Quote:
Originally Posted by PT145SS
"Probable Cause" and "Reasonable Belief" are two very different things and are different enough to be defined by SCOTUS in Terry vs. Ohio. Reasonable belief, would have only legally bought the OP a chance to make legal contact with the individual and get a "Terry Pat" out of it. The OP would then only have a limited chance to gain probable cause during a very limited and short investigation which is afforded in a Terry Stop. At no point does the OP have probable cause to search a vehicle as described in the post.
Unfortunately there are no laws that I am aware of preventing LEOs from lying about what they know during an interview. There are some laws about false promises in regards to letting someone go or reduced sentences and such. But a LEO can lie about pretty much anything else.
I would agree with others, opening ones mouth....even if completely innocent... is fool hardy. Your words can only be twisted and used against you.
LEO: Do you know why I pulled you over?
YOU: Because you have an uncontrollable urge to violate my 4th amendment rights!
|
Pulling out the case law. I love it. For a terry frisk (or as you said terry pat) I can only frisk for weapons for my safety so if I felt a baggy in their pocket or anything I could only ask him what it is. He can say a bag of candy and that would be the end of it. Even if I was sure it was dope. Unless I saw him put it there then it's forbidden territory.
You are right with probable cause and reasonable belief. I need probably cause to search a vehicle. Even with reasonable belief I can not search anything. I can however frisk for weapons just for my safety with just reasonable belief.