Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
The report described Fincher as “shaking” and “very anxious” when asked about the contents of the baggie, and she said it was cotton candy.
The lawsuit claims that police dashcam video shows Fincher and Morris were both “calm” during the encounter.
The substance was tested using a Nark II roadside kit and came back positive for meth, and both Morris and Fincher were arrested, the lawsuit said. The test kits, according to the lawsuit, have a “history of producing false positive results.”
Fincher was charged with trafficking meth and possession of meth with intent to distribute, the lawsuit said.
The judge ordered her to be jailed on a $1 million bond, which the lawsuit said she couldn’t afford so she remained in jail for about three months while the GBI tested the substance.
In March 2017, the GBI said the blue material contained no controlled substances, and she was released from jail on April 4 with her charges dropped about two weeks later, the lawsuit said. https://www.wsoctv.com/news/trending...andy/877798794
There's so much wrong with this, a million dollar bail for meth possession, cops who can't tell cotton candy from methamphetamine, I mean it doesn't even look vaguely similar, and assuming she had a public defender, why didn't they get a court order to get the substance tested sooner?
There's so much wrong with this, a million dollar bail for meth possession, cops who can't tell cotton candy from methamphetamine, I mean it doesn't even look vaguely similar, and assuming she had a public defender, why didn't they get a court order to get the substance tested sooner?
Because our justice system is flawed and cops don't care about the people they bully and persecute. There was a cop in Dallas recently who walked into a man's apartment for no reason, shot him dead and she's out free now. There is no justice.
She should try to get it moved to a higher court and eventually the Supreme Court if possible.
The First drug case to go before the Supreme Court will end the drug laws overnight!!
What on EARTH are you babbling about?
This is about a violation of due process rights. It's not about ending laws criminalizing methamphetamine possession. No one is taking this up as a FREE THE TWEAKERS! crusade. Well, except for you...
And... the 'first' drug case before the USSC 'will' end drug laws? On what planet do you live where you think that the issue of banned substances hasn't been before the Supreme Court many times?
And if you think stuff like that only happens in Georgia, think again. A few years ago a man was arrested in Northern California for DUI, the intoxicating substance was .....caffeine! And the DA was going to prosecute, after news of it spread and the DA looked like the complete idiot that she is they decided not to pursue the case. https://www.foxnews.com/health/count...e-for-caffeine
This is about a violation of due process rights. It's not about ending laws criminalizing methamphetamine possession. No one is taking this up as a FREE THE TWEAKERS! crusade. Well, except for you...
And... the 'first' drug case before the USSC 'will' end drug laws? On what planet do you live where you think that the issue of banned substances hasn't been before the Supreme Court many times?
Its not about 'freeing the tweakers', its about stopping unconstitutional laws.
Police have gone totally nuts on the drug war, this case proves that, they were too stupid to realize it was cotton candy, they just assumed it was meth, I mean, CMON, really?! Plus, this has happened before, there was another thread on here recently, police mistook salt for meth, took the person to jail and everything.
And if you think stuff like that only happens in Georgia, think again. A few years ago a man was arrested in Northern California for DUI, the intoxicating substance was .....caffeine! And the DA was going to prosecute, after news of it spread and the DA looked like the complete idiot that she is they decided not to pursue the case.
It is certainly possible to ingest enough caffeine to be 'under its influence' to the point where one is an unsafe driver. The article you cite blurs the difference between his (apparent) ingestion of a lot of caffeine-laced "workout powders" and a vague floating comment that "caffeine can make people drive better."
It is certainly possible to be 'influenced' enough to lack judgment, attention span, hand-eye coordination and motor skills by a legal, even nominally benign substance - and however silly the charge might seem, anyone attempting to drive while not mentally/physically capable of doing so is indeed driving illegally. The cop's description of the man's behavior is all that's really relevant - so it was an overdose of bubble gum; the cop judged him unable to drive safely and had observed unsafe driving behavior.
It is certainly possible to ingest enough caffeine to be 'under its influence' to the point where one is an unsafe driver. The article you cite blurs the difference between his (apparent) ingestion of a lot of caffeine-laced "workout powders" and a vague floating comment that "caffeine can make people drive better."
It is certainly possible to be 'influenced' enough to lack judgment, attention span, hand-eye coordination and motor skills by a legal, even nominally benign substance - and however silly the charge might seem, anyone attempting to drive while not mentally/physically capable of doing so is indeed driving illegally. The cop's description of the man's behavior is all that's really relevant - so it was an overdose of bubble gum; the cop judged him unable to drive safely and had observed unsafe driving behavior.
A lot of things are possible in theory - it is reality that counts in this case. Was he indeed "under the influence" of ANYTHING? If not, it sounds like reckless driving, assuming he was actually driving in such a manner. I'm sure that DUI has a much different penalty than mere reckless driving - so it's actually important to not assume someone is under the influence rather than attribute it to some random substance they are in possession of.
This is about a violation of due process rights. It's not about ending laws criminalizing methamphetamine possession.
Bingo. The baggie contents should have been verified in a timely manner especially as it is known that field tests can read false, charges dismissed, and the person released.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
