0
BillyVance

Traveler sues after her joke goes awry

Recommended Posts

Quote

Quote

The arguments so far defending this girl for her use of condoms filled with flour are rather silly.



I think the argument is why would she need to be defended for having flour in condoms? Is it illegal to have flour in condoms in the US?



No, it's perfectly legal to have flour in condoms. When her luggage was checked they were found, the field test came back positive for drugs which is why she was arrested.
The only naturals in this sport shit thru feathers...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I think this is going round and rounds in circles... No it isnt illegal to transport flour in condoms. Yes it is suspicious, paticularly when test (albeit incorrectly) identifies substance to be something more sinister than it is. She was therfore detained until a better test could be conducted. She was presumably therfore not charged with any offences.

NOT CHARGED = NO OFFENCES = NOT ILLEGAL

WAS CHARGED = OFFENCE = ILLEGAL = JAIL TIME

Didnt you ever tell your mates to not attract attention to themselves when you saw a police officer? She should have taken the same line. Hindsight is a wonderful thing. She had 3 weeks to think about it

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote

the field test came back positive for drugs which is why she was arrested.



okay, fair enough. Then it took three weeks for a more indepth test to show that it was flour. She was kept incarcerated for those three weeks. Obviously some one or something screwed up, which kept an innocent person in jail for three weeks.

Since she didn't do anything illegal, she should not be punished for that. Or do you believe that a girl who wears a short skirt and a tight top deserves to be raped? I know it is far more sever, but it is an identical concept.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote

Quote

the field test came back positive for drugs which is why she was arrested.



okay, fair enough. Then it took three weeks for a more indepth test to show that it was flour. She was kept incarcerated for those three weeks. Obviously some one or something screwed up, which kept an innocent person in jail for three weeks.

Since she didn't do anything illegal, she should not be punished for that. Or do you believe that a girl who wears a short skirt and a tight top deserves to be raped? I know it is far more sever, but it is an identical concept.



Ok, now we're going off on a totally different subject which has been covered in depth in another thread.
No, she didn't do anything illegal, she was held in custody until a more definitive test was performed. She was arraigned and bail was set at $500,000 (most likely due to the amount of 'substance' she had in her possession), since nobody posted her bond she had to sit in jail until the test results came back.
The only naturals in this sport shit thru feathers...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Once again, carrying a homemade anti-stress device attracts attention from a police office exactly how?

It's funny, that in another post, on this thread:
http://dropzone.com/cgi-bin/forum/gforum.cgi?post=2019357;#2019357

you state:
Quote

If you dont cause any damage then it doesnt constitute criminal damage and there is nothing that can be done. In the same way that squatters are able to enter a property by picking locks or removing boards and replacing them.



except breaking and entering is much closer to being illegal than walking around with flour in condoms.

edit to add:
i undertand tha you are in the UK, and different laws and all, but if you claim there is nothing wrong with breaking and entering, but something wrong with what she did, there's some serious issues with uk laws ...
This ad space for sale.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote

No, she didn't do anything illegal, she was held in custody until a more definitive test was performed. She was arraigned and bail was set at $500,000 (most likely due to the amount of 'substance' she had in her possession), since nobody posted her bond she had to sit in jail until the test results came back.



So, the question becomes two fold. Was the test performed acurately, or did an officer screw up?

Second, is a three week wait for the second test reasonable?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote

Once again, carrying a homemade anti-stress device attracts attention from a police office exactly how?

It's funny, that in another post, on this thread:
http://dropzone.com/cgi-bin/forum/gforum.cgi?post=2019357;#2019357

you state:

Quote

If you dont cause any damage then it doesnt constitute criminal damage and there is nothing that can be done. In the same way that squatters are able to enter a property by picking locks or removing boards and replacing them.



except breaking and entering is much closer to being illegal than walking around with flour in condoms.



Im confused how this has any similarities. In this instance she would have to be detained for a quick investigation and to preserve evidence.

What I mean by dont attract unwanted attention, you wouldnt pull up behind a police car and start flashing your lights at them or randomly lay down on the pavement in front of them. Its just begging for them to start asking questions.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
In the case of squatters it becomesa civil matter. Its very frustrating and yes UK law certainly does have issues. Same as any other legal system. Dont get me wrong, if you were found on enclosed premises Id be nicking you for burglary.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote

What I mean by dont attract unwanted attention, you wouldnt pull up behind a police car and start flashing your lights at them



Which is illegal in itself.

Quote

or randomly lay down on the pavement in front of them.



Hindering traffic is an offence, so is endangerement.

