Guest wrote:If FDLE would audit FHP DAVID use they would have to suspend 3/4 of the certificates because of misuse of DAVID.
That is a fact that the brass has turned a blind eye to. Shame on the brass for allowing this to go on. Heads need to roll.
3/4, how about 100%. But like this OIG office operates, it all depends on who you are and if they turn a blind eye to people. Funny how two troopers can have the same so called violation, yet one gets put under investigation while the other........... well nothing happens or it gets swept under the carpet..... WOW.... this is what happens when the FOX is watching the chicken coop........
It will never end until an outside agency comes in and cleans up this place. corruption starts from the top down. Leaders are told what to do or lack there of.......
My question is why would anyone be interested in running her dl if not for criminal intent. Her pic was advertised all over the papers, and one would have to have personal knowledge of certain criteria to run it to begin with. So if it was not to obtain an address for whatever reason, why run it? There has to be some policing of the use of DAVID to prevent unlawful use.
And as far as the response about mechanical running of tags, yes we are aware and that is a totally different animal from some moron running tags for personal reasons. It's comparing apples to oranges. That MACHINE isn't going to deseminate that data to anyone other than a database. So that's one for the turnip guy and 0 for uneducated troopers who are about to receive a wake up call.
Guest wrote:. So that's one for the turnip guy and 0 for uneducated troopers who are about to receive a wake up call.
What makes you so sure the "uneducated troopers" are the ones thinking it's ok to run any ones's name or tag in DAVID are really troopers? Oh yeah they post on the FHP portion of LEOAFFAIRS so they MUST be Troopers right Dr. Douchebag????
Nothing much will be done here except writeups but what can be done to officers running tags that check out good and then they click onto the DL info of the registered owner and get them for no valid DL even though no traffic infraction was being committed and they were just fishing for stuff without cause ? Some officers do this a lot ?
. Seems like both of you need to learn a little more about the law. Watts is filing a lawsuit. The question was, what is the legal basis for the lawsuit? A violation of the agreement is not grounds for a lawsuit. If the information was not used for unlawful purposes (stalking, identity theft, etc), then how is she going to show harm? While it is impossible to know the reasons for officers being terminated on your agency, that is obviously not the issue here since it was reported that the officers received reprimands.
Uhhh maybe you should go back and learn a little bit more about law, specifically constitutional law. Here there doesn't necessarily need to be harm to recover a judgement. The Government has a different burden than the normal citizenry. Here it would amount to an unlawful search of her information by a government agency, specifically prohibited under the 4th amendment, thus she could win a judgement. If a police officer searches your house without a warrant or permission then your 4th amendment rights were violated. You could sue that department, and/or officer) even though you didn't suffer any harm. The harm would only play into the amount of damages awarded by the court. The same applies if a governmental agency unlawfully searches your information without just cause. Like her or hate her she could recover some money, although probably not going to become a millionaire.
I can run any tag I wish without a reason. When you run the tag the R/O's DAVID information comes up.
Dream on, call FDLE and ask them what happens if you run a tag for no reason. I think you better read your FSS book, as that is usually what FDLE ends up charging the officers with who do stupid things like running a tag for no reason. I think they charge unlawful use of communication. How do you think these loverboys get caught running tags of women they want to pursue?? I have also seen FDLE come in and investigate a guy for running a tag legitimately, thankfully he had written in his log book what and who it was for, that was the only thing that saved his butt. Turns out there was a leak in a case and he happened to run the tag in a official capacity. If you think, "I don't remember" or "I can run any tag I wish without reason" is gonna save you, think again. But you are right, you can run any tag you want, without reason, you are just gonna be a short time leo. and very lucky if you escape criminal charges. Have at it big guy.
I love reading comments from armchair attorneys and LEOs. While anyone can sue for any reason, the chances of Watts getting one cent is close to zero. Examples are continuosly given that have nothing to do with this. If everyone could be sued for running a name in DAVID, there would be a line of attorneys stretched around the block waiting for the daily list of names. While it is not appropriate, you don't think some LEOs haven't ran other people who have made the news like George Zimmerman, Trayvon Martin, Tiger Woods, and others? It is a violation of a policy, not invasion of privacy or a 4th amendment violation as long as no other action was done with the info. Regarding lawsuits, Lopez should sue Watts for excessive use of force by a LEO.
