tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-72430895370047121.post229563591589974807..comments2009-01-15T11:52:36.933-05:00Danielle Riendeauhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/11839404928721376456noreply@blogger.comBlogger3125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-72430895370047121.post-4786930360577607482009-01-15T06:12:00.000-05:002009-01-15T06:12:00.000-05:00January 14, 2009 <BR/><BR/>4th is dead now, as of the date above in this post. the SCOTUS has rendered a verdict stating that "evidence obtained after illegal searches or arrests based on simple police mistakes may be used to prosecute criminal defendants."<BR/><BR/>this decision flies in the face of "right to be free from unreasonable searches or seizure."<BR/><BR/>i felt the need to add this comment even though it has been 6 months sense the original article was posted. it might not have been dead then.....Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-72430895370047121.post-49135971331451120322008-07-16T18:34:00.000-04:002008-07-16T18:34:00.000-04:00The Fourth Amendment to the US Constitution has been strangled with convoluted legal rationalizations, riddled with bullets in the form of Supreme Court decisions and drawn and quartered by “creative” law enforcement interpretations.<BR/><BR/>This old and oft referred to amendment, an attempt to protect the privacy and property rights of individuals, is dead. Driving any more nails into its rotted casket is a redundant waste of time, but the US Supreme Court persists.<BR/><BR/>For motorists, or anyone on a public road or sidewalk, the illusion of personal privacy is but a dim memory. Random searches, based on the flimsiest excuses, roadblocks, “frisking” and “patting down” passengers or pedestrians, because they “might have a weapon” and roadside interrogations are now all quite legal, or are carried out as if they are because no one dare argue to the contrary.<BR/><BR/>peterson<BR/><A HREF="http://www.addictionrecovery.net/massachusetts" REL="nofollow">Addiction Recovery Massachusetts</A>raghavhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/06422511945668944948noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-72430895370047121.post-83725067565129411112008-07-10T21:32:00.000-04:002008-07-10T21:32:00.000-04:00One of the worst parts to my mind is granting retroactive immunity for things that haven't even been investigated. Do we have any idea of what the telecoms did at the behest of the Bush administration? How is it remotely reasonable to grant immunity without first investigating to see what crimes might have been committed and what rights violated?<BR/><BR/>And just what are the Democrats so afraid of that they would bow to Bush on this?<BR/><BR/>Thanks for your post!Anonymousnoreply@blogger.com