http://www.14usc89.com/2010/02/supreme-court-actually-sides-with-police-justice-1-florida-0/ Maritime Law Enforcement Community Sun, 05 Sep 2010 03:33:01 +0000 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.9.2 hourly 1 http://www.14usc89.com/2010/02/supreme-court-actually-sides-with-police-justice-1-florida-0/comment-page-1/#comment-32 Lawler @ 14USC89.com Wed, 24 Feb 2010 11:51:56 +0000 http://www.14usc89.com/?p=498#comment-32 I don't know If I would call what I wrote "bashing", but you are right in a sense. For that, I took out a word in the title that can shift the meaning of the post. Thanks for your response and for the examples. I don’t know If I would call what I wrote “bashing”, but you are right in a sense. For that, I took out a word in the title that can shift the meaning of the post. Thanks for your response and for the examples.

]]> http://www.14usc89.com/2010/02/supreme-court-actually-sides-with-police-justice-1-florida-0/comment-page-1/#comment-31 justice Wed, 24 Feb 2010 04:27:49 +0000 http://www.14usc89.com/?p=498#comment-31 You may want to tone it down on the Supreme Court bashing. This site is going with a pro law enforcement theme and to say the highest court in the country rarely sides with police is false. Consider warrantless searches by USCG officers. Without the Supreme Court, no mobile conveyance exception to the Constitution's Fourth Amendment would even exist. Officers would be be forced to apply for a warrant to conduct every vessel search and nothing would stop the boat from departing scene. As for Miranda and the 5th Amendment, real evidence was collected against the defendant who sparked the initial case and, despite having a retrial because his confession got thrown out, was convicted. The Supreme Court's aim is not to make the job harder, it's ensuring everyone's freedoms are protected. Including officers who enforce the law. You may want to tone it down on the Supreme Court bashing. This site is going with a pro law enforcement theme and to say the highest court in the country rarely sides with police is false. Consider warrantless searches by USCG officers. Without the Supreme Court, no mobile conveyance exception to the Constitution’s Fourth Amendment would even exist. Officers would be be forced to apply for a warrant to conduct every vessel search and nothing would stop the boat from departing scene. As for Miranda and the 5th Amendment, real evidence was collected against the defendant who sparked the initial case and, despite having a retrial because his confession got thrown out, was convicted. The Supreme Court’s aim is not to make the job harder, it’s ensuring everyone’s freedoms are protected. Including officers who enforce the law.

]]>