. Seems like both of you need to learn a little more about the law. Watts is filing a lawsuit. The question was, what is the legal basis for the lawsuit? A violation of the agreement is not grounds for a lawsuit. If the information was not used for unlawful purposes (stalking, identity theft, etc), then how is she going to show harm? While it is impossible to know the reasons for officers being terminated on your agency, that is obviously not the issue here since it was reported that the officers received reprimands.
Uhhh maybe you should go back and learn a little bit more about law, specifically constitutional law. Here there doesn't necessarily need to be harm to recover a judgement. The Government has a different burden than the normal citizenry. Here it would amount to an unlawful search of her information by a government agency, specifically prohibited under the 4th amendment, thus she could win a judgement. If a police officer searches your house without a warrant or permission then your 4th amendment rights were violated. You could sue that department, and/or officer) even though you didn't suffer any harm. The harm would only play into the amount of damages awarded by the court. The same applies if a governmental agency unlawfully searches your information without just cause. Like her or hate her she could recover some money, although probably not going to become a millionaire.
I can run any tag I wish without a reason. When you run the tag the R/O's DAVID information comes up.
Dream on, call FDLE and ask them what happens if you run a tag for no reason. I think you better read your FSS book, as that is usually what FDLE ends up charging the officers with who do stupid things like running a tag for no reason. I think they charge unlawful use of communication. How do you think these loverboys get caught running tags of women they want to pursue?? I have also seen FDLE come in and investigate a guy for running a tag legitimately, thankfully he had written in his log book what and who it was for, that was the only thing that saved his butt. Turns out there was a leak in a case and he happened to run the tag in a official capacity. If you think, "I don't remember" or "I can run any tag I wish without reason" is gonna save you, think again. But you are right, you can run any tag you want, without reason, you are just gonna be a short time leo. and very lucky if you escape criminal charges. Have at it big guy.
I love reading comments from armchair attorneys and LEOs. While anyone can sue for any reason, the chances of Watts getting one cent is close to zero. Examples are continuosly given that have nothing to do with this. If everyone could be sued for running a name in DAVID, there would be a line of attorneys stretched around the block waiting for the daily list of names. While it is not appropriate, you don't think some LEOs haven't ran other people who have made the news like George Zimmerman, Trayvon Martin, Tiger Woods, and others? It is a violation of a policy, not invasion of privacy or a 4th amendment violation as long as no other action was done with the info. Regarding lawsuits, Lopez should sue Watts for excessive use of force by a LEO.
Guest wrote:. So that's one for the turnip guy and 0 for uneducated troopers who are about to receive a wake up call.
What makes you so sure the "uneducated troopers" are the ones thinking it's ok to run any ones's name or tag in DAVID are really troopers? Oh yeah they post on the FHP portion of LEOAFFAIRS so they MUST be Troopers right Dr. Douchebag????
Because most of the information talked about in some of the posts have verbage that would only be recognized and used by leo's. Citizens like to try arguing a point, but they don't know what the hell DAVID even is to argue about it , Mr Douchebag! You give citizens too much credit, why the hell would they want to come on here and read about a bunch of whiny, snot nosed, lazy, wet behind the ear cry babies??
Guest wrote:. So that's one for the turnip guy and 0 for uneducated troopers who are about to receive a wake up call.
What makes you so sure the "uneducated troopers" are the ones thinking it's ok to run any ones's name or tag in DAVID are really troopers? Oh yeah they post on the FHP portion of LEOAFFAIRS so they MUST be Troopers right Dr. Douchebag????
Because most of the information talked about in some of the posts have verbage that would only be recognized and used by leo's. Citizens like to try arguing a point, but they don't know what the hell DAVID even is to argue about it , Mr Douchebag! You give citizens too much credit, why the hell would they want to come on here and read about a bunch of whiny, snot nosed, lazy, wet behind the ear cry babies??
