The Super Mega-Merged Undercover Cops Thread!

SpeedLimit55

Bluelighter
Joined
Nov 18, 2000
Messages
2,499
Undercover cops doing drugs?

My searches have all turned up nadda to this point...I've heard both sides of the story...
Some say undercover cops can do whatever they have to do to make the bust...others say they absolutely may NOT do drugs, under any circumstance...(i.e, "Try some of this coke before you buy it")...
Any factual evidence either way?
 
YES THEY CAN!!! (in USA, atleast) Read the "are you a cop" thread for more info ... cops can smoke and snort and whatnot and the bust is still a go.
Source (just in case you're wondering, I don't wan't you to mistake this for bad info): Citizen's Police Academy, presentation by the head of the **** unit. where I live
(I consider his info more sound than that obtained from friends/movies/other bad sources.)
 
Typically, the reason people think they (undercover cops) can't is because narcs (friends turned foe for a deal) are heavily discouraged from using while on the dole. FYI, sell-outs are also encouraged to count cash out loud, and use names and quantities of drugs (slang is cool--if you sell a guy "a 20 of pot" instead of "a quarter-ounce of marijuana," you're still fucked). Typically cops also like to wait a while after getting the wire but before raiding to try and protect their precious traitors.
 
^^^^
Please post your sources that state it's "legal" for an undercover officer to do drugs for the purpose of netting a bust.
 
hrrrm...this is the last time i'm going to bother typing this out for f00ls.
a cop can use drugs in order to gain your trust and then bust you, because he has no specific criminal intent in doing said drugs. his intent is to bust you.
sources? i'm too lazy.
 
drCipher:
Those four little stars are replacing a colloquialism that begins with n, ends in c, and has a r and an a in the middle (though they might not be in that order). Part of group policy, I guess--you'd have to ask the mods the legality/why of it.
 
Honestly, I think this is more of an ethical issue for a police officer than a criminal one. I doubt that they would be told to take drugs in order to get an arrest. However, if there were a situation where the undercover would be in danger were it to be found out that they were not who they had represented themselves to be, then the least dangerous thing would be to try to fit in.
We discussed lying by the police, or "blue lies" in my criminal ethics class, but the subject of drug use never came up.
Points i found when reviewing materials..
There is usually accepted a subjective test...that "permits police to engage in deceptive practices provided that the deception catches a wolf rather than a lamb",
and sometimes a more objective one, which holds the law enforcement to a higher moral standard no matter what the end result could have been.
Also, in a situation where the officer has enough info or could get it anyway without doing anything, it would be stupid to do so, as it would hurt their credibility.
My final .02..i suppose they could, but unless forced to for safety, it really would go against what a lot of them believe is right and wrong. Some of them do honestly care about this, and even some of the ones that don't wouldn't want to put doubt in other officer's minds regarding their motives.
 
I actually did a search and didn't find squat on this question. I know from professional experience that police aren't prosecuted for using drugs. I can think of a couple reasons, first, like some wise soul said above, police officers lack criminal intent. But, not all drug crimes are specific intent crimes, most are, but a few aren't. For those crimes or juristictions, police officers working undercover must rely on a necessity defense, they must show if charged, that their drug use was neccessary to protect themselves from a potentially greater danger of being discovered. It's a subjective standard, and the courts will most likely take a cops word that his actions were NECESSARY.
As a practical matter, unless the cop does something really stupid it's unlikely that the DA office will ever charge them.
[ 11 December 2001: Message edited by: DrGonzoESQ ]
 
Alright the answer is yes they can...the exception is written directly into the law!
US Code Chapter 13 sec 885 tells us
Except as provided in section 2234 and 2235 of title 18, no civil or criminal liability shall be imposed by virtue of this subchapter upon any duly authorized Federal officer lawfully engaged in the enforcement of this subchapter, or upon any duly authorized officer of any State, territory, political subdivision thereof, the District of Columbia, or any possession of the United States, who shall be lawfully engaged in the enforcement of any law or municipal ordinance relating to controlled substances.
Where 2234 is you can't excercise a warrent with excesive severity and 2235 is executing a search warrant maliciously. So in short not only can law enforcement officers do drugs they may manufacture, distribute, conspire to distribute illicit drugs. Most of the state laws CSAs are similar so it should be pretty much the same wherever you are.
 
^^^
Thanks quale. I searched and searched but could not find anything on it.
 
Yah I had to go read like half the code section to get that. I think the fact that narcs do drugs, while generally believed, isn't exactly the sort of thing they want to put in their FAQ.
 
A friend of mine worked for omni here in MI.
She wasn't a cop, but was payed 25% of streetvalue bust. She had to wear a wire, bulky one too. Thank God for double D's. :)
They didn't want her doing any drugs for a smaller bust, and she had to fake it, but for a much larger one, they actually whored her off on one of the larger guys.
Everyone involved uses different names, etc.
 
i know someone who just recently got imprisoned for drug connections/usage of meth...he was in a relationship w/an undercover agent for 2 solid years--didn't suspect who she was at all. She did EVERYTHING right along w/him and company(nasty dirty tweak), consistently, as well as introduced him to her (fellow male undercovers)"drug friends" who actually lived with them in the same house, too. He said the agent even had to dramatize a breakup w/him, because she really was using him to get to a bigger drug connection, a dealer who she had to form a brief relationship with in order to bust him an so many other people he can't even begin to count.
 
