Had a call from a potential client who was busted for having something in their car they were not legally supposed to have. Yes, they knew they were not supposed to have it and they knew it was there.
Of course the person claimed the whole stop and subsequent discovery started because the cops were racially profiling them whole they were driving in Pontiac.
The arresting agency is the Oakland County Sheriff's Department, which is a pretty solid department that doesn't play around, so that claim is rather unlikely.
Well, let's get some details, so maybe we can suppress it if their claim is really true, so I ask how it was that the sheriffs happened to pull them over. But, I'm rather skeptical.
My skepticism is justified.
They were pulled over because the car had no license plates or tags. As in none, zilch, nada, nothing, unregistered vehicle with no plate traveling at night in a not-so-good area of Pontiac.
Even better, after the stop, sheriffs asked do you have anything illegal inside the vehicle I should be aware about, and the potential client said "Yes I have ....".
That's just not racial profiling, it's called being felony stupid, and that's a perfectly good stop and subsequent search and seizure.
Yes, a lot of criminals really do say yes when asked if they've got something illegal on them during a stop and this one admits they did say that.
Gotta wonder about the thought process of someone who knowingly has possession of something illegally, which possession of such item illegally is a Five Year Felony, and who figures that the best way to go rolling about town is in a car with no license plates with said illegal item inside, and then quickly admits to it when asked.
This is also not the first time potential client has been caught with such illegal item in pretty much a similar way previously. Kinda slow learner, really.
They don't call 'em stupid criminals for nothing.
Potential client is unhappy as I state that's a darn valid reason for the sheriffs to pull over the car, and a valid subsequent search and seizure after the clients answer to the question. I state I would not try to defend this based on a claim of racial profiling as there's no ethical way to do so based on the facts.
I go on to explain the chance of the evidence getting thrown out is about zilch and the case is really about damage control and reducing the potential penalty, not getting off on an unsupportable claim of racial profiling.
Nope, I'm so not getting retained on that one.
2 comments:
Hey Aaron;
And you would have a hard time collecting your money from that one also...If they wanted pro-bono they would have hit the free legal aid office instead.
LOL, good pass on that one!
Post a Comment