The Police vs American's Constitutional Rights

[Supreme Court Justices]

None unless you are under 16, menace someone with it or use it as a burglar tool.

Why, are you illegally confiscating knives too?

Guest Officer:

If I do a car stop, get a Suspicion and toss it, find a knife, I always advise the occupants that the knife is being confiscated. Just policy, suppose I leave and that same knife is used in the commision of a crime?



We copied the above post from another thread because we would like to discuss these comments with the Guest police officer who posted them.

Officer, you informed us that when you detain a motorist, and subsequently develop "a suspicion" that there is some type of criminality afoot, you search the interior of the motor vehicle you detained.

As long as you are searching the car pursuant to the "auto exception rule" this court adopted, we are definitely 100% behind the police action you are taking. We like aggressive officers who use their powers of questioning and observation to develop suspicion that a crime has been, will be or currently is being committed.

Yet we are a little concerned when we read that you believe you have some kind of moral duty to confiscate property that a citizen lawfully possesses.

Perhaps you could explain to us and other readers what police department has an official "policy" that allows it's officers to confiscate a knife that a motorist lawfully possesses?

Could you also inform us what official procedure is followed to safeguard the motorist's knife after the officer takes the knife into police custody?

And if possible, could you name the instructor in the police academy who taught you that police officers are authorized to confiscate property that a citizen lawfully possesses?

Sincerely,

The Supreme Court

[another dummy lawyer post]

Yeah, let suspicious people run around with knives which they can use as weapons and stab policemen and civilians. Let's restrain the police officer so that she must risk the lives and safety of the public because an idiot judge or lawyer might say that it was wrong for her to seize the "property" of a dangerous person, namely a dangerous knife in the possession of a dangerous person.

Oh, yes, let's defend the rights of knife wielding psychopaths! Gotta love it. I can see it now:

Jason Voorhies's knife was seized by the police! Call the ACLU! Call Barbara Bernstein! Call the Civilian Complaint Review Board? Call Lynne Stewart! Help! Help!

[Reality vs. the Classroom]

I appreciate your high and mighty moral crusade, but do us all a favor and leave the utopian textbook world for a while of academia. There is the myth of what's technically allowed and authorized and then there is the reality. While you may enjoy being sanctimonious and condescending towards the average cop, you do nothing but accentuate your ignorance of the stark realities of policing. While you wear your tweed jacket and puff your pipe while seated in an overstuffed leather chair, Police Officers across this country work and deal with people who abuse drugs and list their profession as crack whore and opportunistic thief. We the police officers don't live in a textbook black and white world. We deal with social issues that would take you a month of Sundays to analyze and then not necessarily come up with a feasible plan for dealing with. While everyone would profess to want cops, doctors, teachers etc. to perform their duties by the strictest adherence to "the book", this is not realistic. Those that want police officers and other professions to abide by the strictest set of rules somehow always want those rules bent whenever they are caught for speeding, expired inspection or their children are called to task for their actions by the police or educators. I have responded to numerous neighborhoods where the residents have complained about a certain condition. The most prevalent would be vehicles speeding on a given road. I would respond and conduct radar enforcement. I can attest without reservation that the same individuals who wrote in requesting enforcement were guaranteed to be the same ones I stopped in my "radar trap". Quite often I would hear the same cry from the offending motorists "it's the other people speeding I was complaining about". Of course the concerned resident always wanted me to bend the rules. Thus is the beginning of living and working in a world where discretion and handling certain situations are in the grey areas. Lets put you in this situation for a moment. It's 3 A.M., in any given place in the country. You are on patrol and find a person shabilly attired driving a car that has numerous non moving violations parked behind the local business district in which all of the stores are closed and will be for numerous hours. You enquire of the motorist what they are doing in that location since they don't live anywhere near where you are located now. The motorist gives the usual "nothing" response. You notice a large inexpensive cheaply made knife protruding from the center console or on the floor of the car. You intend to write the motorist a few appearance tickets to document your encounter at that location. Before you go back to your sector car to put your head down to check to see if this person is wanted for anything you have one of two choices. Let the unknown person keep their weapon prior to knowing who you are dealing with or secure the same so that you can more safely return to your car to continue your checks and paperwork. For the academians of the world who claim they would leave a person of questionable intent in possession of an edged weapon I state this. Your actions will lead to an early "inspectors funeral" for your line of duty death. I don't work in a classroom where the downside to my poor choices would be a poor grade. I and countless others work in a place where poor choices about the handling of unknown persons and numerous weapons will result in a permanent grade of D for Dead. If you enjoy living in a utopian world where you are insulated and isolated from the ugly realities of life on the streets enjoy that existence and don't question too greatly the shades of grey decisions by the police involved in maintaining your way of life.

[ChattyPatti]

Call the ACLU! Call Barbara Bernstein! Call the Civilian Complaint Review Board? Call Lynne Stewart! Help! Help

Thanks for the info. I intend to contact these people and tell them the way Suffolk County treated a taxpayer/homeowner of 29 years. The unscrupulous tactics and tricks the Asst. County Atty pulled to protect filthy corrupt, lieing cops and deputies and subsequently winning due to it.

How this loud mouth shouted out "did you pull your pants down for Internal Affairs"?? While producing a picture of my hip where it was brusied. I don't know anyone from Internal Affiars, maybe Ms. Schilling fantacises about pulling hers down for them....

Also the way she treated my son........this lieing, coercing Asst. County Atty harrassed and interrogated him with things that had nothing to do with what happened between myself and the 2 cops who dragged me from my home claiming I resisted arrest. She was clearly trying to discredit him so that he was not believable. When in fact he told what happened exactly the way I did.

AND WE DIDN'T NEED TO HAVE A GROUP MEETING LIKE SHE DID WITH HER DEFENDANTS TO "GET THE STORY STRAIGHT" . This was brought out in FEDERAL COURT as loud mouth cried out "OBJECTION"!

What a sneaky corrupt place we live in.

I don't care if this thread is soley for the purposes noted in the first post. I intend to post corruption anywhere I can, so that EVERYONE knows.

[Verbal Judo]

Ez answer, I ask if they have anything they shouldnt. Sammy Countyresident says his girlfriend Slutfaced Drcorvalle has a knife.She denies it but tells me her lesbian lover Skippy Askidmore has it. I ask she says yes. I ask why she has it, she replies" I dunno"
I ask Whos knife is it, She replies ''my cross dressing Daddy Msmanners''. It never the person holding the weapon, always a friend or a relative,I tell her the knife will be held at the Pct and if her dad wants it back to give me a call, but within a couple weeks, after which it will be turned over to the proerty section, and eventually thrown away. I get her address and when possible mail him a receipt. Put an entry into my memo book or fill out a field interview form.
The reason I confiscated the knife is that I found it. People driving around or hanging out with knives, also tend to get into trouble. also by confiscating the knife, I document its existence on the street, and put it in the hands of the police. Suppose the next day there is a report made from the prior night of 4 extreme losers running around harrassing or menacing kids?
Again suppose I do nothing and these kids end up sticking a wonderful citizen like yourself, why heavens, I'd probably loose some sleep over that. All kidding aside, at minimum if there was no action taken and something happened I'd be the coverboy of Newsday, which i'm sure you'd love.
I was taught how to run a lot in the academy, how to pass some Emt b/s course,and the whole verbal judo thingy anything I learned about being a cop, I learned out here on the streets.

