re: Owner of Triple S convenience store files suit against BRPD, city

quote:

---

The need to deport him back to whatever crap hole he came from.

---

Probably Lafayette.

Now it makes much more sense.

I've always wondered what would happen if a store owner asked the cops to get a warrant for surveillance video using private cameras.

Here's my answer.

quote:

---

This won't end well for him.

---

Good

quote:

---

what judge

---

Section 23

Billy Morvant

quote:

---

Shooting happened outside, no? How far do a crime scene's borders extend?

---

This isn't even really the question. There is no crime scene exception to the 4th Amendment so even if the crime scene extended into the store, you can't just automatically take shite. That is well settled law. Only ways to seize evidence without a warrant, even at a crime scene, is consent, plain view, search incident to arrest and emergency/exigent circumstances to protect ppl or prevent destruction of evidence. First three things don't really apply. I think the fourth one will be at play. Even if the police disabled and held onto the surveillance equipment and homeboys phone for 4 hours until warrant signed, this will be fine. There was definitely a possibility that store owner would delete crap from his phone and surveillance system so keeping him from accessing those systems are legit. Also, who knows what the overwrite time frame was on surveillance equip. I'm sure the officers did not know, nor can they rely on store owners representation. They can't wait for hours while the equipment may be overwriting old video. So, if it is true that they disabled the equipment it and stuck it in a cop car until warrant signed, I still think it's on the up and up and by the book in this scenario.

If it walks like a duck and quacks like a duck, it must be a Mooslem