Bowtech_archer07 Posted September 22, 2009 Report Share Posted September 22, 2009 This was a writing assignment in one of my classes for college. Thought I'd post the idea here and see what everyone says. Not trying to stir anything up, just wanting opinions. Mods, if this is inappropriate, remove it. Assume that the police have multiple leads that implicate Mr. Smith as a pedophile, but they have failed in every attempt to obtain a warrant to search Smith's car and home where evidence might be present. Officer Jones feels frustrated and, early one morning, takes his baton and breaks a rear taillight on Smith's car. The next day he stops Smith for operating his vehicle with a broken taillight; he impounds and inventories the vehicle and finds evidence leading to Smith's conviction on 25 counts of child molestation and possession of pornography. Jones receives accolades for the apprehension. Queries: Do Officer Jones' "ends" justify the "means"? What if he believes he is justified in "taking bad guys off the streets"? What if he argues that he is correct in this approach because he was molested as a child? What do y'all think? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hoosierbuck Posted September 22, 2009 Report Share Posted September 22, 2009 I deal with this stuff daily. The clear, bright line answer is NO, ends do not justify means when the means are illegal. HB Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
texastrophies Posted September 22, 2009 Report Share Posted September 22, 2009 Since when would a broken taillight be grounds for impounding a vehicle? Worst case scenario it should just be a ticket and more likely a verbal warning. Therefore, all of the evidence found in the vehicle will probably be thrown out and he gets off free and the officer gets reprimanded. I guess, what I am saying is you either do it right or risk blowing the case. If they have all of the leads that you say, surely a little more leg work could result in a solid case to get the scumbag off the street. Sounds like in your scenario someone is just getting lazy. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hoosierhunter Posted September 22, 2009 Report Share Posted September 22, 2009 anybody remember Mark Furman? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
camoman1 Posted September 22, 2009 Report Share Posted September 22, 2009 I think Mr. Smith got what he deserved.....people like him need to be caught and their doings put to an end. Personally, I think there is way to much legal mumbo jumbo that gets in the way of dirtbags getting what they deserve....but there also needs to be a line of individual privacy (to protect the innocent). Unfortunately that line is very thin. I think the 'ethical' part is a gray area. Im all for doing whatever it takes to get people like ' Mr. Smith', and murderers and such. But you cant have Police Officers busting everyones tail lights just because they had a 'hunch' they were doing something. In this particular situation, I think it would more unethical to NOT do something. All signs pointed to him being guilty, they just needed a way to prove it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
swohiodave Posted September 22, 2009 Report Share Posted September 22, 2009 I would be glad he is off of the street but if the cop gets away with this what is going to stop a cop who does not like law abiding citizens carrying a legally concealed handgun from pulling him over and arresting him for some crazy charge. The line cannot be hazy. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
backwoods07 Posted September 22, 2009 Report Share Posted September 22, 2009 I deal with this stuff daily. The clear, bright line answer is NO, ends do not justify means when the means are illegal. HB Yup. There's a reason they would not be able to obtain a warrant. Laws are there for a reason, and unfortunately they protect the guilty occasionally. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OJR Posted September 22, 2009 Report Share Posted September 22, 2009 The cop crossed the line! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
joeaveragehunter Posted September 22, 2009 Report Share Posted September 22, 2009 In your scenario it worked out how it should. But if that is allowed for that, where do you draw the line? I would have no problem with the cop doing that if he is 100% sure, but the slope is so slippery, youre gonna end up going over the cliff. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
redkneck Posted September 22, 2009 Report Share Posted September 22, 2009 You can go on like this forever in these scenarios. The cop clearly crossed the line, but tell that to the parents of one of the kids. Let someone touch one of my kids and you wont have to worry about the cop, or the judge, just make a call to the coroner. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stevebeilgard Posted September 22, 2009 Report Share Posted September 22, 2009 the cop did something illegal, and that puts him in the same catagory as the pervert. while the pervert needs to be apprehended, he needs to be done so legally. simple as that. i don't want our cops being as illegal as our criminals. we have juries making decisions on folks lives, not cops. and, once a cop crosses that line, where does he stop? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
oldksnarc Posted September 22, 2009 Report Share Posted September 22, 2009 We don't have to cheat to win. The limits of the Constitution are there for a reason. Circumventing the Constitution is no excuse for lazy or ineffective investigation. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hoosierbuck Posted September 22, 2009 Report Share Posted September 22, 2009 We don't have to cheat to win. The limits of the Constitution are there for a reason. Circumventing the Constitution is no excuse for lazy or ineffective investigation. You, sir, are my kind of guy. I'd take your cases to court any day. HB Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wtnhunt Posted September 22, 2009 Report Share Posted September 22, 2009 the cop did something illegal, and that puts him in the same catagory as the pervert. while the pervert needs to be apprehended, he needs to be done so legally. simple as that. i don't want our cops being as illegal as our criminals. we have juries making decisions on folks lives, not cops. and, once a cop crosses that line, where does he stop? Kind of with Steve on this one. Cop needs to find a way to legally obtain his evidence rather than crossing the line. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sluggunner Posted September 22, 2009 Report Share Posted September 22, 2009 The old adage stands. Two wrongs do not make a right. As frustrating as it might be I agree that the cop needs to follow the rules and catch the dirt bag in a legal and ethical way. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Kid Posted September 22, 2009 Report Share Posted September 22, 2009 the evidence should not be able to be used in the courts even though the guy is a scum bag because america runs on principles everything we do no matter what whether it be right or wrong. And what the police man did was wrong. If this is allowed we are telling all police men and women that its alright to break the laws that we set forth on this country, were saying its alright that if they "suspect" something that its ok to break/bend the rules. That is why we have amendments and a set of rules/ structure for our sophisticated society.. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.