Generally civil forfeiture law ALLOWS it to take place, but does not MANDATE it take place, unless my understanding is incorrect.
This leaves the choice of whether or not to do it, to the LE on the scene, AFAIK.
There are cases where LE still searched. Judges don't typically take too kindly to it, but it's a crapshoot if you find a Judge willing to legislate from the bench.
Generally though, since there's NOTHING to gain by talking or allowing a search and EVERYTHING to lose, there's really only one option. Shut up and refuse.
That LE tends to take it as some kind of silly personal insult is the real problem in the whole thing... They need to get over it and the vast vast majority of Citizen contacts should go that way in order for that mindset/attitude change to occur.
Just because folks have been stupid and uninformed about the law, or how it's *sometimes* abused by prosecutors, for a very long time, doesn't make it suddenly personal against LE when people wise up. Sorry, the job is supposed to be hard.
The presumption of innocence is a difficult concept for folks who spend all day apprehending real criminals, but that's not something to cause frustration or worse, trigger the absolutely stupid "I'll show this Constitutionalist!" behavior that's currently way too popular.
When I've asked LE friends, what I stand to gain by answering anything at all that they ask, the answer is always something in *their* best interests, not mine. They will usually begrudgingly admit this, off-duty.
On-duty, there's sometimes a purposefully fostered culture in some departments of "We're going to make you miserable because we don't like that you exercised your rights under the law," which is ultimately going to lead to a ever greater peaceful backlash of simply clamming up and general distrust amongst the lawful.
There's no way it can lead to anything else. That folks don't see this growing because of a simple attitude problem, is amazing to me.
The other significant problem for the lawful Citizen is even an Arrest without a conviction, can be problematic for job hunting, etc. The standard response to the Catch-22 to get around the denial of a search is now to simply lie and state the person was "resisting arrest".
And then you end up with a stupid stuff like this:
http://kdvr.com/2015/09/23/problem-solvers-deputy-resigns-as-kicking-cop-investigation-expands/
Four. Not one. Four ... officers covered up one officer kicking a person who they had determined was no threat, then went in and grabbed him anyway.
Video surfaced of their actions or they wouldn't have been caught.
Additionally the person's cell phone, which is clearly seen as being picked up by an officer, was "never found" and was not admitted into evidence. Really? Which dumpster was it tossed in?
Open record requests for the disciplinary records of the four officers was denied by a bureaucrat claiming that releasing those records did not "serve the public interest". Hmm. Doesn't pass the smell test.
*Some* departments are simply rife with such stories.
The question is, will the "good cops" clean house and charge these "bad cops" with a crime?
Let's think hard about what would happen to you or I, if we had beat someone, and a video tape of it had surfaced, and we'd stolen their property to cover it up.
We'd be in jail. With a very high bail.
And if it was related to our job, we'd be fired. Gone.
Never to be hired to do that job ever again.
Not "reassigned to duty where direct public contact is not necessary". Or "on paid administrative leave".
And absolutely the DA would have filed charges. Not days or weeks later. The second the video surfaced. Right then.
Something is very broken in a system that doesn't do those things. Very badly broken.
One can blame it on all sorts of things, Unions, lack of leadership, a need to pay folks to do this job very poorly, the list goes on and on, but in the end, it's simply groupthink causing folks not to do what's right.
Your boss should FIRE you if a video like this surfaces and it's pretty obvious four people chose to cover up bad behavior, rather than even one person come clean about it. The can let you sue your way back to the job, if you dare try it, just like any other job.
It's all intertwined and a mess. If Officers want people to trust them, they must demand their departments clean house of the sort of person above. I've been telling LE friends this for a very long time. Way longer than the current LE vs Citizens tensions we're seeing now as a direct result of NOT doing it.
There are definitely real heroes in the job. They're also some real ass-hats that need to be put on trial and locked up for breaking the public trust.
One resigned from the above story already. Will the other three who stood and watched and didn't stop him, have any serious repercussions? Who tossed the cell phone to try to save his ass? Was it him or is there another that needs to resign? We'll see if they let us know or who gets to plea out... If charges are ever filed at all. None yet.
