Then why does the paper make it sound like a triumph against tyranny?
I'm so tired of the lying garbage.
"SJC puts limit on pat-down searches; Sets rules for the frisking of drug suspects" by John R. Ellement, Globe Staff | April 3, 2009
The state's highest court ordered police yesterday to stop pat-frisking suspected drug dealers for weapons unless they have specific information the person is armed or has a history of violence, in a decision that one judge said will put officers at risk.
Reacting to the 5-to-1 ruling overturning the drug dealing conviction of a Dorchester man, law enforcement officials said yesterday that the Supreme Judicial Court has made a dangerous job more dangerous. "Police work by its nature is dangerous, and drug work is even more so," said Lawrence Police Chief John Romero. "We will comply with the ruling . . . but it's going to put officers at risk."
Then LEGALIZE the s***!!!!
As for the poor cops, put down the tasers and I'll think about some sympathy.
Suffolk District Attorney Daniel F. Conley said that he wants Boston police officers to protect themselves and that he is prepared to lose some cases if a judge rules drugs were found after an illegal pat frisk. "I don't want officers out there risking their lives by not pat frisking defendants in these circumstances." he said. "If we have to lose an occasional case . . . then I guess that's what's going to happen."
Good! It SHOULDN'T EVEN be an ISSUE!!!!
Read: The Ron Paul Platform: Personal Freedom
AmeriKa: Land of the Free?
Enough with the fake drug war!!!
Lawyers said police have long had the right to stop someone they suspect has committed a crime or is about to commit a crime. Yesterday's ruling reminds police they must have more evidence before they inject direct physical contact into the encounter, they said.
David M. Siegel, a New England School of Law professor who filed a friend of the court brief for the Suffolk Lawyers for Justice, said the court ruling protects individual liberty, especially for residents in high-crime areas who could find themselves being pat frisked simply because they encountered police while walking in their neighborhood.
He also said that even after yesterday's SJC ruling, police retain the right to pat frisk people suspected of being armed. Police cannot, he added, treat everyone the same way solely out of concern for officer safety....
--more--"
Looks like I may get my wish after all: Times Co. may shut Globe
