--- begin forwarded text
Resent-Date: Fri, 6 Nov 1998 00:44:48 -0700
Date: Thu, 5 Nov 1998 23:42:03 -0800 (PST)
X-Sender: vin@dali.lvrj.com
Mime-Version: 1.0
To: vinsends@ezlink.com
From: Vin_Suprynowicz@lvrj.com (Vin Suprynowicz)
Subject: Nov. 8 column - stop and search
Resent-From: vinsends@ezlink.com
X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/585
X-Loop: vinsends@ezlink.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vinsends-request@ezlink.com
FROM MOUNTAIN MEDIA
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE DATED NOV. 8, 1998
THE LIBERTARIAN, By Vin Suprynowicz
To enhance officer safety and convenience
Fortunately, even the most traditionally "law-and-order" members of the
U.S. Supreme Court seemed both surprised and skeptical Tuesday when
confronted with the broad discretion which Iowa now grants its police to
search drivers pulled over for routine traffic violations ... even without
any "probable cause" to believe a further crime has been committed.
Appellant Patrick Knowles was stopped for speeding on March 6, 1996, in
Newton, Iowa. An officer gave Knowles a speeding ticket and then informed
him he had a right to search Knowles and his cart, which the cop proceeded
to do.
The search turned up a pipe and a small quantity of marijuana, which Iowa
courts allowed to be used as evidence. Knowles was convicted and sentenced
to 90 days in jail, but is now appealing based on the Constitution's Fourth
Amendment protection against unreasonable searches.
"If somebody jaywalks, the police could search them?" asked Justice John
Paul Stevens.
"Correct," explained Iowa Assistant Attorney General Bridget A. Chambers.
Justice Antonin Scalia then asked Ms. Chambers whether an officer could
stop someone, arrest and search them, and then drop the arrest. Yes, she
said.
"Wow," the justice responded.
The record of the initial court case reveals that arresting Officer
Ronald Cook was "disarmingly candid" on the subject of probable cause, in
the phrase of long-term court watcher James J. Kilpatrick.
"Anything you observed lead you to believe or give you probable cause to
believe that he was involved in criminal activity?" the officer was asked.
"Not on this date, no," he responded.
"It was your understanding that simply because you had issued him a
citation that that gave you the right to search him and his vehicle?"
"Yes, ma'am."
About 400,000 people are given traffic tickets each year in Iowa,
Knowles' lawyer, Paul Rosenberg, told the high court Tuesday. But police
invoke their authority to conduct searches only selectively, since if
everyone given a traffic ticket were searched, "the people wouldn't stand
for it."
Chief Justice William H. Rehnquist reminded the parties that police
already have authority to conduct a search following an arrest, to protect
their own safety and to preserve evidence.
But regarding a need to preserve evidence, the chief justice added, "When
you have a traffic stop, you're not going to find any more evidence of
speeding when you search a person's car."
The Supreme Court's 1973 decision allows police to conduct a "search
incident to arrest," noted Justice Anthony M. Kennedy. But "You want to
turn it around and have an arrest incident to search. ... It seems to me
that would be an abuse of authority."
"It does seem an enormous amount of authority to put into the hands of
the police," agreed Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg.
Regular observers of the court warn us not to draw too many conclusions
from the jurists' questions alone -- the justices have been known to play
devil's advocate, challenging the position of a party whose side they
actually intend to favor, in order to better develop their own arguments.
But this sounds like a case where the court's astonishment over Iowa's
brazen defiance of the Constitutional ban on "unreasonable" and warrantless
searches was no sham.
The notion that we should not object to government agents stopping and
frisking any passer-by since "It's for the protection of everyone" and "The
innocent have nothing to fear," is the next-to-last stop on the one-way
trainride to tyranny.
Yes, such measures appear to make the policeman's lot a bit easier, in
the short run. But once the populace begin to see these officers not as
friendly keepers of the peace and protectors of our liberties, but rather
as a hostile occupying army, patting us down and muscling through our
belongings at will, that could quickly change.
As the Hessians learned in 1776.
The high court is expected to rule in the case of Mr. Knowles by July.
Let us hope the Supremes set a firm high water mark for this particular
tide of tyranny, and begin to roll it back. Cops deserve our praise and
support when they undertake the dangerous job of chasing down violent thugs
and felons -- but not when they turn to rummaging through our pockets, our
glove compartments, and our sock drawers.
Vin Suprynowicz is the assistant editorial page editor of the Las Vegas
Review-Journal. Readers may contact him via e-mail at vin@lvrj.com. The web
sites for the Suprynowicz column are at
http://www.infomagic.com/liberty/vinyard.htm, and
http://www.nguworld.com/vindex/. The column is syndicated in the United
States and Canada via Mountain Media Syndications, P.O. Box 4422, Las Vegas
Nev. 89127.
***
Vin Suprynowicz, vin@lvrj.com
The evils of tyranny are rarely seen but by him who resists it. -- John
Hay, 1872
The most difficult struggle of all is the one within ourselves. Let us not
get accustomed and adjusted to these conditions. The one who adjusts ceases
to discriminate between good and evil. He becomes a slave in body and
soul. Whatever may happen to you, remember always: Don't adjust! Revolt
against the reality! -- Mordechai Anielewicz, Warsaw, 1943
* * *
--- end forwarded text
-----------------
Robert A. Hettinga
Philodox Financial Technology Evangelism http://www.philodox.com/
44 Farquhar Street, Boston, MA 02131 USA
"... however it may deserve respect for its usefulness and antiquity,
[predicting the end of the world] has not been found agreeable to
experience." -- Edward Gibbon, 'Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire'
