Is message to hide stash where sun don't shine?
The Sept. 6 News & Record described the overturn by the Court of Appeals of a conviction for cocaine possession because of "unreasonable search and seizure."
The Court of Appeals objected to the police including in their search the shining of a flashlight into the underwear of a suspect where they found a hidden bottle of crack cocaine.
Really? Does that mean that anyone suspected of trafficking can hide their stash in their underwear and escape arrest? Lots of criminals must be gleeful at this news.
What are the police expected to do? The court's message seems to be to hide your contraband in your underwear and get a free pass.
Edwin L. Bryan
Greensboro
Comments (8)
To report abuse of the comment feature on this site, please use the feedback form at the bottom of any page.
Hee Hee! I can see how one might consider that ridiculous. However, you have to know all the details. The Court may have found the search to be unreasonable in this particular case. However, I doubt that sets a precedent for all searches beneath the tighty-whiteys. It’s much more complicated than that.
Posted on September 20, 2006 7:54 AM
Damn Stevie, there goes my plan to cover my house in underwear.
Posted on September 20, 2006 9:03 AM
Is that a crackpipe in your pants or are you just happy to see me?
Posted on September 20, 2006 9:49 AM
LOL! Good one nit.
Posted on September 20, 2006 11:28 AM
LOL again! Didn't see yours Jan.
Posted on September 20, 2006 11:29 AM
Ha, ha, ha...what a fun blog.
Posted on September 20, 2006 12:20 PM
if the officer looks down the front of your skivies and finds nothing - you're still busted if he looks in the back of your skivies - he definitely is gonna see (a) crack. :-(
Posted on September 20, 2006 1:50 PM
hee hee hee
Posted on September 20, 2006 4:47 PM