Last edited:
While a cop might not be prosecuted for doing drugs, many department policies, strictly forbid police officers using drugs. I know the general orders for the Jacksonville, FL Sheriff's Office say that officers are not to use any type of illegal drug, in any circumstance (this includes marijuana). This doesn't mean they don't do it, they are just told not to.
 
Originally posted by Oopsz:
^
That's just pure evil.

Seriously? I dunno...this sort of trickery should be expected when you're livin the way he did in *this country*--we have backward drug laws.
what i can't fathom is how these undercovers could fucking tolerate this guy and his pals for that long...his haven was a 1st rate crackhouse and he himself was pretty psychotic in his own right.
 
Originally posted by Oopsz:
It's not the drug use that bothers me. It's the fact that the n.a.r.c. strung him along in a relationship for two years that's pure evil. PURE EVIL. EVIL!
yea but who's more evil, or, to be more apt-dumber: the cop for being able to do it with ease, or him being so oblivious as to not wholly understand who the hell he was dating, much less let random people into his home? to showcase his ignorance even more: 2 people were murdered in his house during that time (a female raped and strangled, another male shot and killed)and he didn't even know about it till a fellow druggie told him. this was in his own house! and he was in it or very close nearby.
i think you reap what you sow. if you want to diddle responsibility-free in drugs, do it where it's already accepted as ok with like minded invidivuals.
but perhaps he did suspect something of who she was at at one point. just how good are some of these undercovers at disguising their guise???
don't they have to have certain equipment for reporting on them at all times or something??? if you were behaving like everyone else, im sure these hidden features are bound to appear to them somewhere...
 
Undercover cops are not immune from prosecution for doing drugs because they lack the "criminal intent" or "specific intent." That's idiotic.
If there is a law against taking an illegal drug, then the intent requirement is satisfied if you intend to take the illegal drug (i.e., if you intended to take aspirin and someone switched it with e, you have NOT broken this law). A cop who takes an illegal drug to help his cover is still intending to take the drug.
The issue is not intent. The issue is that taking an illegal drug is not a crime. The laws prohibit the sale, transfer, manufacture and possession of illegal drugs. Taking drugs and even buying drugs are not illegal.
That is why a cop can take drugs and still bust you. However, I think it probably is discouraged (i.e., do it if otherwise your cover will be blown or your life will be in danger).
~psychoblast~
p.s. Some or all of this could be wrong.
 
It all comes down to the fact that the State Attorney is not going to prosecute an officer for taking drugs, in order to make an arrest. Also, in Florida, obtaining, or attempting to obtain a controlled substance is a crime.
 
___________________________________________________________________________
Originally posted by psychoblast:
[QB]Undercover cops are not immune from prosecution for doing drugs because they lack the "criminal intent" or "specific intent." That's idiotic.
_________________________________________________________________________
Please don't call my responses idiotic, I treat you with respect and demand the same, if you disagree and want to debate that's one thing, but name calling is another. All crimes (except for things like parking tickets) require two elements, the Acteus Reus(latain for bad act) and Mens Rea(latin for state of mind) in using drugs the Act is the use and the Mens Rea or mental element of the crime is what we're talking about here, and the mental element or "criminal intent" is not satisfied when an officer uses drugs to protect his cover, he is acting to protect his safety or for the greater public good(getting the bust. You can disagree with the wisdom or logic of this, but it is the law.
___________________________________________________________________________
"If there is a law against taking an illegal drug, then the intent requirement is satisfied if you intend to take the illegal drug (i.e., if you intended to take aspirin and someone switched it with e, you have NOT broken this law). A cop who takes an illegal drug to help his cover is still intending to take the drug."
__________________________________________________________________________
You're partially correct, in the case of switched drugs the taker lacks criminal intent, but the so does the cop for the reasons stated above.
___________________________________________________________________________.
"The issue is not intent. The issue is that taking an illegal drug is not a crime. The laws prohibit the sale, transfer, manufacture and possession of illegal drugs. Taking drugs and even buying drugs are not illegal."
___________________________________________________________________________
Ok this is bad bad bad and wrong, purchasing drugs is a crime as is taking them.
[ 28 December 2001: Message edited by: DrGonzoESQ ]
 
Undercover cops identifying themselves

Ok this may seem stupid...My question is related to the buying of drugs in a nightclub/rave situation. I have heard from people who have bought pills while out that the person who has been selling the pill has asked them "your not a cop are you?". Now at first I thought this was funny because the obvious thing is to say...as if they would tell you if they were. And that is my question, by law if asked, must an undercover cop identify themselves as a police officer?
 
Top