|
|
| Re: Dayton Police foul-up? (1857708) | |||
 |
|||
| Home > OTChat | |||
|
[ Read Responses | Post a New Response | Return to the Index ] |
|
||
|
Re: Dayton Police foul-up? |
|
|
Posted by Stephen Bauman on Mon Oct 11 22:10:04 2021, in response to Re: Dayton Police foul-up?, posted by BILLBKLYN on Mon Oct 11 21:39:51 2021. Media doesn't know or print all priors.Neither did the police officers know of the priors before they stopped Mr. Owensby's car. First, an auto pulling up, occupant(s) quickly entering and exiting location and going back to the auto raises the suspicion levels. Suspicion levels are not probable cause for obtaining search warrants. Let me tell you my suspicions, without any probable cause in this case. It's well known that drug trafficking requires police cooperation (aka bribes) for its continued existence. The police in question were had a protection racket with the house occupant. Mr. Owensby was a drug supplier, who just delivered a stash. That accounts for the amount of cash found on his person. The house occupant had notified the police of the delivery. His payoff for protection by these police officers was his payment to Mr. Owensby. The police would stop Mr. Owensby after he left, take the cash and have the dogs sniff the delivery residue in the car. These police officers were using their own initiative. Their supervisor wasn't in on this racket. That's why these police turned ballistic, when Mr. Owensby demanded they call a supervisor. Again, suspicions are not probable cause. |
|
|
|