Downed in podunk

[duane175]

What is the name of your state (only U.S. law)? FLORIDA
HELLO,
My son was driving thru a small rural town in north central Florida last nite when he saw a customized chevy tahoe.He took a picture of it while driving down a 4 lane highway.Subsequently he was stopped by the sheriffs dept 5 minutes later ,they invoking terry vs ohio.No crime had been commited.His camera was then confiscated and his photos deleted,then senton his way.What if any laws have been broken by the department???????????

 

[justalayman]

a bunch.


what are his intentions at this point?

btw; no crime has to have been committed to invoke Terry. It is based more on speculation than anything.

 

[duane175]

o yes

actually the way the law reads is there has to be a reasonable suspicion that a crime has been,is or is about to be comitted.Taking a picture is not a reasonable suspicion( think poporazzi ever get there pictures erased by cops? dont think so).terry not withstanding,deleting the photos should be theft under color of authority as i understand the law,was just wanting a legal opinion on the subject.

 

[xylene]

Umm, do you have all the legal answers already...

Your son should contact a lawyer.

I doubt anything will come of this. It may be wrong, but it is what it is.

Its hicksville central florida where the reputation for police is deservedly bad.

And nothing is going to change that.

Your son should skip that lawyer and just move.

 

[justalayman]

=duane175;2750226]actually the way the law reads is there has to be a reasonable suspicion that a crime has been,is or is about to be comitted

Since this is not a statute but only a result of case law (SCOTUS to be specific) just where are you getting "the law reads"?

Beyond the original ruling it has been further defined to allow a warrant less frisk in just about any situation the police can articulate a reasonable belief his safety is possibly jeopardized.


.

Taking a picture is not a reasonable suspicion( think poporazzi ever get there pictures erased by cops? dont think so

).think "naked kids" Yes, taking a picture can be reasonable suspicion. It all depends what else is going on.

terry not withstanding,deleting the photos should be theft under color of authority as i understand the law,was just wanting a legal opinion on the subject

deleting is not theft. Taking is theft but theft requires other elements as well.

Then, on top of everything else; what the officer can articulate is critical in determining the legality of the actions.

Especially since the police were apparently not on scene, this was the result of a report to the police. What those people reported is important in determining the validity of the stop.

While I'm not saying the actions were legitimate, it would appear you do not have enough information to understand what happened fully.

 

[FlyingRon]

http://www.pixiq.com/contributors/248

 

[justalayman]

generally true but there are a few exceptions.

No idea if the OP has any more information but there is more to this than a guy got pulled over for taking pictures of a truck in another lane.

 

[cbg]

Yeah, I was about to say that there is a LOT of this story missing, but jal beat me to it.

 

[stealth2]

He took a picture of it while driving down a 4 lane highway.

Uuuhhh... he shouldn't have been doing this while behind the wheel.

 

[Hot Topic]

What is the name of your state (only U.S. law)? FLORIDA
HELLO,
My son was driving thru a small rural town in north central Florida last nite when he saw a customized chevy tahoe.He took a picture of it while driving down a 4 lane highway.Subsequently he was stopped by the sheriffs dept 5 minutes later ,they invoking terry vs ohio.No crime had been commited.His camera was then confiscated and his photos deleted,then senton his way.What if any laws have been broken by the department???????????

The police are probably still scatching their heads over your idiot son who diverted his attention from driving down the four lane highway so he could take a picture of the Chevy Tahoe. He should be in jail.

 

[CdwJava]

No matter junior's actions, I cannot see any legal justification to seize a camera and then to delete the photos from within it. Even on the odd chance that the officer's had some sort of probable cause to seize the camera, deleting the images is not generally an option.

Either junior is lying, or, the officers played fast and loose with the law and likely broke it.

 

[Hot Topic]

Junior is trying to divert attention from the stunt he pulled.