Don't rob a bank in Spain

**mhailey** · 06-20-2007, 08:09 PM

I was a prosecutor, and I am now a civil litigator.

Further, an alert to the presence of drugs is totally different than commanding a dog to speak.

An alert is when you tell the dog to find the drugs, and then the animal unilaterally gives the signal that drugs have been found. There can be a multitude of different "alerts" such as sitting, scratching at the location of the drugs, or barking in conjunction with the others. It is not barking alone. The alert is performed unilaterally, after the command is given to search for drugs.

If the police officer commands the dog to speak, then any such command will be on the dash cam (which also records the police officer's voice), and the search can easily be deemed unconstitutional, and any evidence which resulted from this search excluded. Where I live the dash cam automatically begins to record when the emergency flashers are activated, and this is how the vehicle is directed to stop. They (and the dash cam) and are not turned off until after the stop is completed. It is kind of hard for the cop to command the dog to issue a false alert under this scenario.

Additionally, watch this video.

**gratewhitehuntr** · 06-20-2007, 09:25 PM

Good, I'm glad to know who I am talking to, although I must say that as a private security officer I have somewhat less than the utmost respect for civil litigators.

Understand that this may or may not be a condemnation of your profession and or personal character depending on your area of practice and specific sorts of cases you pursue.

I see more clearly now where your question concerning lawyers and the constitution handcuffing the justice system was pointed.

I would say that civil lawsuits have been a factor in the "hobbling" of the criminal law system and that the current civil system is a disaster.

Why would I say this?

Even in a justified shoot at work, ie. armed assailant killed in the commission of a forcible felony, I stand to loose more than 1 month work due to being relieved of duty because of vicarious liability and EVEN IN A JUSTIFIED SHOOT I still stand a very good chance of having a civil suit brought against me.

Even if I just shoot the guy in the leg his liar is going to stand in court and swear that he was the next Dion Sanders until that mean ol security shot him in the knee and ruined his life forever.

If he can't run from the police how is he supposed to make a living??

As far as the dissenting opinion of Ginsburg in the Illinois v. CaballesI was pointing out that even certain members of the Supreme Court feel that dogs are unreliable.

As far as whether or not it is law??

Well now that I know what your level of understanding is on this topic I can clearly see that you meant this to be a joke.

You should know better than most that a judges opinion is at the head of the "about to become a law" line.
All that is needed is a few more justices to agree with her and it WILL be the law.

BTW, dogs respond to all sorts of commands, not just verbal.
Many dogs are trained with hand commands, I've even managed a command by rapid blinks or tiny squeaks, clucks, hissing though my teeth and even a "psst" that was barely audible to even me(and I was issuing it) which the dog would respond to from over 30 ft away and sit.

Hell, in that video all he had to do was issue a hand command to sit by snapping his fingers.
Let me tell you something man.
I have hunted over a lot of dogs, someone else can back me on this, a dog does not need you to point at things for them to smell.

I find his handling techniques suspicious, even in that video.

**gratewhitehuntr** · 06-20-2007, 09:35 PM

Thanks for the youtube idea btw. I went and watched some more vids.

Like this one
Notice the reward at the end? I don't think it was food but still a reward
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SvnU6...elated&search=

**mhailey** · 06-21-2007, 06:17 PM

Originally Posted by gratewhitehuntr

... [I] must say that as a private security officer I have somewhat less than the utmost respect for civil litigators.

Understand that this may or may not be a condemnation of your profession and or personal character depending on your area of practice and specific sorts of cases you pursue.

Seriously, was this necessary?????????

**gratewhitehuntr** · 06-22-2007, 11:35 PM

Originally Posted by mhailey

Seriously, was this necessary?????????

Yes it was.

Many people group all lawyers together.

I was simply stating that there are different areas to work in in the civil system and some civil litigators are very useful and are a benefit to John Q and some are crooks who are pure drain on the system.

I don't know which you are and would not ask as I feel it impolite.

In other words, some are good, some are bad, you know which you are.

The only part of what you quoted that I might amend would be to add a "SOME" to "less than the utmost respect for (some) civil litigators".

That was about as diplomatic as I get, take it or leave it.

**mhailey** · 06-23-2007, 02:04 AM

the simple addition of "some" in that sentence makes a rather large difference, now doesn't it.

**gratewhitehuntr** · 06-23-2007, 02:30 AM

Originally Posted by mhailey

the simple addition of "some" in that sentence makes a rather large difference, now doesn't it.

yeah

damn 10 character minimum

Thread: Don't rob a bank in Spain

LinkBack

Thread Tools

Display

Posting Permissions