Legal challenge questions reliability of police dogs

23536

23536

Bluelight Crew
Joined
Dec 16, 2010
Messages
7,725
Location
Stop resisting!
http://www.reviewjournal.com/news/crime-courts/legal-challenge-questions-reliability-police-dogs

In 2010, a team of researchers at the University of California, Davis set out to test the reliability of drug- and bomb-sniffing dogs.

The team assembled 18 police dogs and their handlers and gave them a routine task: go through a room and sniff out the drugs and explosives.

But there was a twist. The room was clean. No drugs, no explosives.

In order to pass the test, the handlers and their dogs had to go through the room and detect nothing.

But of 144 runs, that happened only 21 times, for a failure rate of 85 percent.

Although drug-sniffing dogs are supposed to find drugs on their own, the researchers concluded that they were influenced by their handlers, and that's what led to such a high failure rate.

The reliability of drug dogs and their handlers is at the heart of a lawsuit filed in state district court by two Nevada Highway Patrol K-9 troopers and a consultant, who claim that the Metropolitan Police Department's police dogs, and eventually NHP's own dogs, were "trick ponies" that responded to their handlers' cues, and therefore routinely violated citizens' rights to lawful search under the Fourth Amendment.

The lawsuit goes on to make a number of other accusations in its 104-page complaint: that the Metropolitan Police Department is a racketeering organization, that money seized by motorists was misappropriated by the Department of Public Safety, that the two troopers were subjected to harassment and intimidation by their agency.

But what has defense attorneys and civil advocates taking notice are the allegations of illegal searches, which could call into question the seizure of millions of dollars from motorists on Nevada highways and jeopardize an untold number of criminal cases stemming from those stops.

The story continues: http://www.reviewjournal.com/news/crime-courts/legal-challenge-questions-reliability-police-dogs
 
I agree with this 100% its just a way for cops to semi legally search your car or at least give them what they think is probable charge. Cartels will dust cars with cocaine on cars crossing the border to confuse the dogs while a tractor trailer filled with 1000 bricks goes right through because theyh are so bust tearing apart the toyota camry of the couple on vacation to mexico who got dusted with coke and looked like the "new age drug smuggler" young white couple...ive seen so many episodes of cops where its like how in the world did a dog smell a vacume sealed bag of weed hidden under the floorboards of a car? Dogs have a great sense of smell no doubt, but its not like a b ears lol. They should outlaw canine searches esp with this study basically showing drug dogs are just trick ponies and respond to the carries sues just like they are trained to. Or when the dog sits it indicates drugs, maybe its taking a piss or something? Lol
 
I cant see how anyone can think the dogs arent influenced by there handlers. Its well known that dogs are adept at reading a humans body language.
 
When I had a dog walked around my car you could tell the dog was just interested in whatever the owner wanted it to be.

Failure rate of 85% says it all. Its all bull shit just a way to violate the rights of americans and search threw there shit.
 
If a dog hits on your car and there is nothing you should get more than a sorry, you should be able to sue.I don't think a dog being wrong 85 percent of time is acceptable. It's obvious they are lying when dogs find things like LSD. The cops want to you to think these beasts are like perfect they have been perpetuating that myth a long time. I wonder what percent of bomb detection on planes is left to the dogs anyway?
 
I read somewhere in the last few months that there is a case to go before the Supreme Court that could decide the constitutionality of property seizures, at least before trial. A Miami couple had over 2 million dollars of their assets seized prior to trial but they argued that they seizure should not occur until after trial as they needed funds for a proper legal defense.
 
This is so true, I have a friend who really doesn't fit into the drug stereotype in terms of appearance. He walked straight past a drug dog with a pill of mdma in his pocket and assumed the dog was bunk. Later on we were together and we saw someone with dreadlocks against the wall with a dog sniffing him. I didn't quite believe that it was all in the owner at first but now i've seen it first hand it is definitely shocking.
 
LogicSoDeveloped said:
I read somewhere in the last few months that there is a case to go before the Supreme Court that could decide the constitutionality of property seizures, at least before trial. A Miami couple had over 2 million dollars of their assets seized prior to trial but they argued that they seizure should not occur until after trial as they needed funds for a proper legal defense.
Click to expand...

http://www.bluelight.ru/vb/threads/...criminal-asset-seizures-in-Supreme-Court-case
 
I've been within 4 feet of a drug dog with some strong weed in my pocket, so these things aren't perfect.

I wonder if they're training the things to detect each rc as its made illegal? If so, those dogs are gonna be Busy.

The police put a ridiculous amount of faith in these dogs to do their jobs for them; if they really are unreliable, that can only be a good thing for the average drug user.
 
Don't they have those hand-held smell devices now? Like the ones they typically use for explosives? We can replace the fucking dogs but no, then the police wouldn't have all the false positives to allow them to violate you body, destroy your property and rape your livelihood with.
 
There was actually a book written by a sniffer-dog handling cop, who ended up opposed to drug laws: "how to beat a drug sniffer dog" or a similar sounding title (sorry I read it ages ago, can't quite remember the title)

^^success rates of 15%, eh? Sounds like profit to me...

^ damn right. These fuckers only need the flimsiest of pretexts; using an unreliable tool creates huge margins for error, making it all the easier to "justifiably" search somebody. It's like a rigged game.
 
Last edited:
Oh, I was sweating, goose pimply, the full works; it was not a fun experience. The weed was stored in an empty plastic bottle designed for rolls of film - there's no chance that made it smell-proof IMHO.

And yeah, 15% did sound WAY too low IMO; I think these animals have hundreds if not thousands of times the sense of smell of us humans - that's what makes the things so scary. I guess you could call them weapons in the war against drugs.

Btw what did you mean about people's lives depending on a sniffer dogs effectiveness? Did you mean like explosives dogs or firearm dogs?
 
I'm just honestly grateful that prisons in the UK are so over-crowded; a drug addict with a small amount of drug is highly unlikely to get prison time, although they do like to make examples of the big time drug dealers.

I hear about some of the sentences being handed out for drug users in the States, and it makes me physically sick, not to mention fucking angry. You're 100% right: we're talking about ruining human lives here.
 
dopemegently said:
I've been within 4 feet of a drug dog with some strong weed in my pocket, so these things aren't perfect.

I wonder if they're training the things to detect each rc as its made illegal? If so, those dogs are gonna be Busy.

The police put a ridiculous amount of faith in these dogs to do their jobs for them; if they really are unreliable, that can only be a good thing for the average drug user.
Click to expand...

lol I had a perfectly legit package opened by DHS and re sealed and the package had some dog teeth marks on the edge of the package. Evidently someone's dog started chewing on it so they opened it and when they closed it they left stickers. Weird. I also got searched for an hour and 20 kins and I didn't even have drugs from a bunk dog hit. no smell of drugs around me.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top