Results 1 to 10 of 12
-
07-12-2019, 09:01 AM #1UnregisteredGuest
Marijuana
Are we the only department that can't do searches of vehicles that smell like weed? Other agencies are still doing it from what I heard. Just another idiotic order from the admin. What a joke.
-
07-14-2019, 07:06 PM #2
-
07-14-2019, 08:05 PM #3
-
07-15-2019, 12:54 AM #4UnregisteredGuest
-
07-15-2019, 01:05 PM #5UnregisteredGuest
I'm a bit confused. If you read the article attached to the Chief's email, it specifically states, "Agencies should immediately adopt policies to reduce or eliminate the risk of erroneously arresting someone in legal possession of a hemp
product. Failure to promptly do so may result in a finding of an unconstitutional policy, custom, or practice, which is a predicate to agency liability under a Section 1983 theory."
So, the Chief sent out an email and in my estimation the email institutes a policy that protects YOU, the OFFICER, of exactly what the article states could happen (which could be a claim of false arrest against YOU and the agency). And your upset because....???? So, what you are saying is that instituting a policy to protect an officer is idiotic? I don't follow your logic.
-
07-15-2019, 05:37 PM #6
-
07-16-2019, 06:20 PM #7UnregisteredGuest
The “Good Faith” doctrine would only provide some protection if and only if you articulated the Holy Ghost out of weed case given the new law, the capabilities of current presumptive testing kits and that of our local labs. You really need to read over the material that was attached to the Chief’s email.
-
07-17-2019, 08:44 AM #8UnregisteredGuest
-
07-18-2019, 09:21 AM #9UnregisteredGuest
-
07-22-2019, 01:08 PM #10UnregisteredGuest
Bookmarks