ton status

    Joined:
    Feb 25, 2000
    Posts:
    360
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    OK
    I would say this is a state law based on the info of the reps responsible for passing this. This will get thrown out, it is unconstituional and it will not stand long. Call the govenor of this state(if it is yours) and get him to veto it.
     
  16. AGM73k5

    AGM73k5 1/2 ton status

    Joined:
    Feb 17, 2000
    Posts:
    1,246
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    Portland OREGON
    Heh, not my state. You're right it does sound like a state law. I figure even if the law is unconstitutional, it may take the supreme court to decide that before they stop using it. Whoever it gets used against still ends up in prison etc. until that happens.

    -Aaron
     
  17. m j

    m j 1/2 ton status

    Joined:
    Dec 28, 2001
    Posts:
    4,606
    Likes Received:
    0
    your blinders are well positioned
     
  18. newyorkin

    newyorkin 1 ton status

    Joined:
    May 8, 2001
    Posts:
    16,555
    Likes Received:
    157
    Location:
    Los Estados Unitos
    BTW, anyone interested in a new microchip that can be implanted under your skin? It can contain your entire medical history, so if you're ever unable to communicate, medical personnell can help you faster by knowing as much as possible about you as fast as possible, andifyoueverbecomelostorcommitacrimeandrun, orowesomeonemoney, orareslightlyindicativeorterroristtraits, wecanturnonthetrackingabilitiesandfindyouquickly. Oh, yes, you can trust us with all this information about you. We're the government.
     
  19. Twiz

    Twiz 1/2 ton status

    Joined:
    Mar 8, 2001
    Posts:
    3,729
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    Clearfield Ut.
    I think someone's spacebar gave-it-up!/forums/images/icons/smile.gif



    small-print
     
  20. AGM73k5

    AGM73k5 1/2 ton status

    Joined:
    Feb 17, 2000
    Posts:
    1,246
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    Portland OREGON

Share This Page