Traffic Stops & Cavity Searches

[bainsidhe]

Terrifying and creepy. A few examples of police stops gone wrong wrong WRONG. I hope further investigations are done and the hammer falls. http://news.yahoo.com/police-turn-ro...201433510.html

Officers stopped David Eckert in a Wal-Mart parking lot for failing to yield at a stop sign. The officers searched his car with a drug dog that alerted them to the smell of drugs. But they couldn’t find any contraband on Eckert or in his vehicle, so they obtained a warrant for a search of his body.

Over the course of 12 hours last January, Eckert was forced to receive an X-ray, CT scan, digital rectal exam, three enemas and a colonoscopy under anesthesia, according to his complaint filed in federal court this week. Eckert says the officers laughed at him at times while he was undergoing the procedures at Gila Regional Medical Center.

Eckert was also billed for the procedures — this time for $6,000.

[Greenday]

That link doesn't mention it, but the dog has falsely identified drugs in other searches resulting in similar treatment of those detained. The dog also hasn't been certified in the state of New Mexico. The dog hasn't passed a certification since 2011.

http://www.policestateusa.com/2013/i...h-a-stop-sign/

[s_stabeler]

a) I'm pretty sure the police are supposed to pay for searches, not the person searched, since the person searched doesn't exactly have much choice.
b) some of those procedures were definitely unnessecary ( the enemas, rectal exam and colonoscopy) and others may have been, depending on what was done first. Off the top of my head, all that is required to identify someone who is concealing drugs internally is an X-Ray. ( the drugs will show up on said X-Ray)
c) if the drug dog is uncertified, how did they get a warrant? More basically, why are they even using a dog that has such a high error rate?

[crazylegs]

I saw this on fb the other day.

I can understand, if using a properly trained dog, A strip search, An x-ray, or the use of a customs toilet . What happened to this gentleman, if true is inexcusable.

[Andara Bledin]

Don't forget that the first hospital actually refused to do what the cops wanted, so they moved to a second hospital that was in a different county and thus not covered by the warrant. Not to mention that the warrant expired at 10pm, long before the colonoscopy could be performed, rendering the action by the hospital especially illegal.

[bainsidhe]

The cops should never have been allowed to get any warrant at all, nor do any exams at a hospital. Their own search turned up nothing, yet they were so hellbent that drugs had to be there, they forced someone to undergo cavity searches and Xrays?

[crazylegs]

The cops should never have been allowed to get any warrant at all, nor do any exams at a hospital. Their own search turned up nothing, yet they were so hellbent that drugs had to be there, they forced someone to undergo cavity searches and Xrays?

That would allow any drug dealer to plug their drugs and prevent them coming to justice so I thing that's not a wise course of action to take.

It's not unreasonable to think that criminals store their drugs internally (they do) so there should be some due process involved with safeguards in place to prevent this kind of abuse of process.

[Titi]

Understandable Crazylegs, but this guy had no criminal record and even the police said they stopped him for not fully stopping (rolling stop) at the exit of a parking lot.

Why was he asked to get out of the car? Why was he not just given a ticket for the traffic violation? Why had the fake drug dog been involved in another case (with the same police department and same out of county hospital) where the guy was pulled over for not using his turn signal while turning and was forced to have a cavity search as well?

I can understand if these people were either known criminals or tried to run, but to be pulled over for a minor thing and told you must have drugs in your butt, that kinda scares me about these cops.

[Gravekeeper]

The doctor at the second hospital can kiss his license goodbye me thinks.

As for the cops, well if history is any indication with US police, they'll get a paid vacation until the lawsuit is settled. Then be back on the job after an hour of sensitivity training.

With the dog. -.-

[Pixilated]

a) I'm pretty sure the police are supposed to pay for searches, not the person searched, since the person searched doesn't exactly have much choice.
*snip*

Some wit commented that he should send the hospital bill to the police who should be told to put it in the same place where they thought he had drugs ...

In all seriousness, this is an unbelievable breach of a person's civil rights. I'd love to see him win a massive award for damages -- much of which would come out of the police budget for the next decade or three, and the rest to come from the budget of the hospital.

And yes, I suspect the doctor who went along with this is going to be looking for another line of work soon. Shame the cops in question will probably not be doing the same thing.

[s_stabeler]

That would allow any drug dealer to plug their drugs and prevent them coming to justice so I thing that's not a wise course of action to take.

