Thread Rating:
  • 0 Vote(s) - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
Some Legal Issues
looks like the gman got banned at p argh,says next to his name," Sent the administrator delerious PMs threatening to try to hack this site."
WTF is wrong with these people,unfortuantley the nature of these forums seems to bring in some nasty little pieces of work,although i have never had any run ins with the guy under that name as far as i can recall,maybe one idiot on ETs/vagues list was giving me and popster some grief a while ago before he eventually got banned.
Do not envy admin or the mods here or on most forums,the worlds getting seriously messed up.
the worst of the threats and letters i get, u guys never see. thank god.

these people r brutal. for no reason at all.

because a vendor at another forum did them wrong and they blame me?

stinkin thinkin. u gotta be rather tough or thick skinned to be mod or admin.

even as just the chaplain, i would get the insane emails and the hacking of my computer.

but, here, it is loverly. so peaceful.

let's keep it that way.
Angel  It is Well with My Soul  Angel
I've got no complaints here... Everybody seems to be on the sane(or same) page... I guess the folks here have had enough already and are taking a stand against the hellraisers and dipsh!tz that stir the pot for no reason other than pure evil intentions ... I have no time for that nonsense ...

Like I've said before, if I have to come to a place like this just to start sh!t or get over on somebody or have someone get over on me, I'd rather be independent and go on my way. I canlt see forming bonds with others, then jacking them around for fun and/or profit ... People like that should be freaking shot ... A lot!!
A True Friend 
Freely Advises Justly 
Assists Readily, 
Adventures Boldly, 
Takes all Patiently,
Defends Courageously
Continues a Friend Unchangeably.

William Penn

(08-26-2015, 02:03 PM)FirePlaces Wrote: Hi Char!  Yea, we are posting on the same forum once again. A nice friendly one at that.  

Dagger's post was pretty good.  Wonder if it's true.  

Not sure those PO boxes are the way to go but it probably depends most on how one's home mail box is set up.  IMO it just provides another witness maybe?

Also I know some ladies or gents have spouses who do not know about the letters.

Hey! We should probably clean that up, curate it, so to speak, it's a mess of kind of true, needs more explanation, half true, weird, etc.

Lets do it point by point. Obviously I have no idea what state you're in or do I want to know but you know, just generally, you can Google Scholar and figure out how it goes in your state, or talk to an attorney in your state, or whatever. Some of it is federal, some of it is state, which is why I think it's best to make it less misleading and confusing.

Quote:Look, if merely having drugs sent to you is enough to get someone in trouble then I could put every person who has ever harmed me behind bars for life by just dropping some packages in the mail. But it is not that simple. As the law enforcement manual above states PROOF OF KNOWLEDGE OF THE CONTENTS BY THE RECEIVER IS ABSOLUTELY NECESSARY TO PROVE A CASE! 

I know it's a hyperbole, but it's far worse to get caught with a delivery/distribution charge than a possession charge in every instance, so I don't think he'd do that. Because you know, the other guy, who didn't order it, will go to the cops first, and if he doesn't, then how would this fella know it's coming so specifically?

Anyway, knowledge, mens rea, intent, it's essentially true, more or less (some sort of guilty knowledge at least, or at least a totality of circumstances that infers guilty knowledge) is required in 48 out of 50 states. The outliers are Washington, which has instead strict liability but an unwitting possession and a transitory possession defense, and Florida, where knowledge is an affirmative defense that will negate the charge. Affirmative defenses are effectively you saying "Sure, I'm admitting to the conduct, but this is why it should be excused". It's not ideal for defense attorneys because you're in the hotseat, but you take what you can get in that field. People tend to think strict liability is harsh, but it's certainly constitutional. Unwitting possession is an affirmative defense where you're saying "I had it, but I didn't mean to have for whatever reason", like if you never seen pot but it grew wild on your lawn, or whatever, so knowledge is sort of a part of it, but it expands the universe of relevant evidence to prove this affirmative defense by preponderance (more likely than not). Two kinds of unwitting possession defenses are prominent - "I bought this pair of pants 5 minutes ago at Salvation Army and it had a little thing of coke in a hidden pocket" - or "I've never seen pot so I don't know what this grass is on my lawn" are both good, and either one would do, so it's saying that you don't have knowledge of either presence or nature of substance as a rebuttal of the charge as an excuse for the whole charge. Transitory means essentially you had a hot potato's worth of possession time and so you did touch it, but you got rid of it so quickly, it shouldn't count. Different sorts of knowledge, effectively. Just saying "knowledge" doesn't give you an idea of the depth of the concept.

