snopes.com  

Go Back   snopes.com > SLC Central > Moot Court

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old 05 November 2013, 07:38 PM
A Turtle Named Mack's Avatar
A Turtle Named Mack A Turtle Named Mack is offline
 
Join Date: 21 June 2007
Location: Marietta, GA
Posts: 21,451
Icon09 Police force man to undergo invasive anal operation

When New Mexico police stopped a local driver for committing a minor moving violation, they decided to check whether he was carrying drugs in his anus. So they procured a warrant, drove him to two different hospitals, forced him to endure eight medical procedures — including an invasive colonoscopy — and stuck him with the bill. No drugs were found.

http://dailycaller.com/2013/11/05/ho...-anal-surgery/

Link to local news report:
http://www.kob.com/article/stories/S3209305.shtml
Reply With Quote
  #2  
Old 05 November 2013, 07:43 PM
GenYus234's Avatar
GenYus234 GenYus234 is offline
 
Join Date: 02 August 2005
Location: Mesa, AZ
Posts: 26,695
Default

Damn you Obamacare!

Aside from all the other ridiculous actions of the police and doctors, what judge signed off on a warrant to search a man's anus on the basis of "the suspect appeared to be clenching his buttocks"?

ETA: And what exactly did the drug-sniffing dog do? Because drug sniffing dog "evidence" basically (IMNALO) comes down to the K-9 officer saying that the dog indicated the presence of drugs.
Reply With Quote
  #3  
Old 05 November 2013, 07:58 PM
Little Pink Pill's Avatar
Little Pink Pill Little Pink Pill is offline
 
Join Date: 03 September 2005
Location: California
Posts: 7,055
Default

And how long did this go on, if the warrant had expired before the surgery even started? They must have had this guy for the better part of a day.
Reply With Quote
  #4  
Old 05 November 2013, 08:10 PM
A Turtle Named Mack's Avatar
A Turtle Named Mack A Turtle Named Mack is offline
 
Join Date: 21 June 2007
Location: Marietta, GA
Posts: 21,451
Dog

Quote:
Originally Posted by GenYus234 View Post
ETA: And what exactly did the drug-sniffing dog do?
"Hmm, the dog sniffed at the guy's butt - there must be drugs up there."
Reply With Quote
  #5  
Old 05 November 2013, 08:48 PM
Esprise Me's Avatar
Esprise Me Esprise Me is offline
 
Join Date: 02 October 2005
Location: Los Angeles, CA
Posts: 6,947
Default

I can't even imagine what additional undisclosed facts could possibly make this OK.
Reply With Quote
  #6  
Old 05 November 2013, 08:57 PM
E. Q. Taft's Avatar
E. Q. Taft E. Q. Taft is offline
 
Join Date: 30 July 2003
Location: San Diego, CA
Posts: 14,407
Default

Nor can I see how forcing him to pay the bill is even remotely justifiable, even if the search itself had been.
Reply With Quote
  #7  
Old 06 November 2013, 03:53 AM
ganzfeld's Avatar
ganzfeld ganzfeld is offline
 
Join Date: 05 September 2005
Location: Kyoto, Japan
Posts: 23,789
No

Quote:
The lawsuit claims that Deming Police tried taking Eckert to an emergency room in Deming, but a doctor there refused to perform the anal cavity search citing it was "unethical."
The one microscopic good thing in this whole story: Apparently there are still doctors for whom the Hippocratic Oath means something.
Quote:
That means all of the medical procedures were performed illegally and the doctors who performed the procedures did so with no legal basis and no consent from the patient.
I would say "shame on you" but shame is not nearly enough punishment for this alleged rape.
Reply With Quote
  #8  
Old 06 November 2013, 06:51 AM
JoeBentley's Avatar
JoeBentley JoeBentley is offline
 
Join Date: 23 June 2002
Location: Jacksonville, FL
Posts: 21,796
Default

3 enemas? 2 abdominal x-rays? 2 anal cavity searches? And a colonoscopy? What was that thing the Republicans want to use on pregnant women before an abortion out for repairs that day?

Wwww... whhh... what? I don't even... this is like an alien abduction story.

Okay seriously I'm usually a pretty big proponent of not taking a side based on only one report/POV but as Esprise Me said unless this story is somehow a total and complete across the board fabrication on a level that's rather hard to even consider, this is just beyond the pale.
Reply With Quote
  #9  
Old 06 November 2013, 12:55 PM
Avril's Avatar
Avril Avril is offline
 
Join Date: 07 August 2002
Location: Princeton, NJ
Posts: 10,547
Default

I don't believe you could give a man a transvaginal ultrasound.

And if a guy has drugs in a body cavity that can't be removed by a routine search, I think they're "his." I mean, you wouldn't order a blood transfusion if he was found to have them in his bloodstream would you?
Reply With Quote
  #10  
Old 06 November 2013, 12:59 PM
Nick Theodorakis Nick Theodorakis is offline
 
Join Date: 05 November 2005
Location: Fishers, IN
Posts: 6,657
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Avril View Post
I don't believe you could give a man a transvaginal ultrasound.
...
Not without another layer of invasive surgery, at least!