It's not unreasonable to think that criminals store their drugs internally (they do) so there should be some due process involved with safeguards in place to prevent this kind of abuse of process.

why not enforce the existing safeguards? (with reasonable suspicion, you can do a pat-down search (I'm simplifying here, there are a couple of other conditions) and with a warrant, that will only be granted if you have probable cause, you can do a more invasive search.)

To be honest, I think that anybody who made the decision to go along with this needs firing. Possibly including the judge who issued the warrant, since it appears a very invasive warrant was issued on flimsy evidence.

[bainsidhe]

What's so terrifying is these stories could happen to ANYONE. *shudder*

And while I twitch a bit at calling it "rape", what else would one call it? The victim was forcefully and thoroughly probed against his will. It's deeply disturbing.

[Panacea]

a) I'm pretty sure the police are supposed to pay for searches, not the person searched, since the person searched doesn't exactly have much choice.

The gentleman was in police custody at the time, so the cops are on the hook for the search. The hospital should have known that.

b) some of those procedures were definitely unnessecary ( the enemas, rectal exam and colonoscopy) and others may have been, depending on what was done first. Off the top of my head, all that is required to identify someone who is concealing drugs internally is an X-Ray. ( the drugs will show up on said X-Ray)

Usually. Sometimes stool will hide balloons if there are only a few of them.

c) if the drug dog is uncertified, how did they get a warrant? More basically, why are they even using a dog that has such a high error rate?

I doubt they told the judge about the dog's history; the judge has to have faith in law enforcement or nothing would get done. That being said, this dog clearly does not belong in law enforcement. He should be retired.

The cops should never have been allowed to get any warrant at all, nor do any exams at a hospital. Their own search turned up nothing, yet they were so hellbent that drugs had to be there, they forced someone to undergo cavity searches and Xrays?

If the cops reasonably believe drugs have been concealed, it's appropriate to do further searches. I've seen inmates hide things in body cavities as a jail nurse. Body cavity searches are a routine part of law enforcement under very specific conditions. An exam at a hospital is actually safer for the suspect than one done by law enforcement.

Don't forget that the first hospital actually refused to do what the cops wanted, so they moved to a second hospital that was in a different county and thus not covered by the warrant. Not to mention that the warrant expired at 10pm, long before the colonoscopy could be performed, rendering the action by the hospital especially illegal.

I'm not sure the 2nd hospital could reasonably be expected to know what. If they acted in good faith, then they're not liable.

A colonoscopy sounds rather extreme; makes me wonder if the doctor thought he saw something on the X ray and thought he was doing a retrieval procedure. You don't want a balloon breaking waiting for nature to take its course; that can have lethal consequences.

The doctor at the second hospital can kiss his license goodbye me thinks.

Not necessarily. If he acted in good faith, and if the chart indicates he reasonably thought he saw something and was trying to retrieve it, then he's covered by the Board of Medicine. That he was wrong won't matter; if the doctor thought he saw something and did the scope to retrieve it, he was acting in the best interest of the patient.

Remember, we only have the suspect's version of the story right now. I'd love to see the chart and X rays.

As for the cops, well if history is any indication with US police, they'll get a paid vacation until the lawsuit is settled. Then be back on the job after an hour of sensitivity training.

With the dog. -.-

Cops get fired all the time. These will join them, as will the dog.

why not enforce the existing safeguards? (with reasonable suspicion, you can do a pat-down search (I'm simplifying here, there are a couple of other conditions) and with a warrant, that will only be granted if you have probable cause, you can do a more invasive search.)

To be honest, I think that anybody who made the decision to go along with this needs firing. Possibly including the judge who issued the warrant, since it appears a very invasive warrant was issued on flimsy evidence.

And while I twitch a bit at calling it "rape", what else would one call it? The victim was forcefully and thoroughly probed against his will. It's deeply disturbing.

There really is no word for it.

[Aethian]

Wouldn't it have been something if a time bomb if cancer was found because if this?

[bainsidhe]

If the cops reasonably believe drugs have been concealed, it's appropriate to do further searches. I've seen inmates hide things in body cavities as a jail nurse. Body cavity searches are a routine part of law enforcement under very specific conditions. An exam at a hospital is actually safer for the suspect than one done by law enforcement.

What specific conditions allow for body cavity searches? I understand in a jail or prison environment, where you are looking out for the safety of the prisoner and staff, but these were just random guys going about their day, who were pulled over for a minor traffic violation.