[RIGHT ON CUE.]

let's defend the rights ofpsychopaths! Gotta love it. I can see it now:

Jason Voorhies's knife was seized by the police! Call the ACLU! Call Barbara Bernstein! Call the Civilian Complaint Review Board? Call Lynne Stewart! Help! Help
No not jason its;ChattyPatti

[Supreme Court Justices]

There is the myth of what's technically allowed and authorized and then there is the reality.

What “myth” are you referring to? The United States Constitution?

[Supreme Court Justices]

While you may enjoy being sanctimonious and condescending towards the average cop, you do nothing but accentuate your ignorance of the stark realities of policing.

We asked the officer who wrote he confiscates knives from citizens what authority or law he uses to seize the knife. If you wish to invoke your 1st amendment right to characterize us as “sanctimonious and condescending,” please feel free to do so.

[Supreme Court Justices]

While you wear your tweed jacket and puff your pipe while seated in an overstuffed leather chair, Police Officers across this country work and deal with people who abuse drugs and list their profession as crack whore and opportunistic thief.

What does this have to do with the topic of this thread?

[Supreme Court Justices]

We the police officers don't live in a textbook black and white world.

Very true. Police officers live in a world of rules and regulations they SWORE they would uphold and abide by. Now would you please quote the rule or regulation that permits a police officer to confiscate a knife from a citizen who lawfully possesses the knife?

[Supreme Court Justices]

We deal with social issues that would take you a month of Sundays to analyze and then not necessarily come up with a feasible plan for dealing with.

Excellent. If that is the case you should have no problem offering a cogent response to the topic of our thread. :)

[Supreme Court Justices]

While everyone would profess to want cops, doctors, teachers etc. to perform their duties by the strictest adherence to "the book", this is not realistic.

All we did was ask a simple question like, “what rule of law does a police utilize to confiscate property that a citizen lawfully possesses?” and all you want to talk about everything under the sun while avoiding the topic of this thread. Why is that?

[Supreme Court Justices]

Those that want police officers and other professions to abide by the strictest set of rules somehow always want those rules bent whenever they are caught for speeding, expired inspection or their children are called to task for their actions by the police or educators.

Seems to us that you are attempting justify corrupt police work by deflecting blame to others. We have read arguments similar to yours.

Generally, people who are guilty as sin and wish to use their power and influence to obfuscate their criminal culpabiltity though loopholes in our criminal justice system bring arguments such as yours before us. And in every case we scoff at arguments that attempt to deflect blame.

[Supreme Court Justices]

I have responded to numerous neighborhoods where the residents have complained about a certain condition. The most prevalent would be vehicles speeding on a given road. I would respond and conduct radar enforcement. I can attest without reservation that the same individuals who wrote in requesting enforcement were guaranteed to be the same ones I stopped in my "radar trap". Quite often I would hear the same cry from the offending motorists "it's the other people speeding I was complaining about". Of course the concerned resident always wanted me to bend the rules. Thus is the beginning of living and working in a world where discretion and handling certain situations are in the grey areas.

We are not sure what the above ramblings have to do with the topic of this thread, and we would like to admonish the writer to not waste our time by commenting on issues not relevant to the discussion. Thank you.

Lets put you in this situation for a moment. It's 3 A.M., in any given place in the country. You are on patrol and find a person shabilly attired driving a car that has numerous non moving violations parked behind the local business district in which all of the stores are closed and will be for numerous hours.

Officer, first you are going to have to explain to the court how it is possible for a person to be driving a car that is parked.

You enquire of the motorist what they

Officer, who is “they?” You described one shabbily attired man.

You enquire of the motorist what they are doing in that location since they don't live anywhere near where you are located now. The motorist gives the usual "nothing" response. You notice a large inexpensive cheaply made knife protruding from the center console or on the floor of the car. You intend to write the motorist a few appearance tickets to document your encounter at that location. Before you go back to your sector car to put your head down to check to see if this person is wanted for anything you have one of two choices. Let the unknown person keep their weapon prior to knowing who you are dealing with or secure the same so that you can more safely return to your car to continue your checks and paperwork. For the academians of the world who claim they would leave a person of questionable intent in possession of an edged weapon I state this. Your actions will lead to an early "inspectors funeral" for your line of duty death. I don't work in a classroom where the downside to my poor choices would be a poor grade. I and countless others work in a place where poor choices about the handling of unknown persons and numerous weapons will result in a permanent grade of D for Dead. If you enjoy living in a utopian world where you are insulated and isolated from the ugly realities of life on the streets enjoy that existence and don't question too greatly the shades of grey decisions by the police involved in maintaining your way of life.

The court appreciates the time you invested to make a contribution to this thread…yet we noticed you failed to address the topic of this thread. Better luck next time.

[Maneater]

No not jason its;ChattyPatti

Chatti's no muff diver.

Lets put you in this situation for a moment. It's 3 A.M., in any given place in the country. You are on patrol and find a person shabilly attired driving a car that has numerous non moving violations parked behind the local business district in which all of the stores are closed and will be for numerous hours.


Officer, first you are going to have to explain to the court how it is possible for a person to be driving a car that is parked.

It's called constructive operation, similar to constructive possession. Like when I respond to a meeting of the local ACLU for a person acting crazy and find a mirror on the table with a white powdery substance. The powdery substance is field tested and found out to be cocaine. Everyone in the room gets arrested, because of course everyone denies the drugs are theirs. Constructive operation, a loose example thereof. A lawyer is groggily emitting the odor of an alcoholic beverage while sitting in the drivers seat with the keys in the ignition. The counselor goes for DWI under the theory (after appropriate Standard Field Sobriety Tests) of constructive operation.

It's called constructive operation,

No, it's called poor writing and communication skills.

People do not 'drive' parked cars, as the officer suggested. People 'sit' behind the wheel of a parked car.

I hate to be a stickler for detail, but you would think a college educated police officer would possess more advanced writing skills.

While everyone would profess to want cops, doctors, teachers etc. to perform their duties by the strictest adherence to "the book", this is not realistic.

All we did was ask a simple question like, “what rule of law does a police utilize to confiscate property that a citizen lawfully possesses?” and all you want to talk about everything under the sun while avoiding the topic of this thread. Why is that?

I learned it from listening to Lawyers jerk off the courts and getting their dirt bag clients off on technicalities.

While you may enjoy being sanctimonious and condescending towards the average cop, you do nothing but accentuate your ignorance of the stark realities of policing.

We asked the officer who wrote he confiscates knives from citizens what authority or law he uses to seize the knife. If you wish to invoke your 1st amendment right to characterize us as “sanctimonious and condescending,” please feel free to do so.

Thanks for your permission to state the obvious your high holiness, I didn't realize I needed it. I wonder if there is a Federal Offense covering impersonation of a Supreme Court Justice?

We the police officers don't live in a textbook black and white world.

Very true. Police officers live in a world of rules and regulations they SWORE they would uphold and abide by. Now would you please quote the rule or regulation that permits a police officer to confiscate a knife from a citizen who lawfully possesses the knife?

It's the law right behind the one that enables thief attornies to steal monies belonging to their clients and contained in the attorney's escrow accounts. The last time I checked attorneys who are admitted to the bar are officers of the court and they too SWORE to uphold the law.

Those that want police officers and other professions to abide by the strictest set of rules somehow always want those rules bent whenever they are caught for speeding, expired inspection or their children are called to task for their actions by the police or educators.

Seems to us that you are attempting justify corrupt police work by deflecting blame to others. We have read arguments similar to yours.

