Cops Play Wii During Undercover Drug Raid

An anonymous reader writes "Guns drawn, cops busted down the door of a suspected south Florida drug dealer, then proceeded to kick some ass on Wii bowling. A security cam captured some playing video games while others searched for drugs and weapons. Clearly they just misunderstood when they were told to search the house for Weed."

Comments

Least of our problems

[Killer Orca]

I think a couple of police officers getting paid to goof off is the least of our problems with the police in general here in the U.S. Things like corruption, abuse of power, illegal searches, etc. are of more concern to me. Personally I think that when you become a police officer you agree to be monitored 24/7 and have all the video/ transcripts made publicly available.

Re:Least of our problems

[Anonymous Coward]

Monitored while on duty is fine. Off-duty, no way. Officers aren't slaves and they can have a personal life.

Re:Least of our problems

[The Moof]

a couple of police officers getting paid to goof off

This isn't like the library staff caught playing Rock Band. These were investigators at the scene of a drug raid playing a Wii owned by the person being arrested while evidence was being collected on the premesis. This could potentially be a pretty big problem. A defense lawyer could use this to their advantage when attempting to invalidate the evidence collected.

Re:Least of our problems

[Anonymous Coward]

This presents an interesting argument: in the vast majority of communities across the US, police officers are always considered "on-duty" ... that is, they are allowed to carry a concealed weapon, make arrests, etc. during "personal" hours. Since they are still exercising their powers, it seems that they should be monitored 24x7, even if "off duty".

Re:Least of our problems

[Artifakt]

The defending attorney simply claims that this proves the police were either poorly trained, or often deliberately went against training. Then the prosecution is caught in a forking argument where trying to prove the police aren't incompetent makes them look wilfully malicious instead, and vice versa. Anything else a cop says afterwards that relates to following procedures, why should the jury believe them?
      Here, let me nudge your imagination. Under defense cross-exam, a police witness says "I took all the seized narcotics directly to the evidence room. I watched as the evidence locker custodian weighed the drugs, and logged the ticket showing that weight, and made sure he gave me a copy for the record book." The attorney simply asks "Is that standard procedure?". "Yes". The defense attorney than says "Are you sure you know standard procedure - Earlier, with the Wii, you indicated you didn't?.", and maybe makes closing remarks about how the police have flip-flopped on how well they follow procedure to where their testimony is 'deeply flawed'.
      Alternately, the attorney asks "And do you always follow procedure?" knowing that the policeman in question has already admitted he didn't with the Wii, and is going to have to say "No." or perjure himself.
      That last is one of the biggest advantages possible for the defense if they can get it. It's great to cross-examine witnesses who are constantly worried they are going to sink their careers, make their whole department look like fools when the press gets hold of it, or actually get themselves charged with perjury (although the last is very rare for cops, even if occasionally deserved.).
        Those particular cops can expect to be cross examined at least twice as long as the others, and if the defense is any good they will pounce on anything else said that can be used to make it worse for the prosecution. That's another advantage for the defense - they already know of some witnesses that are particularly likely to screw up, and to look bad to the jury.

Re:Least of our problems

[b4dc0d3r]

I don't think this is a trolling comment - if you've ever gotten pulled over you've probably heard the "If you have nothing to hide you have nothing to worry about..." justification when an officer feels like searching your car.

I got pulled over for speeding on a Superbowl Sunday, and submitted to the breathalyzer. Blew a zero, and obviously the guy was on DUI patrol because now he wanted to search the car. Just giving me a speeding ticket was apparently not an option. I heard this explanation several times, along with the accusation "What's wrong, you have a little joint in there? A bit of a roach in the ashtray? If there's nothing in there then it won't hurt to have a look, right?" He wouldn't believe me, go figure. He seemed like a good guy, so I traded a search for a warning. I would not advise people to do the same, better to ask if you are free to go and pay the speeding ticket. But I'm weak sometimes when it involves outrageous fees.

I would mod this "+1 funny, in a sad frustrated sort of way"

Re:Least of our problems

[lorenlal]

Actually, I commend you on solid negotiation, and getting away with it. He could've agreed to the trade, and given you the speeding ticket anyway.