Now now, FHP has spent the past 20 years hiring a certain type of trooper so they could dumb down the patrol. It seems to have worked perfectly.
Guest wrote:Because most of the information talked about in some of the posts have verbage that would only be recognized and used by leo's. Citizens like to try arguing a point, but they don't know what the hell DAVID even is to argue about it , Mr Douchebag! You give citizens too much credit, why the hell would they want to come on here and read about a bunch of whiny, snot nosed, lazy, wet behind the ear cry babies??
WOW I didn't think I could read a more stupid reply than yours Dr. Douchebag. No way the posts could be by city kitty's and deputy sheriffs stirring the pot right..right Dr. Douchebag?
Guest wrote: So mr. know it all, what would she sue about? Running someone's name on DAVID isn't a crime unless you do something with the info. She will have to show that each person she sues was either trying to harass, threaten, intimidate, or caused some action to effect her. She can't claim the running of her on DAVID resulted in her reputation being smeared, her actions that were caught on her own videotape did that. As for the earlier post about YouTube, the tape was released to the public. Anyone who posted it did do legally.
Hey Rook,
I think you need to re-read the DAVID user agreement (you know, the long paragraph priot to the box you check each time your certificate is used) and then you might see how ignorant your statement is Miami guy.
Im not the original poster of this message. I am replying to the "Miami Guy" comment. F U and stop hating that we make more than any of you good ol boys.
. Seems like both of you need to learn a little more about the law. Watts is filing a lawsuit. The question was, what is the legal basis for the lawsuit? A violation of the agreement is not grounds for a lawsuit. If the information was not used for unlawful purposes (stalking, identity theft, etc), then how is she going to show harm? While it is impossible to know the reasons for officers being terminated on your agency, that is obviously not the issue here since it was reported that the officers received reprimands.
Uhhh maybe you should go back and learn a little bit more about law, specifically constitutional law. Here there doesn't necessarily need to be harm to recover a judgement. The Government has a different burden than the normal citizenry. Here it would amount to an unlawful search of her information by a government agency, specifically prohibited under the 4th amendment, thus she could win a judgement. If a police officer searches your house without a warrant or permission then your 4th amendment rights were violated. You could sue that department, and/or officer) even though you didn't suffer any harm. The harm would only play into the amount of damages awarded by the court. The same applies if a governmental agency unlawfully searches your information without just cause. Like her or hate her she could recover some money, although probably not going to become a millionaire.
I can run any tag I wish without a reason. When you run the tag the R/O's DAVID information comes up.
Dream on, call FDLE and ask them what happens if you run a tag for no reason. I think you better read your FSS book, as that is usually what FDLE ends up charging the officers with who do stupid things like running a tag for no reason. I think they charge unlawful use of communication. How do you think these loverboys get caught running tags of women they want to pursue?? I have also seen FDLE come in and investigate a guy for running a tag legitimately, thankfully he had written in his log book what and who it was for, that was the only thing that saved his butt. Turns out there was a leak in a case and he happened to run the tag in a official capacity. If you think, "I don't remember" or "I can run any tag I wish without reason" is gonna save you, think again. But you are right, you can run any tag you want, without reason, you are just gonna be a short time leo. and very lucky if you escape criminal charges. Have at it big guy.
I love reading comments from armchair attorneys and LEOs. While anyone can sue for any reason, the chances of Watts getting one cent is close to zero. Examples are continuosly given that have nothing to do with this. If everyone could be sued for running a name in DAVID, there would be a line of attorneys stretched around the block waiting for the daily list of names. While it is not appropriate, you don't think some LEOs haven't ran other people who have made the news like George Zimmerman, Trayvon Martin, Tiger Woods, and others? It is a violation of a policy, not invasion of privacy or a 4th amendment violation as long as no other action was done with the info. Regarding lawsuits, Lopez should sue Watts for excessive use of force by a LEO.
