johnnycee Wrote: If memory serves me right and although I wasn't assigned to any Drug Task Force other than as a support position, transport mostly, the seizures and subsquent forfitures of money and property were generally split up between the agencies involved, and their degree of participation was the determining factor as to how much their respective agency received, wages were not a consideration but I guess the monies recovered and equipment seized did allow the agency to save on those purchases that would have been purchased so the savings in their budgets must have reflected that, possibilty in wage increases.
Until a few years ago, here in Tennessee, seized money and money from the sales of seized property, was not to be used to pay salaries. This all change, now our Drug Task Forces are solely self supporting and dependent upon seized money and property. My Judicial District actually leases part of I-40 from Dickson County. They even have a written agreement that concerns when and where drug interdiction activities can take place. This agreement's sole concern is the West bound lanes. The west bound lanes are the "Money" lanes not drug trafficking lanes. The east bound side is where the drugs flow through. They do not want to stop the drugs, that would take the incentive of the money out of it. And reduce the amount of money that may travel back through Tennessee after the drugs sales.
This is not a profiling traffic stop, but this will give an idea of how our local officers will attempt to circumvent the 4th Amend. I good friend was gone on vacation last week. Her daughter was house sitting. The law shows up looking for an individual that had a warrant for his arrest. This individual was not there, the only info that law had was that someone said he was there 3 days ago (false rumor). 5 or 6 officers entered the door as soon as her daughter answered the knock. She tells them the subject is not there. They insist on looking for him. She tells them that it's not her place, so she can not give them permission to search. Lead officer states that if she makes him jump through the hoops to be able to search, he can get a search warrant in 15 min. But he is going to tear the place up. Next he tells her daughter that he is going to call the landlord to get permission. Then he pretends to be on the phone with the landlord. Her daughter informs him that her mother owns the place that she is the landlord. She calls her mother, Mother tells them if they want to look for this subject to go ahead. Then they get to the mothers bedroom. Daughter is not the most trustworthy person and mother has kept her bedroom door key locked for as long as I have known her, 4 different houses during that time. Law request a key to enter from daughter. Daughter tells the she doesn't have one. She's called a liar and much more. They phone the mother back requesting access to a key. Mother informs there is not one that she can guarantee that no one is in there if the door is still locked. Because she locked it when she left and she has the only key. She's called a liar, and threaten to get a warrant and break the door down. Mother says that's the only way you can get in as she has the only key with her. So the law acts like they are getting a warrant, then officer shows up with a flexible camera and peer under the door.
That was pretty much the end of it. From my understanding the subject had not been there in a while and did not have an active warrant at the time he was there. But look at how the officers tried to circumvent the 4th Amend, a law/right that they are supposed to defend. They attempted multi counts of persuasion/lies in the effort to gain consent. These officers did not follow the policy/theory that you spoke of. "I do not look at the 4th Amendent as an impedment to law Enforcement,but rather the more the 4th Amendment is followed when drawing up various warrants the more likely your arrest will stand up to scrunity"