Nick
Reply With Quote
  #11  
Old 06 November 2013, 01:27 PM
GenYus234's Avatar
GenYus234 GenYus234 is offline
 
Join Date: 02 August 2005
Location: Mesa, AZ
Posts: 26,695
Default

Quit giving these cops ideas.
Reply With Quote
  #12  
Old 06 November 2013, 05:30 PM
Little Pink Pill's Avatar
Little Pink Pill Little Pink Pill is offline
 
Join Date: 03 September 2005
Location: California
Posts: 7,055
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Avril View Post
And if a guy has drugs in a body cavity that can't be removed by a routine search, I think they're "his." I mean, you wouldn't order a blood transfusion if he was found to have them in his bloodstream would you?
You may be on to something. This is not my area of expertise so this might be a bit of a leap, but if it's true that dogs can get high from eating the excrement of drug users (cite), then theoretically a drug sniffer might be able to sniff something suspicious in certain, er, regions of someone who has used. In other words, maybe the dog got it right, but the cops were looking for drugs in the wrong form.

Who conceals drugs in a body cavity when they're just driving around town, anyway? Isn't that usually a method reserved for smuggling?

Quote:
Originally Posted by JoeBentley View Post
Wwww... whhh... what? I don't even... this is like an alien abduction story.
Quote:
Originally Posted by GenYus234 View Post
Quit giving these cops ideas.
Reply With Quote
  #13  
Old 06 November 2013, 05:53 PM
GenYus234's Avatar
GenYus234 GenYus234 is offline
 
Join Date: 02 August 2005
Location: Mesa, AZ
Posts: 26,695
Default

This has been bugging me about the thread title. I don't know if there are specific medical definitions, but didn't he undergo a anal procedure, not an operation? An anal operation would be something like hemorrhoid surgery or lower GI resection.

Not that that makes it okay...
Reply With Quote
  #14  
Old 06 November 2013, 06:05 PM
Little Pink Pill's Avatar
Little Pink Pill Little Pink Pill is offline
 
Join Date: 03 September 2005
Location: California
Posts: 7,055
Default

You're right, I think it's technically just a test. But the second article also uses the term, "prepped for surgery." Do they say that for anything that goes down in that department, rather than for the procedure itself? Or maybe for anything that requires anesthesia?

The fact that they put him under is a big deal, to me. That's not just embarrassing and inconvenient, it's a risk.
Reply With Quote
  #15  
Old 06 November 2013, 06:31 PM
WildaBeast's Avatar
WildaBeast WildaBeast is offline
 
Join Date: 18 July 2002
Location: Folsom, CA
Posts: 15,911
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Avril View Post
And if a guy has drugs in a body cavity that can't be removed by a routine search, I think they're "his."
I know, right? After the first search didn't find anything they should have admitted they made a mistake and there was nothing up there. It sounds like these officers just couldn't accept that they were wrong; they "knew" there were drugs up there if they just looked hard enough.
Reply With Quote
  #16  
Old 06 November 2013, 06:34 PM
GenYus234's Avatar
GenYus234 GenYus234 is offline
 
Join Date: 02 August 2005
Location: Mesa, AZ
Posts: 26,695
Default

If it was ever about finding smuggled drugs in the first place. It may simply have been cruelty or about punishing him for him showing what they saw as contempt.
Reply With Quote
  #17  
Old 06 November 2013, 06:51 PM
Esprise Me's Avatar
Esprise Me Esprise Me is offline
 
Join Date: 02 October 2005
Location: Los Angeles, CA
Posts: 6,947
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Little Pink Pill View Post
You may be on to something. This is not my area of expertise so this might be a bit of a leap, but if it's true that dogs can get high from eating the excrement of drug users (cite), then theoretically a drug sniffer might be able to sniff something suspicious in certain, er, regions of someone who has used. In other words, maybe the dog got it right, but the cops were looking for drugs in the wrong form.
It's also possible he had drugs in his back pocket at some point prior to the encounter, and the dogs smelled the little bit of residue left behind. Or there were drugs on the seat of the car at one time--perhaps when someone else was driving it--and the residue transferred to his butt. Or maybe he was carrying a dollar bill that had once been used to snort cocaine. Even assuming this wasn't a false positive, there are a lot of ways we could get to "dog smells drugs on suspect's butt" that don't lead to "he has drugs in his rectum right now!"
Reply With Quote
  #18  
Old 06 November 2013, 09:55 PM
Little Pink Pill's Avatar
Little Pink Pill Little Pink Pill is offline
 
Join Date: 03 September 2005
Location: California
Posts: 7,055
Default

Good point!
Reply With Quote
  #19  
Old 07 November 2013, 01:12 AM
UEL's Avatar
UEL UEL is offline
 
Join Date: 01 August 2004
Location: Fredericton, Canada
Posts: 9,387
Baseball

Or, dogs responding to non-verbal cue given by his handler (often subconsciously).

Bomb sniffing dogs have this problem from time to time during training.
Reply With Quote
  #20  
Old 07 November 2013, 02:17 PM
Photo Bob's Avatar
Photo Bob Photo Bob is offline
 
Join Date: 08 February 2008
Location: Venice, FL
Posts: 2,528
Default

The basic premise that drug sniffing dogs are good at finding hidden drugs is flawed.

Locally we had a drug dog that alerted to drugs in cars over 80% of the time, but drugs were found only about half the time. Of course many folks thought that was good enough because the dog got all those criminals off the street.

A link from Chicago: Chicago Tribune

And, I think more important, a link explaining what your rights are when a dog is called in: Flex Your Rights
Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is On

Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
National Police Force John Simpson Politics 0 14 January 2010 12:57 AM
Anal Penetrating Chair Kills Teen snopes Fauxtography 15 07 January 2010 09:10 AM
Operation Wetback snopes Politics 3 03 June 2009 05:44 AM
Operation Garden Plot tuff_gong Politics 1 28 March 2008 03:05 PM
Anne McCaffrey on anal sex snopes Questionable Quotes 45 15 November 2007 09:45 PM


All times are GMT. The time now is 09:14 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2019, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.