Florida, again

Gonz

Gonz

molṑn labé
Staff member
Like him or not, Rush Limbaugh is getting shafted.

WEST PALM BEACH, Fla. — A state appeals court ruled Wednesday that prosecutors did not violate Rush Limbaugh's privacy when they seized his medical records to investigate claims of illegal drug use

The court rejected Limbaugh's arguments that his privacy rights trumped investigators' power to seize his records, even with search warrants. Judges also said prosecutors didn't have to notify him of the warrants or give him an opportunity to challenge them.

"The state's authority to seize such records by a validly issued search warrant is not affected by any right of privacy in such records," a three-judge panel of the 4th District Court of Appeal ruled. Chief Judge Gary M. Farmer wrote the opinion and Judge Carol Y. Taylor concurred. Judge Melanie G. May concurred in part.

Limbaugh said he would fight the decision, which he said did not recognize the privacy rights afforded by Congress or the Florida Legislature.
Click to expand...

This ruling, in affect, says the state has authority to investigate you for what you may be doing & any evidence gathered may be used...

example-The cop pulls you over, when you ask what you did the officer, searching your vehicle, says he'll tell you when he finds it.

Good luck Floridians. Here's hoping it stays there.
 
Seems more like cops knocking down the door of a teen prostitute ring and laying charges when they find the bevy of 13 year old boys in the back bedroom.

They can't notify when they're going to search a property with a warrant because that'd give the suspect the chance to get rid of the evidence, like the sounds of flushing coming from the upstairs bathroom of drug dealer's homes while the downstairs is being searched.

They got a warrant...that's sufficient.

...and...if a cop stops you for a broken tail light and sees a baggie of cocaine on the seat next to you...your rights to privacy go out the window.
 
Sharky said:
Aye, there's the rub. I would like to know, too.
Click to expand...

Testimony from a disgruntled employee. Remember his maid? The one he sent out on his drug runs?
 
Gonz said:
That's not evidence. That's suspicion.
Click to expand...

Evidence is not needed. Just a believable source. She was a believable source, so they got their warrant. BTW...a warrant is presented to search for evidence that might otherwise be hidden or destroyed. It has nothing to do with your first post. ;)
 
For a warrant though doesnt there have to be some evidence? She maybe a believable source but can she benefit somehow from it?
 
freako104 said:
For a warrant though doesnt there have to be some evidence? She maybe a believable source but can she benefit somehow from it?
Click to expand...

Nope. No evidence is needed for a search warrant at all. Just probable cause. You get a warrant to get the evidence, not the other way around. ;)
 
Yea yea yea...I wrote poorly in the first post. Still, the point stands. He was accused & an accusation alone is not probable cause. If it were there'd be a lot of unhappy, and jailed, ex-husbands.

They got his medial records to go fishing & landed a minnow.
 
Gonz said:
They got his medial records to go fishing & landed a minnow.
Click to expand...
It must have been a fearless crew that searched his place, then... after all, if not for the courage of the fearless crew, the minnow would be lost.
 
My sister was arrested on a Fla highway 2 years ago for posession based upon a random search at a random roadblock across a highway. She was a passenger and the driver gave the consent, not knowing any better... but it would have been of no import since the cops threaten to just arrest you and hold you until they can get a warrant... or waste 6 hours of your time trying. Noone puts up a fight because you 'can't fight city hall'. She was not asked her consent for the search. The reasons for being stopped were not either by cause or random since everyone was stopped and the drug dogs tipped off all who were to be the 'random' searches.

The orderly right wing type in me loves to see troublemakers scooped up by the truckload. The libertarian in me despises the abuse by big brother that has been all too frequent in the last 20 years. They can seemingly suspend civil rights at will and to little judicial restraint. The state/government ability to strongarm is just a wee bit too harsh.
 
They have a habit of doing these "safety inspection" :rolleyes: roadblocks where they check driver's licenses and insurance cards, while sniffing the driver for alcohol. They walk a drug dog around the vehicle while the driver's papers are being examined. They get around the state's requirement of announcing roadblock locations in the newspaper in advance by not being specific about the date and time of the roadblock.

In Bay County (Panama City) the sheriff's department does random sweeps on the high schools, walking through the parking lots looking into vehicles and walking the drug dogs around them, and walking the dogs through classrooms sniffing the students' book bags. They have made arrests based on the dogs' alerts, mostly for possession of alcohol (the dogs can alert on alcohol).
 
Gonz said:
Like him or not, Rush Limbaugh is getting shafted.



This ruling, in affect, says the state has authority to investigate you for what you may be doing & any evidence gathered may be used...

example-The cop pulls you over, when you ask what you did the officer, searching your vehicle, says he'll tell you when he finds it.

Good luck Floridians. Here's hoping it stays there.
Click to expand...


Sounds like a nice sidebar of the Patriot Act.

You support the writes. Don't complain.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top