Generally, people who are guilty as sin and wish to use their power and influence to obfuscate their criminal culpabiltity though loopholes in our criminal justice system bring arguments such as yours before us. And in every case we scoff at arguments that attempt to deflect blame.

Yes and those arguments are raised and supported by ATTORNEYS not their clients. If you don't like the briefs you are receiving from your fellow attorneys work with the ABA to bring them up to speed. Feel free to clean up and root out corruption in your own profession before casting spurios hypothetical claims at anothers.

I have responded to numerous neighborhoods where the residents have complained about a certain condition. The most prevalent would be vehicles speeding on a given road. I would respond and conduct radar enforcement. I can attest without reservation that the same individuals who wrote in requesting enforcement were guaranteed to be the same ones I stopped in my "radar trap". Quite often I would hear the same cry from the offending motorists "it's the other people speeding I was complaining about". Of course the concerned resident always wanted me to bend the rules. Thus is the beginning of living and working in a world where discretion and handling certain situations are in the grey areas.

We are not sure what the above ramblings have to do with the topic of this thread, and we would like to admonish the writer to not waste our time by commenting on issues not relevant to the discussion. Thank you.

Lets put you in this situation for a moment. It's 3 A.M., in any given place in the country. You are on patrol and find a person shabilly attired driving a car that has numerous non moving violations parked behind the local business district in which all of the stores are closed and will be for numerous hours.

Officer, first you are going to have to explain to the court how it is possible for a person to be driving a car that is parked.

You enquire of the motorist what they

Officer, who is “they?” You described one shabbily attired man.

You enquire of the motorist what they are doing in that location since they don't live anywhere near where you are located now. The motorist gives the usual "nothing" response. You notice a large inexpensive cheaply made knife protruding from the center console or on the floor of the car. You intend to write the motorist a few appearance tickets to document your encounter at that location. Before you go back to your sector car to put your head down to check to see if this person is wanted for anything you have one of two choices. Let the unknown person keep their weapon prior to knowing who you are dealing with or secure the same so that you can more safely return to your car to continue your checks and paperwork. For the academians of the world who claim they would leave a person of questionable intent in possession of an edged weapon I state this. Your actions will lead to an early "inspectors funeral" for your line of duty death. I don't work in a classroom where the downside to my poor choices would be a poor grade. I and countless others work in a place where poor choices about the handling of unknown persons and numerous weapons will result in a permanent grade of D for Dead. If you enjoy living in a utopian world where you are insulated and isolated from the ugly realities of life on the streets enjoy that existence and don't question too greatly the shades of grey decisions by the police involved in maintaining your way of life.

The court appreciates the time you invested to make a contribution to this thread…yet we noticed you failed to address the topic of this thread. Better luck next time.

They are called fact patterns. You know the hypothetical stories that were used to convey a scenario when you were in law school.

Perhaps you could explain to us and other readers what police department has an official "policy" that allows it's officers to confiscate a knife that a motorist lawfully possesses?


Its called ''Safeguarding". On the official Property papers, there is a box marked safeguarding, lost /found or evidence.
Instead of a knife what if the item was a pellet or paint gun? Lets say its during a quiet month, no reports of windows or houses or cars shot.Would you like the officer not to do anything because no crime has taken place? Better to wait until 40-50 grand of proerty damage occurs, right?
What if the item was a license not belonging to anyone in the car, but not stolen? Could it be the underage youths were using the Id falsely in order to get themselves soused enough that they may cruise the streets like the adults them emulate?
ake the property document in my memo book or a field interview, attempt to contact the owner, or parents, then vouch the property. Of all the knives, bb guns,no one has ever come into the pct to claim it.
Of all the parents I've contacted 70% are glad to know what their little babies are up to, and of course the other 30% liberals demand to know why and what laws give me the power to steal from their little angels....

We are not sure what the above ramblings have to do with the topic of this thread, and we would like to admonish the writer to not waste our time by commenting on issues not relevant to the discussion. Thank you.


1) Who's we? All the names you posted under,Count res. Dr corvalle, Mike Cardigan, et al?
2) That poster is making a point, this entire thread isnt relevant, so who are you... excuse me you guys, to determine whats revelant.? Why is it you can demand things explained to you like a 5 year old, and discuss anything under the sun, including this thread, and expect the answers to fall in your guideline and rules of posting?Is that not an attempt to censor us, the responders to your posts?
What if you posted and no one answered you?
That would be too much like your real life, huh?

While you wear your tweed jacket and puff your pipe while seated in an overstuffed leather chair, Police Officers across this country work and deal with people who abuse drugs and list their profession as crack whore and opportunistic thief
Tweed jacket? more like scoobie doo feety pjs
Pipe, more like dorals gold 3.95 a pack on the pachahunsta website.
Leather chair? C'mon now

[Ah yes]

Questions, Questions, Questions......Whos is holier then Thou ?

[Monday Morning Policeman]

Questions, Questions, Questions......Whos is holier then Thou
Who cares

[one cophater vs all cops]

In the latest installment of his latest attempt to prove all cops are corrupt or drunk or lazy, mr hateful, jeaulous, insecure little man pretends to be a chief justice, or since he is calling himself we, the entire supreme court. Mr hateful feels that by doing this it may add substance to his usual ignorant empty words.
Mr justice has no firsthand knowledge of what police do, bases his model on old reruns of a 1970s cop show, not sure which one.
His model of Long Island goes back to the day when every community was as quite as Head of the Harbor or Shelter Island.
He actually has no clue as to how busy the modern police are.
He takes his time to criticize cops, who he normally classifies as doing nothing, for stopping and interviewing youths who may have a knife or pellet gun in their vehicle or on their person. The officer involved decides to safeguard it, so that there is no crimes committed that night with those items. The officer knows that if he doesnt confiscate those items, that the youths could participate in some illegal activities. The next day his face would be plastered all over Mr. supreme court guys bible, newsday. Then Mr supreme ct guy would be ragging on him for not taking the property.
Mr supreme ct cophater dude is what we refer to as Monday morning policeman. That is they like to sit around with their lay knowledge of the law, you know like if someone touches you, thats a assault, if someone curses at you,verbal harrassment, if someone looks at you optical harrassment, then when they hear an officer disagree, on a show like cops,(bad boys, what u gonna do?) they call them lazy, just looking to get out of work. They decide that getting a free meal is a Unlawful Gratituities charge.

Yes and those arguments are raised and supported by ATTORNEYS not their clients. If you don't like the briefs you are receiving from your fellow attorneys work with the ABA to bring them up to speed. Feel free to clean up and root out corruption in your own profession before casting spurios hypothetical claims at anothers
Dude hes a lawyer like i'm the commish.

Officer, first you are going to have to explain to the court how it is possible for a person to be driving a car that is parked
A person in a parked car, on a public street with keys readily available,(within a reachable area) is considered by law to be in operation of the motor vehicle. numerous court cases have upheld this for various vehicle and traffic violations and misdemeanors, including dwi and agg. unlicensed driving, and Penal laws such as Grand larceny auto and crim poss of stolen property, which may be charged on any property public or private.
You are not a court, just a poorly informed lay person, otherwise you would know this stuff, I'm dissapointed

[Ex-Ms. Manners]

operation of the motor vehicle

Right you just have to explain that a bit more for the lay people. Despite the pretense of being a Court, he isnt that savy. In legal jargon a person with a motor vehicle parked,driving, running, stopped, not running, moving or standing is all considered the exact same based on the fact of the operator having control of the vehicle, either by having the keys in the ignition, his pocket or within grabbable area inside the Motor Vehicle. In our world there is no distinction between a moving( car being driven) vehicle or a parked vehicle, as long as the car has keys and can start.
Remember what the D.A.s tell you, always dummy down the legal jargon, so that a average joe can grasp the events, or doesnt feel intimidated by your testimony.[/quote]

[Supreme Court Justices]

Perhaps you could explain to us and other readers what police department has an official "policy" that allows it's officers to confiscate a knife that a motorist lawfully possesses?


Its called ''Safeguarding". On the official Property papers, there is a box marked safeguarding, lost /found or evidence.
Instead of a knife what if….

Officer, we are not interested in reading your “What if” questions.

Now would you please respond to the topic of this thread and inform us under what authority of law are you, the police, confiscating property that one of the people you serve lawfully possesses?

What if the item was a.

What’s this? Another “what if” question.

Officer, obviously you have a chronic case of Attention Deficit Disorder. Would you please address the issue being discussed? Why do you believe the police have the authority to confiscate a citizen’s private property (knife) without a warrant or pursuant to a lawful arrest?

Also, since you mentioned “safeguarding,” perhaps you could tell the court what lawful authority the police have to confiscate a motorist’s private property (knife) for the purpose of “safeguarding” it?

And why would the police feel the need to safeguard property that a person was already safeguarding as their private property before the police confiscated the property?

[Supreme Court Justices]

2) That poster is making a point, this entire thread isnt relevant,

The court is amused when people post comments without supporting their comments with fact or opinion.

Let's use this poster as an example of who amuses us.

He/she writes, "this entire thread isnt relevant," yet he/she refuses to state why this thread isn't relevant.

Which leads us to ask, what was the point of writing, "this entire thread isnt relevant" if the writer is not going to tell us why this thread is not relevant?

We are sure that even the most intellectually challenged reader can figure out that this particular anonymous police poster is NOT able to address the tpoic of this thread. So he/she does the next best thing...and that is blow smoke on the issue of police misconduct.

What if you posted and no one answered you?

You are unable to resist responding to us. You have proven that over and over and over and over and over again. :lol: :lol: :lol:

[Supreme Court Justices]

He takes his time to criticize cops, who he normally classifies as doing nothing, for stopping and interviewing youths who may have a knife or pellet gun in their vehicle or on their person.

At no time did this court mention or write ANYTHING about pellet guns.

Yet we appreciate that the anonymous police officers that took the time to respond to our query would attempt to obscure the original issue by introducing facts not part of our original query.

In this thread the court asked three simple questions that NOT ONE OF THE POLICE POSTERS has addressed. Instead they respond to us with “What if” questions and other comments that ignore the issue of alleged police misconduct being discussed in this thread.

In case you missed them, here are the three questions the court asked after we read a 'message board police officer' states he cheerfully ignores his sworn oath of duty when he confiscates lawfully possessed property (knife)from motorists without due process of law:

“Perhaps you could explain to us and other readers what police department has an official "policy" that allows it's officers to confiscate a knife that a motorist lawfully possesses?”

”Could you also inform us what official procedure is followed to safeguard the motorist's knife after the officer takes the knife into police custody?”

”And if possible, could you name the instructor in the police academy who taught you that police officers are authorized to confiscate property that a citizen lawfully possesses?”

[Supreme Court Justices]

Right you just have to explain that a bit more for the lay people. Despite the pretense of being a Court, he isnt that savy. In legal jargon a person with a motor vehicle parked,driving, running, stopped, not running, moving or standing is all considered the exact same based on the fact of the operator having control of the vehicle, either by having the keys in the ignition, his pocket or within grabbable area inside the Motor Vehicle.

We are questioning the communication skills of a college educated police officers who writes, “A person is driving a parked car.”

The court is still waiting to read a response to these questions:

“Perhaps you could explain to us and other readers what police department has an official "policy" that allows it's officers to confiscate a knife that a motorist lawfully possesses?”

”Could you also inform us what official procedure is followed to safeguard the motorist's knife after the officer takes the knife into police custody?”

”And if possible, could you name the instructor in the police academy who taught you that police officers are authorized to confiscate property that a citizen lawfully possesses?”

[Supreme Court Justices]

Mr justice has no firsthand knowledge of what police do,

And your proof of this is.............????????????????

[Supreme Court Justices]

The officer knows that if he doesnt confiscate those items, that the youths could participate in some illegal activities. The next day his face would be plastered all over Mr. supreme court guys bible, newsday. Then Mr supreme ct guy would be ragging on him for not taking the property.

This Supreme Court has absolutely no problem with police officers who use lawful authority to confiscate private property.

Yet when we read a 'message board police officer' write that he confiscates a citizen's property without any lawful authority, we are forced to question the training this officer received and the supervision under which this officer is allowed to run willy-nilly...trampling the rights of American citizens that this same officer allegely swore he would protect.

Mr supreme ct cophater dude is what we refer to as Monday morning policeman.

We are amused by the ignorance of a poster who would characterize us as cop-haters when all we did was ask a few questions about government procedures.

Obviously the police poster we are currently responding to has no clue about the US Consititution and Bill of Rights that allows EVERY American to question the policies and performance of our local, state and federal governments.

We find people like this very sad and we can only hope that one day they will climb out of the gutter from which they dwell and find the intelligence that has apparently evaded tham all these years.

This idiot is hoping that someone will give him our justification and Rule &Procedure so that this scumbag atty. can counteract our case to defend his scumbag client. Don't fall into this trap ignore this azzhole. The big tip off that this is the angle is the request for the name of the academy instructor who gave this instruction. The scumbag is on a fishing expedition to find out the names of people to subpoena and the titles of our R&Ps. Don't take the bait. See you in court counselor btw I'm sure I'll end up getting overtime for my troubles.

And your proof of this is.............????????????????
Everytime you open your silly mouth. :wink:

Now would you please respond to the topic of this thread and inform us under what authority of law are you, the police, confiscating property that one of the people you serve lawfully possesses?

Quote:
What if the item was a.


What’s this? Another “what if” question.

Officer, obviously you have a chronic case of Attention Deficit Disorder. Would you please address the issue being discussed? Why do you believe the police have the authority to confiscate a citizen’s private property (knife) without a warrant or pursuant to a lawful arrest?

Also, since you mentioned “safeguarding,” perhaps you could tell the court what lawful authority the police have to confiscate a motorist’s private property (knife) for the purpose of “safeguarding” it?

And why would the police feel the need to safeguard property that a person was already safeguarding as their private property before the police confiscated the property?
Its my judgement as a law officer, I conducted a traffic stop, found a person with a potentially dangerous item, conducted an investigation as to why he was carrying it, felt it would be inappropriate to allow him to continue having the property, advised him of my choice to safe guard the item, advised him how to get it back.
I can bring up the pellet gun since you are quoting my original scenario.
Show me where in the Constitution it states that I cannot bring up a what if question, isnt 80% of your posts what if questions?

Ok sillywilly?

This idiot is hoping that someone will give him our justification and Rule &Procedure so that this scumbag atty. can counteract our case to defend his scumbag client. Don't fall into this trap ignore this azzhole. The big tip off that this is the angle is the request for the name of the academy instructor who gave this instruction. The scumbag is on a fishing expedition to find out the names of people to subpoena and the titles of our R&Ps. Don't take the bait. See you in court counselor btw I'm sure I'll end up getting overtime for my troubles.

