Any precedent for warrants for customers on vendor list?

[malfeasance]

Hmm I’d like to know how they got warrants or were able to search all these people for possession. If there’s heat at your gym I would think people would want to just clean house…but then again it’s hard to do that for 6 months…unless you have a good place to hide all the shit

Also goes to show the risk of in person sources

It is a lot easier to get a search warrant than you might think.

Since you do not source in person, all they need is evidence of a package addressed to your home.

They can get a separate warrant for the package pretty easily, too, and intercept it quickly. All it takes is a dog to hit on it (and the dog will hit on it) and a few other factors listed to buttress the claim (like a false return address).

Remember, they do not have to prove a criminal case to get a search warrant. They need only show probable cause to believe that contraband is in your home. Of course, it will be in your home if they let the package be delivered. Ha, ha. See? Probable cause.

And once they have the warrant, they can search anywhere a vial or a pill might be, which means pretty much everywhere inside your home. It is not like they are searching for something large, like a stolen 1969 Cadillac.

Your fridge, your safe, everywhere.

Judges pretty much rubber stamp search warrants. It is rare for a search warrant to be denied.

 

[marsupial]

Yea there’s always a risk for the pack in transit, but what about after it arrives. If scammers and phishers in Nigeria and India can easily get access to your personal info (which I promise you has happened to you if you’ve ordered from Amazon before), then what’s stopping a vendor from generating a fake list from phished info. I highly doubt the list alone can have any sort of weight, and if it does the defense seems quite easy

 

[marsupial]

Also even if resources have improved, I think you underestimate how lacksadasical local law enforcement in general has gotten (esp in more populated cities and states) due to the 2020 protests

 

[Deleted member 127229]

73 arrests - had they all filed speedy trial demands and refused to plea bargain, they could have brought Fort Bend County's system to its knees, but nobody thinks like that.

That's easy for you to say when you aren't in that situation. The reality is most people won't gamble with 10-20years of their lives to go to trial. So you have a lot of truly innocent people, pleading guilty.

 

[Deleted member 127229]

Also even if resources have improved, I think you underestimate how lacksadasical local law enforcement in general has gotten (esp in more populated cities and states) due to the 2020 protests

"Protests"

 

[marsupial]

"Protests"

Agreed lol but my point stays the same

 

[malfeasance]

That's easy for you to say when you aren't in that situation. The reality is most people won't gamble with 10-20years of their lives to go to trial. So you have a lot of truly innocent people, pleading guilty.

Most of those 73 were not facing anything like 10-20 years. More like probation and drug treatment class and expungement, if it was their first offense. Most states have something like a first offender felony law that mitigates the harshness of a felony conviction.

Remember the original story - it is not about 73 dealers. Most of those arrested were buyers. They were mere possession arrests. In Texas, less than 28 grams of steroids is a misdemeanor, and a low level felony just above that. That is today. I do not know if the law was the same back then or if it has changed since the arrests took place.


PS - apparently that 28 grams is not much, it includes "adulterants or dilutants"

 

[Millard]

So he was found not guilty? I was looking for the outcome among the news links in that article. Do you know what his defense was?

Sorry, not acquitted. The judge dismissed the charges: