Ron Duval

The two points that I get from this situation are:

1) Don't be a poacher
2) Use caution and some common sense when posting on the internet

spaniel

So people who HAVE gone and tried to validate this cannot find any evidence that such a regulation exists, but you are not willing to do it so we're supposed to believe you because you're heard it from multiple sources? The only source that counts is the regulations and nobody can validate what you're telling us. Such a regulation should be clear in the manual and it's not there. As I said I hunted MI for 12 years and I never heard of such a thing.

I have meat piled in my freezer from probably 10-12 different animals. What would having the tags in the freezer prove? Unless they're going to DNA test every package of meat there is no telling what animal anything came from, much less how old it is. Heck, I'M not even sure how old some of it is.

If the DNR was doing this they were probably trying to intimidate them. I'd tell them to show me the regulation or leave. If they refused to do either, I'd tell them they'd better be right or I'd be filing grievances against them for violating my civil rights (unlawful search among other things).

statjunk

I'm glad to see that someone gets it.


Spaniel,

Even if it were false which I doubt, I don't think it matters. You can put up a fight. You may even prevail. But monetarily these situations typically cause a loss.

The point of this is we should all think before we post.

Tom

spaniel

I totally agree and pretty much said the same thing in an earlier post.

As for not gaining by fighting, I disagree. If you consent to everything you give up your rights. Once they're into you for something, legit or not, it's going to cost you so you'd might as well make them go by the book.

They need reason to believe and INDIVIDUAL committed a crime...they can't lock down an entire block legally although they may try to bluff their way through it.

RangerJ

As a retired LEO of 30 plus years, I have sat on many wire taps etc. I cannot believe any judge would sign a consent order to tap phones for the entire street for a hunting violation. It is difficult enough on a criminal case involving humans. Just my 2 cents. Thanks

driftrider

Yep. Based on the way the story was presented, either the details have been grossly exaggerated, or the individuals in question have been given an easy out, and everyone else on that block who had their phones tapped have a big fat civil rights lawsuit gift wrapped and dropped right on their doorstep by the MI-DNR.

Wiretapping the entire neighborhood... don't think so. No sane judge would allow such a thing unless the cops could demonstrate probable cause that every person on that block was involved in a (grand) criminal conspiracy to poach that deer. Searching everyones house? Only if you let them, unless they have a warrant. Again, no judge in his right mind would give LE carte blanche warrants to go on a big fishing expedition through every house in the neighborhood. Not only would such a warrant be overturned in a New York minute, it could also put his career in jeopardy when eager defense lawyers start picking apart every warrant he's ever issued. Again, no way it's gonna happen.

So if the cops did go on a neighborhood wide fishing expedition searching everyones freezers, it was only because the folks who owned those freezers gave them consent to search. Now, if you have untagged meat in your freezer (I find it hard to believe that the processed meat has to be tagged, but I'll give you the benefit of the doubt. It certainly doesn't have to be in Iowa or Minnesota), and the cops want to take a look in your freezer and don't have a warrant, then JUST SAY NO! Now, if they have a good case and probable cause (meaning they have some solid evidence that you do), they will likely detain you while they get a telephonic search warrant signed. If not, the only choice they have is to bid you 'good day' and leave. If they do the search anyway, then the evidence they find will get thrown out before the ink on the police report dries.

It never ceases to amaze me how few people know what their rights are. Folks assume that if they don't surrender their rights in order to "cooperate" with the police it's a de-facto admission of guilt and will result in immediate arrest. The fact is that there is no reason, short of a warrant supported by probable cause, or exigent circumstances (google it), that the cops can lawfully enter and search anyones home unless given permission from someone who lives there. Same goes for tapping your phone. If they do anyway, they contaminate any evidence they find as a result of said search (google "fruits of the poisonous tree doctrine").

What I think probably happened was that he posted this deer on a forum in addition to him bragging it up at the local watering hole. Word got around that ol' Bubba "shot hisself big deer" and has it at a buddies house, but the season was over. The story got to the local CO/Game Warden, who suspected the deer was taken illegally, and began an (lawful) investigation which ultimately him them to your buddies house and the carcass. I'm betting it was good old fashioned police work meets the 21st century. Sucks to be your buddy, but he should have known better. Next time he'll pick his friends, or at least his favors, better.

Mike

driftrider

Oh, and one other thing... just FYI. There is absolutely NO law prohibiting the cops from lying to you about the scope or methods of their investigation. They probably told your friend, or whomever, that they tapped the phones to make him believe his goose was already cooked and had no good reason not to 'fess up. It's a common and completely legal interrogation tactic to deceive a suspect as such. That's why smart criminals, and smart non-criminals wrongfully accused, to NEVER TALK TO LAW ENFORCEMENT WITHOUT AN ATTORNEY! Never ever. If you are a suspect, you have the right to council. If you surrender that right, even to be cooperative, you either stupid or foolish. I guarantee you that if I ever have an official encounter with the law, guilty or not, I'm not letting them search a darn thing without a warrant, I'm not letting them in my house, I'm establishing right away if I'm a suspect or under arrest, and if so I'm not saying a word until I have spoken with and am represented by council. I've been on the back side of the badge and know that while most cops are good folks, they also know through training and experience how to manipulate a situation into their favor. When I was in LE (as an MP), we ALWAYS asked for permission to search whenever appropriate. Most criminals are too stupid to say no, and you never know what you might find. And with consent, EVERYTHING you find is admissible. I've never seen evidence found during a consent search thrown out.

Oh, and one last thing. To be perfectly clear. Refusal to grant a LEO consent to search does NOT, EVER, constitute probable cause to issue a warrant, nor is it EVER considered by a court to be evidence of guilt. You may think you have nothing to hide, but I, for one, will not surrender my 4th Amendment rights to the state just to appease the curiosity of a LEO.

Mike

halfbakedi420

lol..dnr dont need a warrant...they have more jurisdiction than bounty hunters.

JagMagMan

Friend of a friend of a friend, wire tapping, house to house search!!!
I call BS! It stinks even through the Internet cables!

driftrider

Before they conduct a search of your property... you bet your a$$ they do. They are still law enforcement and representives of the State. They can no more infringe on your constitutional rights than any other representative of the government can. But they don't mind you believing that they can do whatever they want, because your ignorance of the law makes it easier for them to fool you into waiving your rights.

As for bounty hunters... they have the advantage of not being a representative of the government. They are private citizens, and as such aren't bound by the same constitutional restrictions government agents are. The Bill of Rights pertains to the relationship between citizens and the government (aka the State, with a capital "S"). That said, bounty hunters still must adhere to the laws of the state they practice in, and in reality they can't do anything any other citizen can't legally do.

Mike