Rule, Rule, it's the too bad so sad nanny nanny foo foo rule. I take what action I deem necessary and prudent at the time that it strikes me. If I get called to task, so what. As long as my heart was in the right place I'll be OK. If you don't like it sue me, I'll get overtime to respond to numerous EBTs and court appearances. BTW who do you think a bunch of taxpayers are going to believe? The nice shiney police officer who is trained as an EMT saves lives and leaps tall buildings in a single bound, or the jerkoff substance abuser who has a spotty employment record and CPS referrals. My bet is on the cops every time even if they are in the wrong, juries of nicd taxpayers tend to side with the cops when they realize the monies paid out to some whitetrash lotto wannabe will be coming out of their tax dollars.

[Supreme Court Justices]

This idiot is hoping that someone will give him our justification and Rule &Procedure so that this scumbag atty. can counteract our case to defend his scumbag client. Don't fall into this trap ignore this azzhole. The big tip off that this is the angle is the request for the name of the academy instructor who gave this instruction. The scumbag is on a fishing expedition to find out the names of people to subpoena and the titles of our R&Ps. Don't take the bait. See you in court counselor btw I'm sure I'll end up getting overtime for my troubles.

The court is recommending that the poster who we quoted be taken into custody pursuant to his or her home state's Mental Hygiene Laws.

We have determined the paranoia exhibited by this particular police officer represents a potential danger to not only himself, but the community he so loyally served before he developed this serious mental defect.

Any decent, law abiding person who believes in the US Constitution should take ALL practical steps necessary to avoid contact woth this particular police poster until he is taken into custody and afforded the psychological assistance he desperately and urgently requires. As you can see he is bubbling over with anger and he could be frothing at the mouth...A sure way to identify him if he approaches you or your loved ones.

That poster is making a point, this entire thread isnt relevant,


The court is amused when people post comments without supporting their comments with fact or opinion.

Let's use this poster as an example of who amuses us.

He/she writes, "this entire thread isnt relevant," yet he/she refuses to state why this thread isn't relevant.

Which leads us to ask, what was the point of writing, "this entire thread isnt relevant" if the writer is not going to tell us why this thread is not relevant?

We are sure that even the most intellectually challenged reader can figure out that this particular anonymous police poster is NOT able to address the tpoic of this thread. So he/she does the next best thing...and that is blow smoke on the issue of police misconduct.

Sorry this thread isnt relevant because it has nothing to do with reality.
You obviously are not a court. additionally I believe you are not a judge or a lawyer, additionally I have reasonable cause to believe you are exceptionally ignorant of much that police can and can't do. If you ever been in court you would also know judges do not question the witnesses, no matter what happened on CSI miami last week.
What exactly is the topic of this thread?
Can a officer confiscate property from a civilian without a civilian committing a crime? well i presented a knife, pellet gun and drivers license as evidence, i'm sure there are many others, so my answer is yes.

This idiot is hoping that someone will give him our justification and Rule &Procedure so that this scumbag atty. can counteract our case to defend his scumbag client. Don't fall into this trap ignore this azzhole. The big tip off that this is the angle is the request for the name of the academy instructor who gave this instruction. The scumbag is on a fishing expedition to find out the names of people to subpoena and the titles of our R&Ps. Don't take the bait. See you in court counselor btw I'm sure I'll end up getting overtime for my troubles.

The court is recommending that the poster who we quoted be taken into custody pursuant to his or her home state's Mental Hygiene Laws.



We have determined the paranoia exhibited by this particular police officer represents a potential danger to not only himself, but the community he so loyally served before he developed this serious mental defect.

Any decent, law abiding person who believes in the US Constitution should take ALL practical steps necessary to avoid contact woth this particular police poster until he is taken into custody and afforded the psychological assistance he desperately and urgently requires. As you can see he is bubbling over with anger and he could be frothing at the mouth...A sure way to identify him if he approaches you or your loved ones.



Funny thing counselor, Cops get psychologically screened as a condition of their employment. Do Attorneys? Nope none what so ever. You are tap dancing on dangerous grounds. We have laws that prevent people from practicing medecine without a license. I'm sure the NYS Board of Regents would like to speak to you about your delusions that you are qualified to make medical diagnoses and pass medical judgment without a license.

BTW who do you think a bunch of taxpayers are going to believe? The nice shiney police officer who is trained as an EMT saves lives and leaps tall buildings in a single bound, or the jerkoff substance abuser who has a spotty employment record and CPS referrals. My bet is on the cops every time

Excuse us for a moment while we attempt to regain our composure.

Officer, are telling this court that after swearing an oath to tell the truth, you would lie to a jury by informing them you never took the motorist's knife?

At no time did this court mention or write ANYTHING about pellet guns.

Yet we appreciate that the anonymous police officers that took the time to respond to our query would attempt to obscure the original issue by introducing facts not part of our original query.

In this thread the court asked three simple questions that NOT ONE OF THE POLICE POSTERS has addressed. Instead they respond to us with “What if” questions and other comments that ignore the issue of alleged police misconduct being discussed in this thread.

In case you missed them, here are the three questions the court asked after we read a 'message board police officer' states he cheerfully ignores his sworn oath of duty when he confiscates lawfully possessed property (knife)from motorists without due process of law:

“Perhaps you could explain to us and other readers what police department has an official "policy" that allows it's officers to confiscate a knife that a motorist lawfully possesses?”

”Could you also inform us what official procedure is followed to safeguard the motorist's knife after the officer takes the knife into police custody?”

”And if possible, could you name the instructor in the police academy who taught you that police officers are authorized to confiscate property that a citizen lawfully possesses?”
Right I mentioned a pellet gun. I will also mention a toy gun, samurai sword, Identification, cigarettes, alcohol, pornography as things I've taken from people that have not committed crimes. Its called ''Safeguarding". On the official Property papers, there is a box marked safeguarding, lost /found or evidence.
Instead of a knife what if the item was a pellet or paint gun? Lets say its during a quiet month, no reports of windows or houses or cars shot.Would you like the officer not to do anything because no crime has taken place? Better to wait until 40-50 grand of property damage occurs, right?
What if the item was a license not belonging to anyone in the car, but not stolen? Could it be the underage youths were using the Id falsely in order to get themselves soused enough that they may cruise the streets like the adults them emulate?
ake the property document in my memo book or a field interview, attempt to contact the owner, or parents, then vouch the property. Of all the knives, bb guns,no one has ever come into the pct to claim it.
Of all the parents I've contacted 70% are glad to know what their little babies are up to, and of course the other 30% liberals demand to know why and what laws give me the power to steal from their little angels....
handles the procedural aspect.Safeguarding means temporarily holding property pending investigation, could be to see if it was stolen or used in the commision of a crime. Again the next day the owner may come down and request his property, as long as he has proof of ownership.
And again it wasnt covered in the Academy.least not mine 15 years ago.

[Supreme Court Justices]

BTW who do you think a bunch of taxpayers are going to believe? The nice shiney police officer who is trained as an EMT saves lives and leaps tall buildings in a single bound, or the jerkoff substance abuser who has a spotty employment record and CPS referrals. My bet is on the cops every time

Excuse us for a moment while we attempt to regain our composure.

Officer, are telling this court that after swearing an oath to tell the truth, you would lie to a jury by informing them you never took the motorist's knife?

[Ms.Manners]

We are amused by the ignorance of a poster who would characterize us as cop-haters when all we did was ask a few questions about government procedures.

Obviously the police poster we are currently responding to has no clue about the US Consititution and Bill of Rights that allows EVERY American to question the policies and performance of our local, state and federal governments.

