The Daily Gazette
The Locally Owned Voice of the Capital Region
Advertisement
Promotions

Prosecutors eye $215K in suspected drug proceeds

  • FACEBOOK
  • TWITTER
  • GOOGLE+
  • LINKEDIN
  • PRINT
  • E-MAIL
Text Size: A | A

A speeding ticket might cost one man a lot more than the standard fine — $115,000 more. Federal prosecutors filed paperwork in U.S. District Court on Dec. 31 seeking to seize the $115,000 as suspected drug proceeds. They’re also looking to seize $99,800 seized at an Albany apartment as police looked into the case further. Authorities said officers found the $115,000 in the car of Oral Richard Prince, age and address unavailable, after a traffic ...


You Must Log-In or Subscribe to Continue Subscription Offer Individual stories can be found and purchased from our Archives for $2.00

Advertisement

comments

Will1960
January 8, 2013
8:43 a.m.

[ Flag Post ]

"After getting a search warrant for the car, officers used a state police drug dog to search the vehicle. The dog alerted to several spots in the car, but no drugs were found."

Why did the dog give a signal for a false positive that drugs were present? Could it be that these drug-sniffing dogs give such indications whenever there used by police? The use of these dogs is an ingenius ploy to search everybody and every vehicle. And these dogs can't be cross-examined in a court of law. For this reason, the court need to examine the legality, training methods and rate of accuracy of using these dogs. If someone initally refuses a request to search your person or vehicle, a K-9 unit can come on the scene and police have the right to revoke your 4th amendent rights by searching your vehicle without having to obtain a warrant.

It's bad enough that the general public routinely waives their 4th amendent rights due to lack of awareness and feeling intimindated by police. This legal end-around of the constitution is an area the court need to review and set stricter guidelines to prevent police abuse of their power to perform these searches. The forfeiture laws give law enforcement a finacial incentive to do as many searches as possible.

wmarincic
January 8, 2013
10:16 a.m.

[ Flag Post ]

will1960 I know, you, like the Gazette are anti police but common sense would say that the dog alerted to several spots because in fact there was drugs there that have been removed. Just like if you leave your dirty clothes in a hamper for a while and then remove them, they will leave an odor, why is that so hard to figure out? Wait, don't answer that, I already know.

Will1960
January 8, 2013
11:40 a.m.

[ Flag Post ]

It isn't a question of being anti-police. The scent of dogs has proven to be infalliable as illustrated in this article. Wmarcic, what about the constitutional protects against unreasonable search and seizures? There has to be some standards the police have to adhere to and they have been watered down as the politicians have seized on the drug war to appear to be tough-on-crime while shredding the fourth amendment in the process. In the court of law you need more than common sense to convict someone charged with a crime. You need probable cause.

Just because you're willing to forfeit your 4th amendment rights because you have nothing to hide doesn't mean the rest of us do.

Advertisement