This story is closed for comments. Comments on WRAL.com news stories are accepted and moderated between the hours of 8 a.m. and 8 p.m. Monday through Friday.

Oldest First
  • less_govt_is_better_govt Jul 10, 11:53 a.m.

    Officer did nothing wrong.. yet it does not allow an officer to just walk into your home?

    So...
    View More

    — Posted by btneast

    I guess you missed the SCOTUS ruling that consent must be freely given.

    Consent was given because of intimidation and untruthful bullying by the officer. In NC the apparent mindset of some officers is they can perform such actions and then let the court system work it out, when in the citizen world the officer is not factually allowed to use those practices.

    It would appear as if a "liberal" judge is one who adheres to strict constitutional interpretations by some users. I presume they prefer a more liberal approach to the constitution which gives the government (police) the right to do whatever they want however they want, then label themselves conservative (of which they are factually not they are totalitarian).

  • berniwheeler Jul 10, 11:10 a.m.

    Officer did nothing wrong.. yet it does not allow an officer to just walk into your home?

    So...
    View More

    — Posted by btneast

    I have to enter your home because of a 911 call. Its policy.
    ummm ok..

    he lied. This is not "right". I guess you missed the whole moral point? He gained approval which he would not have otherwise obtained, because the whole concept is illegal. Are you a Durham cop cuz Im seeing a justify bad behavior rationalization going on here...

  • berniwheeler Jul 10, 10:50 a.m.

    It's interesting to read all the comments of those that feel this officer somehow broke the law... View More

    — Posted by thinkin out loud

    Wrong, wrong, and WRONG!

    Yes police can use "deception" (ie lying) for interrogation but courts... View More

    — Posted by less_govt_is_better_govt

    Its easy and relatively cheap (considering a bad cop can and would eaily ruin your whole life) to install motion activated wireless cameras. Remember, its your word as a "Criminal" against the word of an "upstanding officer" otherwise!!! This is supposed to be the land of the innocent until proven guilty justice system. Really... is it? take a look around...

  • btneast Jul 10, 10:49 a.m.

    Officer did nothing wrong.. yet it does not allow an officer to just walk into your home?

    So which is it?


    I guess you missed the sentence AND at some point someone had to give the officer CONSENT to enter the house

  • less_govt_is_better_govt Jul 10, 10:35 a.m.

    It's interesting to read all the comments of those that feel this officer somehow broke the law... View More

    — Posted by thinkin out loud

    Wrong, wrong, and WRONG!

    Yes police can use "deception" (ie lying) for interrogation but courts have ruled consent must be freely given. Until body cameras are on every officer NEVER believe that consent was freely given. Intimidation and bullying are the typical means of obtaining
    Officer: can I search the premises? Suspect: no. Officer: if you do not let me I can and will arrest you and your family. And no that part of the conversation never makes it on the officer's notes and will most likely never make it to the court room.....

  • same ole story Jul 10, 9:54 a.m.

    The purported practice involves officers gaining entrance to a home under the pretense of investigating a 911 hang-up call
    And THEY WONDER WHY no one trusts the police!!!!!

  • berniwheeler Jul 10, 9:28 a.m.

    It's interesting to read all the comments of those that feel this officer somehow broke the law... View More

    — Posted by thinkin out loud

    Officer did nothing wrong.. yet it does not allow an officer to just walk into your home?

    So which is it?

  • less_govt_is_better_govt Jul 10, 9:14 a.m.

    Psssshhh. Lol.

    Meanwhile in neighboring wake county from 2002 through 2010 the wake county sheriff would allow deputies to use any means possible to obtain consent to search to include coercion, untruthful statements,even communicating threats. It was then the accused citizen's job to prove that these actions occurred or they could just plea down the illegal charges.

    The supreme court ruled a long time ago that LEOs cannot obtain consent via intimidation but in wake and Durham counties this ruling was never payed any attention because consent was always so "productive" for finding criminals.

  • thinkin out loud Jul 10, 9:02 a.m.

    It's interesting to read all the comments of those that feel this officer somehow broke the law or violated the constitution. Though I agree this is an unusual tactic it IS NOT illegal nor unconstitutional. In fact, police officers are allowed to lie to people. Yes that's right, cops are allowed to lie to people (to an extent) in order to get information or confessions and the like. It's all part of interview and interrogation techniques but there are limitations. This case could have been prosecuted but the ADA probably knew he had a liberal judge and couldn't win so he dismissed it.

    In this case the officer actually did nothing wrong AND at some point someone had to give the officer CONSENT to enter the house unless the officer saw something that would cause exigent circumstances. 911 hang ups happen all the time and 99% are accidents from trying to dial 919. This does require a response but does not allow an officer to just walk in your home.

  • givemeabr8 Jul 10, 8:22 a.m.

    Officers lie ALL the time in the course of their duties. This is not limited to the Durham Police Department. Why is everyone so surprised over this?

  • LocalYokel Jul 10, 8:21 a.m.

    "added one and one and came up with three."

    Please fire employees that can't add well enough to protect our rights and help preserve what little respect you have left as a public safety department.

  • westernwake1 Jul 9, 7:45 p.m.

    I think that this issue and some other related ones are going to cause significant issues for the Durham Police Department and lead to a number of overturned convictions.

  • liquidsatin5702 Jul 9, 7:40 p.m.

    I'm normally one to support LEO's, but this is horse hockey.

    The 4th Amendment supposedly protects us from this type of stuff, so I have to wonder how an officer of the law can even call the practice 'questionable'. If the case seriously is that he doesn't even know his own rights, how can he be expected to uphold those rights for anyone else. It screams severe incompetence at best, and outright lying at worse. In either case, yes, he should be without a LEO career.

    As for a police officer being honest with you, that simply doesn't apply. It's actually standard practice to use any number of tactics (including lying) to get information from a person and/or suspect.

    And lastly. I have to wonder what the officer was doing there at all. Did he just choose a house at random? Did he have some other suspicions? Why didn't he just use the standard lie of "Well I smelled marijuana!"... apparently he did find the drugs.

  • Honesty first Jul 9, 6:52 p.m.

    "'We don't have a training system or policy that uses lying to get consent,' he said."

    I... View More

    — Posted by "Screen Name-8/20"

    I agree 100%!!

  • "Screen Name-8/20" Jul 9, 6:35 p.m.

    "'We don't have a training system or policy that uses lying to get consent,' he said."

    I certainly hope not, and personally, I can't imagine anyone intelligent enough to pass a cop entrance exam thinking this was ok to do. And those that do/did need to be fired cause I don't believe they didn't know better and they don't have the honesty to be an officer of the law anywhere in the US.

Oldest First