We find people like this very sad and we can only hope that one day they will climb out of the gutter from which they dwell and find the intelligence that has apparently evaded tham all these years
Right and all the other posts under all the other names blasting us?

[Ms.Manners]

This idiot is hoping that someone will give him our justification and Rule &Procedure so that this scumbag atty. can counteract our case to defend his scumbag client. Don't fall into this trap ignore this azzhole. The big tip off that this is the angle is the request for the name of the academy instructor who gave this instruction. The scumbag is on a fishing expedition to find out the names of people to subpoena and the titles of our R&Ps. Don't take the bait. See you in court counselor btw I'm sure I'll end up getting overtime for my troubles
Guy its just County Resident aka Ms. Manners aka Ad infinitum.. still desperately trying to win a point, any point. Except now hes a court,lol

[Supreme Court Justices]

Can a officer confiscate property from a civilian without a civilian committing a crime? well i presented a knife, pellet gun and drivers license as evidence, i'm sure there are many others, so my answer is yes.

The message board police officer who raised this issue when he wrote he confiscated a motorist knife made no mention of pellet guns or drivers licenses.

This court would be very appreciative if you could focus on the issue being addressed and answer the questions posed to you.

We read that you claim the police can confiscate a knife that a motorist lawfully possesses.

Would you please quote what rule of law you believe gives the police authority to confiscate a knife?

If you are not able to address this issue then the court would respectfully suggest you find another thread or sandbox to play in.

BTW who do you think a bunch of taxpayers are going to believe? The nice shiney police officer who is trained as an EMT saves lives and leaps tall buildings in a single bound, or the jerkoff substance abuser who has a spotty employment record and CPS referrals. My bet is on the cops every time

Excuse us for a moment while we attempt to regain our composure.

Officer, are telling this court that after swearing an oath to tell the truth, you would lie to a jury by informing them you never took the motorist's knife?

Go get your reading glasses. Where in that post does it say it. I don't even think it was implied.

[/quote]Rule, Rule, it's the too bad so sad nanny nanny foo foo rule. I take what action I deem necessary and prudent at the time that it strikes me. If I get called to task, so what. As long as my heart was in the right place I'll be OK. If you don't like it sue me, I'll get overtime to respond to numerous EBTs and court appearances. BTW who do you think a bunch of taxpayers are going to believe? The nice shiney police officer who is trained as an EMT saves lives and leaps tall buildings in a single bound, or the jerkoff substance abuser who has a spotty employment record and CPS referrals. My bet is on the cops every time even if they are in the wrong, juries of nicd taxpayers tend to side with the cops when they realize the monies paid out to some whitetrash lotto wannabe will be coming out of their tax dollars.[/quote] BTW I must give credit to Bill P. J.D. for the too bad so sad nanny nanny foo foo rule. There is your rule, feel free to shepardize it and quote it in court.

[Ms.Manners]

The message board police officer who raised this issue when he wrote he confiscated a motorist knife made no mention of pellet guns or drivers licenses.

This court would be very appreciative if you could focus on the issue being addressed and answer the questions posed to you.

We read that you claim the police can confiscate a knife that a motorist lawfully possesses.

Would you please quote what rule of law you believe gives the police authority to confiscate a knife?

If you are not able to address this issue then the court would respectfully suggest you find another thread or sandbox to play in.


Sure my employer allows me the power to make a determination after an interview, whether or not you mr court would like me to ''focus'' on your issue or not, it is a procedure to confiscate property, whether a knife a pack of butts or a pba card, if I feel that it may be used in the commision of a crime, its called safeguarding, and as the same as a pba card, when I inform someone that I am confiscating it, issuing a receipt to the rightful owner and it will be at the pct, no one has ever even questioned it, let alone refused.
Again the property is vouched as a safeguarded item, returnable to the righful owner, SCPD policy, not mine.
ps you are not a court, just a uninformed person

If you are not able to address this issue then the court would respectfully suggest you find another thread or sandbox to play in.
You are a mildly amusing chimp, answer my questions and only my questions because on this thread, I'm pretending to be an important person, if you give information other than what I want I'll....I'll... well I'll just change my name.
ha

[Supreme Court Justices]

BTW who do you think a bunch of taxpayers are going to believe? The nice shiney police officer who is trained as an EMT saves lives and leaps tall buildings in a single bound, or the jerkoff substance abuser who has a spotty employment record and CPS referrals. My bet is on the cops every time

Excuse us for a moment while we attempt to regain our composure.

Officer, are telling this court that after swearing an oath to tell the truth, you would lie to a jury by informing them you never took the motorist's knife?

Go get your reading glasses. Where in that post does it say it. I don't even think it was implied.

Then perhaps you could explain, in the context of this discussion about police misconduct, what you meant when you wrote, "BTW who do you think a bunch of taxpayers are going to believe?"

[Supreme Court Justices]

Sure my employer allows me the power to make a determination after an interview, whether or not you mr court would like me to ''focus'' on your issue or not, it is a procedure to confiscate property, whether a knife a pack of butts or a pba card, if I feel that it may be used in the commision of a crime,

Again, the court MUST note that you are incapable of discussing the facts presents in this issue.

The officer who stated he confiscated a motorist knife made no mention of a crime being committed at the time he confiscated the knife that a motorist lawfully possesses.

Officer, if you are NOT ABLE to address the specific facts of this discussion the court would politely ask you to stand aside and stop wasting our time with your made up scenarios.

[Supreme Court Justices]

This idiot is hoping that someone will give him our justification and Rule &Procedure so that this scumbag atty. can counteract our case to defend his scumbag client. Don't fall into this trap ignore this azzhole. The big tip off that this is the angle is the request for the name of the academy instructor who gave this instruction. The scumbag is on a fishing expedition to find out the names of people to subpoena and the titles of our R&Ps. Don't take the bait. See you in court counselor btw I'm sure I'll end up getting overtime for my troubles.

Rule, Rule, it's the too bad so sad nanny nanny foo foo rule.

Officer, thank you for posting the "nanny nanny foo foo" rule of law that you claim permits a police officer to confiscate a motorist's lawfully possessed knife.

Obviously we are going to need a bigger sandbox for all the serious police posters to play in.

[quote="Officer, if you are NOT ABLE to address the specific facts of this discussion the court would politely ask you to stand aside and stop wasting our time with your made up scenarios.[/quote]

If you are NOT ABLE to prove you are a Supreme Ct. Justice the people who live in the real world request that you stand aside and stop wasting our time with your made up scenarios. In my opinion your delusions of grandeur need psychological intervention by a certifed/licensed mental health practitioner.

[Supreme Court Justices]

If you are NOT ABLE to prove you are a Supreme Ct. Justice the people who live in the real world request that you stand aside and stop wasting our time with your made up scenarios. In my opinion your delusions of grandeur need psychological intervention by a certifed/licensed mental health practitioner.

Obviously you are a police officer who illegally confiscates (steals) property from citizens you swore you would protect.

Because if you were not a scoundrel cop, you would be able to provide a cogent response to the topic of the thread...instead of attacking the court for asking questions about police misconduct.

If you are NOT ABLE to prove you are a Supreme Ct. Justice the people who live in the real world request that you stand aside and stop wasting our time with your made up scenarios. In my opinion your delusions of grandeur need psychological intervention by a certifed/licensed mental health practitioner.

Obviously you are a police officer who illegally confiscates (steals) property from citizens you swore you would protect.