States have different definitions of intent/knowledge, different defenses, it's a pretty complicated thing and it's definitely something you need to check out state by state. Some can use circumstantial evidence, some can use inferences and implications, etc. Also what's a felony in one state might not be in another, because sometimes it's amount and substance-based. 

Florida actually just have it laid out in one of their cases, first note:

"A national survey reveals that Florida's drug law is clearly out of the mainstream. Except for Washington, which eliminates mens rea for simple drug possession offenses, and now Florida, the remaining forty-eight states require knowledge to be an element of a narcotics possession law, either by statute or by judicial decision. See State v. Bradshaw, 152 Wn.2d 528, 98 P.3d 1190, 1196 (Wash. 2004) (Sanders, J., dissenting) (noting that at least forty-eight states have adopted the Uniform Controlled Substance Act and all but two expressly require knowledge to be proved as an element of unlawful possession); Dawkins v. State, 313 Md. 638, 547 A.2d 1041, 1045, 1046 n.10 (Md. 1988) ("In surveying the law of other states that have adopted the Uniform Controlled Substances Act, we note that the overwhelming majority of states, either by statute or by judicial decision, require that the possession be knowing"; "Most states addressing the issue of possession of controlled substances hold that the accused must not only know of the presence of the substance but also of the general character of the substance.").

State v. Adkins, 96 So. 3d 412, 423 n.1 (Fla. 2012)

Truth level, number I'll give 96%, but explanation is poor, so ulimately tis claim gets... 75%? Good start.

Essentially unless there are other facts, receiving anything in the mail is at most a possession offense, unless you can prove a conspiracy, or that you're selling this, or whatever. Also 1st federal simple possession offense is only a misdemeanor so it's actually possible that the fed charge is less harsh than the local charge (and I don't remember ever hearing about it being the only charge on someone, waste of resources).

Quote:If you do not admit to knowing about it there is nothing they can do except try to get you to admit it. 

This is incorrect. Different states have different rules. North Dakota, Pennsylvania, and New York are just a few states that either allow, require, or presume knowledge if it's not testified to directly. I don't have a 50 state survey here but I'm sure there are more.

This is probably more like a 50%. Oomph, falling fast.

Quote:Unfortunately police have an extraordinarily easy time getting people to admit that they were waiting for a package filled with illegal drugs. They usually do this by one of two approaches. I have seen both approaches work against hardened criminals and I can’t believe the stupid f***ers fall for it and admit their way into years of prison when otherwise they’d walk free. The two approaches really are the good guy bad guy approach. For you personal use buyers you will most likely get the good guy approach first and if it doesn’t work then you will get the bad guy approach. The good guy approach goes like this, the police will try to act all nice and like your friend (after giving you a heart attack with a bust) and say, “Look man we don’t really care if you ordered yourself a little bit of drugs to use for yourself, we just want the sellers, the real bad guys, we know you are a good dude and a working man and that’s why we don’t care about you, so just tell us where you got this from. We know you are an honest guy so please just be honest with us. I promise you won’t get into any trouble, I will see to that.” Then if this doesn’t work they will try their scare tactics, “Look man you are F***ED. You are in a lot of trouble and going to jail as it stands. You are going to lose your job, maybe your house, maybe your kids, you are in lots of trouble, the only way to get out of it is to just admit what you did.” You will be in a position of fear and shock and you will be amazed how easily you may want to cave into one of their approaches. It’s literally because you become dumber. When something like a bust happens your fight or flight mechanism kicks in. What this does is drives all your blood from your brain into your arms and legs. All that oxygen and nutrition you had in your brain is now in your arms and legs to fight or run away. You are now a stupid mother f***er and the cops will take advantage of it. Don’t let them. Not going to prison or being on many many years of probation really is just as easy as keeping your mouth shut. Even if you have to go to jail then just go, bond out, and either the cops will fold on their bluff and drop charges, the prosecutor will neglect to file, the judge will toss out, or worse case your lawyer files a motion to dismiss, but 9 times out of 10 you will just have the cuffs taken off and the police will leave knowing that you won. So DO NOT EVER ADMIT TO ANYTHING! Act scared, confused, panicked, whatever, and just exercise your right to remain silent.

