Drug War Issues
Politics & Advocacy
Seventeen residents of Gerald, Missouri, located in Franklin County, have filed federal lawsuits alleging that their arrests on drug charges were illegal because a fake DEA agent helped make them, the St. Louis Post-Dispatch reported Sunday. The lawsuits, filed last week, came in the wake of a man now accused of duping Gerald officials into believing he was a bona fide federal agent on loan from the DEA.
Authorities admitted last week that the fake DEA agent, William Jakob, of Washington, Missouri, conducted drug raids and made arrests without legal authority. The police chief and two officers involved have already been fired. Jakob has yet to be charged with any crime.
The plaintiffs in the civil rights lawsuits allege that Jakob and Gerald police officers burst into their homes in April and May, pointed guns at their heads, damaged property, took money, and made arrests. The suits name city officials, police, and Jakob as defendants and say police should have verified Jakob's identity.
One suit filed by 11 people seeks $11 million for each plaintiff. Another suit filed by six people did not specify damages sought.
Permission to Reprint: This content is licensed under a modified Creative Commons Attribution license. Content of a purely educational nature in Drug War Chronicle appear courtesy of DRCNet Foundation, unless otherwise noted.
Comments
Good for them
I think eveyone who is arrested on a drug charge (whether innocent or guilty as charged) should sue the governments and all law enforcement agencies which were involved in the arrest for violation of the unalienable right to make one's own decisions about what intoxicating substances one will use. The entire Constitution is based on the idea of God given, unalienable property rights and the foremost property anyone owns is one's own body, each individual has the unalienable right to treat his/her body as s/he sees fit and no government or government agency has the right to interfere in that decision, or to criminalize it. I do not know why no one has used this argument before in a court of law. If everyone started using this argument when they were arrested for doing something the Constitution says the government has no power to criminalize, regulate, or restrict (much more than just the drug laws), the situation would soon change and the American people would get their rights back.
In reply to Good for them by Anonymous (not verified)
Good for them reply
So your saying they should be able to endanger their children, (and in the case of explosive methamphetamine) their neighbors. That's great, I'm glad you think the Constitution covers those rights as well, what about an anhydrous tank rupturing which causes suffocation and death within 15 minutes of inhaling. Murder, by the way is against the law. Oh wait, yeah thats right, the Constitution covers that too, someones right to do whatever they want. I 'm glad your so understanding of that, when it happens to someone you know (who doesnt even use drugs, which by the way is their right) I supposed it wont be a problem for you to let the person responsible walk, even move in with you and your family and continue to create methamphetamine. It's good dumbasses have other dumbasses who dont think things all the way through to back them up.
In reply to Good for them by Anonymous (not verified)
Re: Good for them
People like you are what is wrong with this country.
If only the Constitution still applied....
"Good for Them" has an excellent point, except for the fact that the current police state has thrown the Constitution out the window. Warrantless searches, prisoners held without trial, secret court proceedings, gag orders, torture, concentration camps on foreign soil, all of it clearly unconstitutional; yet the outrage continues with fake agents making arrests? What next? The USSA is no longer the "land of the free".
Dont DWB(Drive While Black) in So. Arkansas..
I an a black male who,until recently, resided i suothern Arkansas. On Jul 7,07; I was pulled over by a Arkansas State Trooper,Scott Russell#243;without provocation.He was heading southbound as I headed northbound. As soon as he passed me, he turned around and got behind me. I was almost immediately pulled over.When the officer approached and asked for license/insurance(which i had), I asked why I was pulled over.He responded that my tailights were" too bright"(I have euro lights,similar to many new vehicles). He then stated that he smelled the prescense of marijuana. I asked him how,seeing that I never smoke in my car.He said that he did and asked if i had any in the vehicle.I stated no.I was told that I appeared to be "on something" and asked if I was on any pills/alcohol/weed/coke,etc.I said no and that I had just awaken 20 min. prior.He asked me if I had done any drugs/drinking earlier in the day.I said that I smoked half a joint around 11am(and that smoking wasn't illegal-possession was)and had one beer at 6:30pm-the stop was at 9:30 at night.He then told me that he felt I was under the influence and to step out of the car.I did.He then asked for permission to search,which I gave.After searching my car and finding an unopened half pint of vodka and two cigars(present for a friend),an unloaded bb gun, and my two sleeping children seatbelted in the back, he decided to give me a field sobriety test which he claims I failed"horribly".I never fell or stumbled during the "test".What he didn't find is anything illegal.After the test,I was asked if I had anyone who could drive me home and to call them.I gave them my aunts number(she lives10 min away)and they called her.When she and my first cousin arrived to drive me away,suddenly I hear that I will be transported to the station! They never once mentioned I was being arrested,nor was I given my mirandas or retested for impairment. I was charged with(and I found this out after being released by reading my ticket):
2 counts child endangerment
1 count DUI-Drugs
1 count faulty equipment(taillights)
1 count no license plate(how can your car be registered w/no plate? mine is ar 297 JIR)
At the station (Crossett,AR city station)I was told to sign a paper,at which time I asked if I was being arrested.The officer gave no response.I signed and was released after surrendering my license,which is currently suspensed because of this incident.The moral of the story:Don't drive while black in(racist)Southern Arkansas..
p.s. they offered no means to obtain a public defender,so now what?
DWB
Sorry to hear about that. May I recommend the film "Busted", which helps people protect their 4th amendment rights in the event of a traffic stop. I don't know what the officer's motive was but I hope it was not your being black.
P
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yqMjMPlXzdA
reply to DWB
In response to DWB, why do you people automatically think your entitled to a public defender. Most of us have to pay for a lawyer but you should get one for free. What's with that. ps The officer knows you were guilty of something even if it was not at that time.
Add new comment