Because if you were not a scoundrel cop, you would be able to provide a cogent response to the topic of the thread...instead of attacking the court for asking questions about police misconduct.

attacking the court? Now you are referring to yourself in the 3rd person. You are the Supreme Court in theory of the United States. You sound more like a sole individual with a multiple personality disorder. Which SC justice are you today? Clarence Thomas, Ruth Bader Ginsberg? Speaking of Clarence Thomas, how the F did you ever get on the SC considering all of the sexual harrassment you committed.

If you are NOT ABLE to prove you are a Supreme Ct. Justice the people who live in the real world request that you stand aside and stop wasting our time with your made up scenarios. In my opinion your delusions of grandeur need psychological intervention by a certifed/licensed mental health practitioner.

Obviously you are a police officer who illegally confiscates (steals) property from citizens you swore you would protect.

Because if you were not a scoundrel cop, you would be able to provide a cogent response to the topic of the thread...instead of attacking the court for asking questions about police misconduct.

attacking the court? Now you are referring to yourself in the 3rd person. You are the Supreme Court in theory of the United States. You sound more like a sole individual with a multiple personality disorder. Which SC justice are you today? Clarence Thomas, Ruth Bader Ginsberg? Speaking of Clarence Thomas, how the F did you ever get on the SC considering all of the sexual harrassment you committed.

Because if you were not a scoundrel. Scoundrel you say. I am highly insulted thems fightin words. Now you have gone and done it. I'm fixin to challenge you to a duel sir, to defend my honor. You me and the rest of the fictitional members of the multiple personalities in your head. There I think I've gone and done it, I've made a complete mockery of the sanctity of your delusional membership in the "supreme court".

[UF-28]

You have some pair of ba^%# criticizing a police officer who misuses his authority and places his career at risk..all to protect the good people in his sector.

If it serves the good of the community at large, Suffolk cops are self-authorized to violate any laws necessary to maintain public order.

If you don't like their conduct, you can sue the officers and witness how adept the police are at test-a-lying or not directly answering questions posed to them under oath.

Screw the United States Constitution...WE ARE THE LAW!

[US or Them]

My moneys on the Constitution!

[Ms.Manners]

Suffolk County Rules and Procedures
Chapter 20
Section iv
Sub g
After a whole long paragraph on how to invoice nonevidentiary property, there is a paragraph that states;
If during the case of a investigation, a Sworn member (not swollen member, a police officer) has reasonable belief that certain property may be used in the commision of a crime, at some point after said investigation is terminated, The officer may confiscate property whether or not the owner is present or agrees. The property or incident may be non-criminal at the time. The officer must issue a receipt for property and invoice it accordingly as per non evidentiary invoice procedures.
The procedure is the same the property is held until the receipt clears then the rightful owner may pick it up.
The next paragraph is a example of being at a non-criminal domestic where the husband is intox and possesses a hunting rifle.
SCPD is the one telling us to do this, we are not acting as renegades, ok.
Now Mr. Police academy /Court/ everyone else drop it.

Obviously we are going to need a bigger sandbox for all the serious police posters to play in
Why this is a serious thread?
Could have fooled me.

[C0UNTY RESIDENT]

[/quote]US or Them
Posted: Tue Feb 22, 2005 9:05 pm

My moneys on the Constitution



So what you are saying is you gamble on legal documents?

[Arrest me]

Money Money everywhere!!! Threats will get U nowhere except on the SCPD. 8) :roll: :o :lol: :D :lol:

If you are not able to address this issue then the court would respectfully suggest you find another thread

The Supreme Court with all you phoney holier-than-thou judges and court personnel can kiss my fat ass. I will post whereever I want to.

IT'S CALLED FREEDOM OF SPEECH. DO YOU EVEN KNOW WHAT JUSTICE MEANS? No your too busy stuffing your faces at the Irish Coffee Pub.

[Applicantbeinginvestigate]

Money Money everywhere!!! Threats will get U nowhere except on the SCPD.
Is that how you get on the force?
I thought you had to take a civil service test, then psyche, agility followed by background/ poly.
Thats it I'm going to The academy and threatening some instructors, dammit

Suffolk County Rules and Procedures
Chapter 20
Section iv
Sub g
After a whole long paragraph on how to invoice nonevidentiary property, there is a paragraph that states;
If during the case of a investigation, a Sworn member (not swollen member, a police officer) has reasonable belief that certain property may be used in the commision of a crime, at some point after said investigation is terminated, The officer may confiscate property whether or not the owner is present or agrees. The property or incident may be non-criminal at the time. The officer must issue a receipt for property and invoice it accordingly as per non evidentiary invoice procedures.
The procedure is the same the property is held until the receipt clears then the rightful owner may pick it up.
The next paragraph is a example of being at a non-criminal domestic where the husband is intox and possesses a hunting rifle.
SCPD is the one telling us to do this, we are not acting as renegades, ok.
Now Mr. Police academy /Court/ everyone else drop it.

I warned you that this is some dirt bag lawyer hoping to goad a cop into reciting chapter and verse to obtain the R&P utilized to seize property. I can almost hear the FOIA request from the attorney being obtained now. In addition this has the makings of a scumbag attorney class action suit. Good job officer, the asswipe known as SCJ is now laughing himself all of tht way to the bank and you made their job that much easier. The way the dept. skirts the FOIA is that if you dont refer to the exact chapter, name page number and title of a document you get a "does not exist" response. Good job big mouth. I can almost see the class action suit against the PBA and the Dept. now for the illegal confiscation of PBA cards and knives.

[Dr. Dre]

I warned you that this is some dirt bag lawyer hoping to goad a cop into reciting chapter and verse to obtain the R&P utilized to seize property. I can almost hear the FOIA request from the attorney being obtained now. In addition this has the makings of a scumbag attorney class action suit. Good job officer, the asswipe known as SCJ is now laughing himself all of tht way to the bank and you made their job that much easier. The way the dept. skirts the FOIA is that if you dont refer to the exact chapter, name page number and title of a document you get a "does not exist" response. Good job big mouth. I can almost see the class action suit against the PBA and the Dept. now for the illegal confiscation of PBA cards and knives.

Your paranoia may be a result of the turmoil created in you mind when considering the ambiguity of your role in society as a law abiding citizen and your role as a police officer.

Meds are available to treat your current mental impairment. Perhaps you should consider seeking competent medical assistance?

I warned you that this is some dirt bag lawyer hoping to goad a cop into reciting chapter and verse to obtain the R&P utilized to seize property. I can almost hear the FOIA request from the attorney being obtained now. In addition this has the makings of a scumbag attorney class action suit. Good job officer, the asswipe known as SCJ is now laughing himself all of tht way to the bank and you made their job that much easier. The way the dept. skirts the FOIA is that if you dont refer to the exact chapter, name page number and title of a document you get a "does not exist" response. Good job big mouth. I can almost see the class action suit against the PBA and the Dept. now for the illegal confiscation of PBA cards and knives.

Your paranoia may be a result of the turmoil created in you mind when considering the ambiguity of your role in society as a law abiding citizen and your role as a police officer.

Meds are available to treat your current mental impairment. Perhaps you should consider seeking competent medical assistance?

Yeah, I'll self medicate w/ coke and booze and then I'll be promotable to Inspector.