Woah, that escalated quickly. I'm guessing they're not playing good cop bad cop, so he's not only assuming arrest, but also interrogation? Two cops? They initiated it, you're in custody, guess what comes next - MIRANDA! So all that knowledge stuff goes to hell, I guess. 

Now, I know that some cops will pretend to not hear you and keep asking you questions, but here's the thing - the right to remain silent is not only half of the 5th Amendment you need to use here to get the cops off your back, but also both parts can be waived if it's knowing and intelligent. What's less clear is whether complete silence is an inference of invocation of your right or... a showing of your lack of understanding of the question. Because Miranda essentially gives you two things you can do and they contradict - the right to not talk and the right to make a statement that invokes your right to an attorney immediately. The police will ask you whether you understood it or not. If you don't say anything and just act scared, what do you think that looks like to the cops? What do you think they want to say that looked like?

Do your attorney a favor. Tell the cops that you understood your rights and you wish to invoke your rights so you will not answer questions on any topic and will do so with an attorney present after consulting your attorney. Sure, they might keep asking, but since you answering can be seen as you waiving your right to an attorney present, you don't wanna give that up never gonna let you down, etc..

Your 6th Amendment rights will attach later, that's also right to counsel. It's more general than consult and have one present. I mean, people do just not talk, but god I can't imagine what it'd look like when your attorney sees that you just won't talk at all. "Difficult client". You gotta help yourself so your attorney can help you to the best of his or her abilities. There are things you must do, work with them, be precise and concise, say no more but be thorough. 

He is right about the cops likely fucking with you, but ultimately if you keep invoking the right they'll stop, eventually. You're not at Guantanamo, these people have hours to keep.

Poor advice, doesn't help anyone. 40%. We're falling!

Quote:However, it does not even need to get to that.
Not admitting to anything is the first rule of accepting drug packages safely. But not even allowing them to bust you in the first place is even better as no one wants to have to stand up against the police’s gestapo interrogations. I believe the easiest way to do this is by renting a mailbox at a UPS Store or other mailbox rental place (I think the mom and pop independent ones are the best). If you can’t pay an extra $45 to guarantee safe deliverance of your drugs then you probably should not be ordering drugs off the internet.

What's this admission thing, come on, they can convict you without you saying shit in quite a few places, and having a PO Box might be inferred as some sort of knowledge/planning. Admission is a thing saved for immigration law to screw people over already, don't let it spread.

Probable cause is not based on one thing. If you ever see PC affidavits, they're pretty long sometimes, and since the bar to establish it is pretty low, you can use hearsay that's not admissible in actual court to establish it. If someone works there, they'll just be another voice to establish part of PC,. If you're not ready for the potential of possibly getting caught then don't order drugs online would be more correct.

It will depend on where you live. I've lived somewhere so rural that you can't get mail at your house and you have to get a PO Box. There are places where your stuff will get stolen in your actual mailbox, but if it's the least bit unusual it'll make the PC affidavit even if it's not admissible within itself, so I mean if you want one, cool, but it's not some sort of panacea to make you forever uncatchable. 

Your mailman will know your habits anyway, you can have one more person, or not.

Quote:Pick one that you can access 24/7 which most are. Always use your real ID. Using a fake ID can instantly compromise your box and very much hurt you if one of your packages becomes compromised. Fake IDs can add to probable cause to open/watch your mail, make it harder for you to deny you had bad intentions with the box, and ultimately get you into a lot of trouble independently of the drugs because post-911 fake IDs are now a serious crime (before they were associated with underage drinking, now they are associated with mass murder, terrorism, id theft, and credit card fraud). So use your real ID/name.