Having flour in a condom is not an offence a crime or illegal.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
that's a bad analogy ... you actually have a gun there ... it's possible to hijack a plane with a "deactivated" gun.

i wouldn't even consider this a good analogy, but it's closer:
taking a bright orange plastic water gun filled with water, having them see that, see that it is plastic, then arrest you, and put you in jail for three weeks, while they determine that the liquid inside isn't poisonous.
This ad space for sale.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote

Quote

No, she didn't do anything illegal, she was held in custody until a more definitive test was performed. She was arraigned and bail was set at $500,000 (most likely due to the amount of 'substance' she had in her possession), since nobody posted her bond she had to sit in jail until the test results came back.



So, the question becomes two fold. Was the test performed acurately, or did an officer screw up?

Second, is a three week wait for the second test reasonable?



I asked a local sherrif about the original test results and was informed that this isn't unusual considering the type of equipment they use, flour would test as a finely ground cocaine.
The fact it took 3 weeks to get the second test results could be that since she was already in custody they didn't rush the test thru or it could be that the officer deliberatly stalled the procedure. That's something only the officer involved will know....
The only naturals in this sport shit thru feathers...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote

I think we shall agree to disagree, but working from a security point of view, its better to be over the top than let people slip the net who shouldnt



So is this like..."it would be better to put an innocent man to death than to have ten guilty men go free"?

rl
If you don't know where you're going, you should know where you came from. Gullah Proverb

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote

I saw this short article in today's newspaper. What unmitigated gall! Rest assured, she has no sympathy coming from me and deserved the reaction she got. Stupid bitch! :|

I did a search for the story online and found a link: http://www.latam.msnbc.com/id/10641052/ Saves me the trouble of typing out the story from the newspaper, which is much shorter... :P



This was in the Philadelphia Inquirer a long time ago.

What she did was stupid, yup yup. Federal agents are extremely trigger happy since 9/11 and what she did just invited them to fire at her. She might as well went into the terminal screaming IM GONNA KILL ALL YOU SUNNABITCHES!

But, there was obviously no drugs here (after the retests), but it raised a very nasty problem. Now that we found her original test to be invalid, that just opened a big wide door for defense attorneys since she was misprosecuted on tainted evidence.

It also makes the FBI and DEA look stupid since their labs can't keep their samples clean.

[:/]

____________________________________________________________
I'm RICK JAMES! Fo shizzle.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote

Quote

I saw this short article in today's newspaper. What unmitigated gall! Rest assured, she has no sympathy coming from me and deserved the reaction she got. Stupid bitch! :|

I did a search for the story online and found a link: http://www.latam.msnbc.com/id/10641052/ Saves me the trouble of typing out the story from the newspaper, which is much shorter... :P



I don't understand why you're mad at her. She didn't do anything wrong, and it is kind of frightening to me that flour could be "confused" with cocaine and opium.

rl



I think the problem started showing itself when they were finding traces of all sorts of different drugs. When you are caught, the lab has to identify the drug and the exact quantity of it in order for the DA to know what they can prosecute you for.

Every time she turned around and asked what she was caught with, a different drug popped up.

No, it's crank!

No, it's heroin!

No, it's rock coke!

No, it's tina!

She had a dumb defense attorney, she coulda got out of jail faster.

____________________________________________________________
I'm RICK JAMES! Fo shizzle.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote

The facts indicate that she deliberately presented airport security personnel with a false security concern.



She didn't present it. They searched her and found it. She didn't stop them from searching her luggage or obstruct them, either.

The object she had is not illegal. It's weird, but it's not illegal. Had she ran into the airport screaming I HAVE A BOMB, then yes she commited a crime and can go to jail. But in this case, she did nothing.

____________________________________________________________
I'm RICK JAMES! Fo shizzle.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote

It happened 2 years ago and she did spend 3 weeks in jail, so I'd say she was punished. In fact, I'd call the punishment excessive for an act that was more stupid than malicious. (I'm thinking a fine and community service would have been more appropriate, plus whatever punishment her parents felt like dishing out.) Like some other posters, I'm more bothered by the fact that the Philadelphia police department could not tell cocaine from flour.



The Philadelphia Police Department is not the most brightest bunch on the block. FOUR times this year police officers where shot with their own weapons. One very disturbing incident occured on Market Street four blocks from me. A deranged lunatic was walking around Market St. NAKED and an officer put him in the cruiser. He managed to grab the officer's gun and take the police cruiser and then smash it into a SEPTA bus before he was shot dead to keep from causing any more chaos.

I was here when it happened, it caused gridlock for about 5 hours while everything was being cleaned up.

____________________________________________________________
I'm RICK JAMES! Fo shizzle.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

0