[FinallyTheTruth]

First of all, I will not take out my dictionary in order to impress the readers on this thread. In plain english... Everyone knows that the Supreme Court Justices, which this perp is trying to impersonate, are located in Washington D.C. and they surely do not care about this topic. In order for a case to even be heard by them (and it is VERY rare) their is the little requirement "Writ of Certiori" You know, like in cases such as Roe V. Wade. Not pockt knife invoice cases by a county cop trying to dot the right thing. And another thing... You're right to bear arms and all of your constitution talk... that was all written 100's of years ago...You know...to protect against your life against red coats or what not... and to stop soldiers from other jurisdiction from using your daughter or wife as they please... I'm sure they would have agreed to change this right had they forseen Jasbo from the res carrying a knife or a musket while cruising the streets of Brentwood looking to pull a GLA.

[Supreme Court Justice]

First of all, I will not take out my dictionary in order to impress the readers on this thread. In plain english... Everyone knows that the Supreme Court Justices, which this perp is trying to impersonate, are located in Washington D.C. and they surely do not care about this topic. In order for a case to even be heard by them (and it is VERY rare) their is the little requirement "Writ of Certiori" You know, like in cases such as Roe V. Wade. Not pockt knife invoice cases by a county cop trying to dot the right thing. And another thing... You're right to bear arms and all of your constitution talk... that was all written 100's of years ago...You know...to protect against your life against red coats or what not... and to stop soldiers from other jurisdiction from using your daughter or wife as they please... I'm sure they would have agreed to change this right had they forseen Jasbo from the res carrying a knife or a musket while cruising the streets of Brentwood looking to pull a GLA
Stop you are ruining all my fun. I am a court and I disbar you from the court, baillif remove this slob, any trouble from him, shoot him on my authoritor. The rest of you peasants simmer down, before I take matters in my own hands.
We the court find police to have too much power and are taking it away. Every U.S. citizen now has the power to act as a Officer of the Law. All may write each other traffic summons. All may use DPF for any reason.
The court has spoken!
Now baillif ready my bubble bath

[Finally The Truth]

That's enough of your BS. You wan't something to cry about, go to www.facialabuse.com That is something to worry about.

[Supreme Court Justice]

That's enough of your BS. You wan't something to cry about, go to www.facialabuse.com That is something to worry about.
Hey thats my mom, wife and daughter on that site!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! :twisted:

[Finally the Truth]

I didn't mean to actually create a link, but that shoud be illegal, not a cop taking a pocket knife! Sorry if I offended anyone.

[US Citizens]

I see your point. THAT should be illegal.

Everyone knows that the Supreme Court Justices, which this perp is trying to impersonate, are located in Washington D.C.

So whats your point? Anyone can log onto lipolitics form anywhere in the world. Why I have done it prior to bungi jumping off Victoria Falls :lol:

[Supreme Court Justice]

So whats your point
Dont you know you dont need a point, just post anything, join the Supreme court justice club

[Supreme Court Justices]

First of all, I will not take out my dictionary in order to impress the readers on this thread.

A meat and potatoes man, huh?

In plain english... Everyone knows that the Supreme Court Justices, which this perp is trying to impersonate, are located in Washington D.C. and they surely do not care about this topic.

We are disheartened to learn you saw right thru our transparent little sham. Apparently we underestimated the intellectual prowess of the average reader. You deserve accolades and disparate recognition for exposing us as perps.

In order for a case to even be heard by them (and it is VERY rare) their is the little requirement "Writ of Certiori" You know, like in cases such as Roe V. Wade.

Gee, you don’t say?

Not pockt knife invoice cases by a county cop trying to dot the right thing.

This court admires officers who do the right thing. It’s the officer who thinks it’s okay to break the law in order to do the right thing that twists the nuts of this court.

And another thing...

LOL…………..

You're right to bear arms and all of your constitution talk... that was all written 100's of years ago...You know...to protect against your life against red coats or what not... and to stop soldiers from other jurisdiction from using your daughter or wife as they please... I'm sure they would have agreed to change this right had they forseen Jasbo from the res carrying a knife or a musket while cruising the streets of Brentwood looking to pull a GLA.

This court is recommending your legal guardian consult with an attorney and seriously consider taking advantage of the mental hygiene laws.

[Supreme Court Justice]

First of all, I will not take out my dictionary in order to impress the readers on this thread.


A meat and potatoes man, huh?

Quote:
In plain english... Everyone knows that the Supreme Court Justices, which this perp is trying to impersonate, are located in Washington D.C. and they surely do not care about this topic.


We are disheartened to learn you saw right thru our transparent little sham. Apparently we underestimated the intellectual prowess of the average reader. You deserve accolades and disparate recognition for exposing us as perps.

Quote:
In order for a case to even be heard by them (and it is VERY rare) their is the little requirement "Writ of Certiori" You know, like in cases such as Roe V. Wade.


Gee, you don’t say?

Quote:
Not pockt knife invoice cases by a county cop trying to dot the right thing.


This court admires officers who do the right thing. It’s the officer who thinks it’s okay to break the law in order to do the right thing that twists the nuts of this court.

Quote:
And another thing...


LOL…………..

Quote:
You're right to bear arms and all of your constitution talk... that was all written 100's of years ago...You know...to protect against your life against red coats or what not... and to stop soldiers from other jurisdiction from using your daughter or wife as they please... I'm sure they would have agreed to change this right had they forseen Jasbo from the res carrying a knife or a musket while cruising the streets of Brentwood looking to pull a GLA.


This court is recommending your legal guardian consult with an attorney and seriously consider taking advantage of the mental hygiene laws.

See?Dont you know you dont need a point, just post anything, join the Supreme court justice club
You'll have a blast

Suffolk County Rules and Procedures
Chapter 20
Section iv
Sub g
After a whole long paragraph on how to invoice nonevidentiary property, there is a paragraph that states;
If during the case of a investigation, a Sworn member (not swollen member, a police officer) has reasonable belief that certain property may be used in the commision of a crime, at some point after said investigation is terminated, The officer may confiscate property whether or not the owner is present or agrees. The property or incident may be non-criminal at the time. The officer must issue a receipt for property and invoice it accordingly as per non evidentiary invoice procedures.
The procedure is the same the property is held until the receipt clears then the rightful owner may pick it up.
The next paragraph is a example of being at a non-criminal domestic where the husband is intox and possesses a hunting rifle.
SCPD is the one telling us to do this, we are not acting as renegades, ok.
Now Mr. Police academy /Court/ everyone else drop it.

I warned you that this is some dirt bag lawyer hoping to goad a cop into reciting chapter and verse to obtain the R&P utilized to seize property. I can almost hear the FOIA request from the attorney being obtained now. In addition this has the makings of a scumbag attorney class action suit. Good job officer, the asswipe known as SCJ is now laughing himself all of tht way to the bank and you made their job that much easier. The way the dept. skirts the FOIA is that if you dont refer to the exact chapter, name page number and title of a document you get a "does not exist" response. Good job big mouth. I can almost see the class action suit against the PBA and the Dept. now for the illegal confiscation of PBA cards and knives.
Nah, I didnt post the actual section, just made up a pretend one. Figured it would shut this loser up, worked quite well. Thread died after one more page.

[www.coptroll.org]

hey you cop loser groupie, why didnt you find this one, remember back here people actually replied to you, rather than just made fun of you, now you just have a all nite dialogue with yourself(you are used to that anyone from the stories the guys you worked with tell, lol)

another hyppocritical gem....ah the days of preaching........... dr corvalle

remember the ''cops on the wrong side of the law drivel you had a few years back? Were you included?
Troll


You have been banned from this forum.
Please contact the webmaster or board administrator for more information.

[mesno]

were u banned when you posted this?