Fake IDs for daily use is still pretty common in some circles. Usually it's for scamming. I don't know where this murder terrorism thing comes from... Homer Simpson's mom? The real reason is that you'll have a ID theft charge on you if they find it. 

Quote:After you have your box then order from a trusted vendor. Ordering from good established vendors who know what they are doing helps greatly in not having to deal with a hot package. When the package comes let it sit there for a couple days. LE does not have the resources to conduct 24/7 surveillance for a small time buyer (and most times not for a bigger buyer as well). After hours, like say 9pm, visit your box, check out the area a little bit, go in, grab your package, and without opening it take it back home. If you like set it to the side as if you forgot about it and open it a couple days later (which maintains the ability to deny knowledge of the contents). When you feel it’s good to do so open it up, verify contents, then go hide it in a good place. Now you are good :-). Most buyers and vendors would suggest all of that is going overboard but if you are paranoid that is the way to go and gives you a legal loophole out of any trouble until you can safely hide it (I think burying is always the best option, particularly off your property).
What legal loophole? I don't see one, and I hate calling somewhat unexpected applications of the law as "loopholes". Someone wrote that on purpose. Once again, knowledge of content and nature of content are not necessarily requirements, and if you did something or someone did something to you to warrant any surveillance, everything here is super sketchy. Wow, he has a very naive view as to what the law and law enforcement actually does.

I guess if you have a twisted view of the law you'll have a bunch of bad advice as well. The key is to blend in, everything he suggests, if not normal where you are, like getting a mailbox, checking your mail at 9pm and hiding it, adds to your suspiciousness. 

Man that went to shit quick. Also it sounds totally darknet and totally not IOP. Halfway through I realized that he's not talking about us. We rely on being small potatoes and agency underfunding really. Damn, all that time wasted :/
Man ... That is pure Fa-King quality! Thanks Jim ... This kind of info is most valuable!

What would we do without you my friend....
A True Friend 
Freely Advises Justly 
Assists Readily, 
Adventures Boldly, 
Takes all Patiently,
Defends Courageously
Continues a Friend Unchangeably.

William Penn

No, that time was not wasted, jim.

I love reading the terms of art again. Hearing it through your enthusiasm.

Gman apparently had a problem with drinking. As well as his personality. Apparently he would hit on women at PR. He did an amends to me at least 8 months or so ago. Maybe longer. To forgive him for his drunken passes at me. Uh, they never happened. He and I never spoke privately. Not at Pr. And, only here when I responded to Dagger's dumb ass emails threatening me. I guess he likes to threaten mods and admins. Equal Opportunity threats. Dr.B apparently and me. (So, it was not just cuz he would post, I was told, that I was the vendor Pink. He went after many. No rhyme nor reason did we see.)

Maybe its not early morning forum reading for all. But, I love having such a knowledgeable and enthusiastic young attorney on this forum.

Well done, counselor. We are all very grateful for all ur sharing. But, we attorneys do talk Bass Ackwards because, elsewise, why would anyone pay to use our services?
Angel  It is Well with My Soul  Angel
Thanks jimjte.

I appreciated the time you took to break down the flaws in Daggers logic/statements.
Music is probably the only real magic I have encountered in my life. There's not some trick involved with it. It's pure and it's real. It moves, it heals, it communicates and does all these incredible things. Tom Petty
Hey, no problem. While Google Scholar is totally adequate to address everything if anyone really wanted to fact-check I figure I break it down cuz I couldn't sleep that night.

Turns out I had a viral infection and had to go to the ER for it, but hey, silver linings, better now (although it'll take a few more weeks to be normal), so next time anyone want me to break anything down like that again you might wanna hope I get something ER-worthy again Wink
Nothing like sitting in an ER to motivate one. Hope your infection is better jimte.
Music is probably the only real magic I have encountered in my life. There's not some trick involved with it. It's pure and it's real. It moves, it heals, it communicates and does all these incredible things. Tom Petty

Forum Jump:

Users browsing this thread: 2 Guest(s)