Re:Least of our problems

[insertwackynamehere]

Haha you are all idiots, seriously next time the cops raid your place and start using your things like over-entitled house guests, you share that sentiment. When cops get permission to perform a search of a property, they are already at a point where not only are they being held to a very high legal standard to make sure they absolutely don't ruin evidence or violate rights in the process but they SHOULD be on edge the entire time not knowing who are what is going to be there. Playing the Wii is unprofessional and illegal. They were letting their guard down which is dangerous to them and making a mockery of one of their most hard to obtain rights; the right to search and seizure which only can be obtained with a lot of work or explicit permission. If you are in someone's home, right on the cusp of legality as it is, and start using their items, you are doing something wrong. On the hopefully rare occurrence a police officer has to be in someone's home on a search warrant, their mind should be focused on looking for evidence and not acting like they were invited there to party it up.

Re:Least of our problems

[Z34107]

I hate to quote an overused quote, but who watches the watchmen?

Lots of people - it was a box office hit.

Re:Least of our problems

[putaro]

Trading the search for the warning at least got you something. I do hate the whole "if you've got nothing to hide why don't you let me search" garbage. The right answer to that is - "There's nothing to find so you don't need to search the car" Your time is valuable and your privacy is valuable. That's why we require the police to justify searches.

Apologies to Training Day

[Digital Vomit]

Hey, don't hate the player, hate the game.

Should have played Wii Boxing

[Monkeedude1212]

Might have been able to pass it off as Physical training on the job.

Completely unacceptable

[vehicle tracking]

Having been a police officer for five years, I can comment on this one. I support the job they do when it's done right, but this is completely unacceptable. These officers should be suspended for this. Unfortunately, this kind of stuff, and worse, happens every day. There are a few bad apples in every department. We need more whistle blowers out there.

Re:Completely unacceptable

[fridaynightsmoke]

On an interesting question, how many police officers play Grand Theft Auto?

Hey, they could always be playing the 'police missions'!

Re:Completely unacceptable

[gnick]

So their jobs are stressful. So what? Mine is too. But I don't come in and check out a GOV for joy-riding. Nor do I go to the lab and fire up the lasers to burn smiley faces on things. And those are government assets - Abusing personal assets is far worse.

You wanna play Wii? Fine - Buy one or befriend somebody who has one. Breaking into somebody's house (warrant or no) is NOT grounds for just playing around with their stuff.

Should this invalidate evidence found on the premises? Hell no. Should those officers be suspended for taking control of and playing with property that was completely aside from the investigation? Hell yes. They're probably short of theft, but if they're just playing in the guy's house - Charge 'em with trespassing.

Re:Completely unacceptable

[Achromatic1978]

Because their search warrant was for search of premises and an arrest warrant for suspect, not to "chill out after a hard day and play suspect's video game system"?

Are you dense?

Here's an analogy, I'm an EMT. If I come to your premises, after /you/ call 911, and you decide you don't want treatment, but I think "No, this guy's messed up, I'll just have a look at this", I'm committing criminal assault and battery. If I stick around in your house, after, you can call 911 again, and have me arrested for trespass. Let alone pull up a pew and decide I'm going to have a few games of Wii Bowling, especially against your consent.

I am staggered that you think the real issue here is that the suspect thinks that this is inappropriate or unacceptable behavior. Don't even start me on "after doing their highly stressful job". So what? You go back to the station, to your home, you don't de-stress there. How could you ever think that was acceptable? Maybe they should have pulled a few brews out of the fridge too? Hell, maybe rolled themselves a joint from the evidence!

Re:Completely unacceptable

[vehicle tracking]

It's Wii this time. Next time it will be something more serious.

Re:Completely unacceptable

[mypalmike]

After entering a premises and doing their highly stressful job, they played some Wii. Big Whoop. The real story is that attorney are trying to say this counts a seizing property. That's the abuse here.

"The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized."

That's the word on the street anyhow. Also known as the fourth amendment of the US Constitution. Entering someone's private residence with a warrant is serious business. There's a time to blow off steam, but it's not during the execution of a search warrant.

Re:Completely unacceptable

[jellomizer]

I think there are more then a few or at least the bad apples cluster together, before you can get more whistle bowers you need an environment where it is ok to blow whistles. Although this is bad behavior and coming from the private sector myself I would say they should get fired not suspend for such actions, but for someone to risk the quality of their life, harassment from other cops, Possible retribution, etc... It would need to be more serious then cops playing video games when they should be working.

Re:Completely unacceptable

[Achromatic1978]

Bad analogy? What part of the concept of personal and private property do you not understand? You have a specific warrant, and are permitted on the premises for that purpose ONLY. It is not a carte blanche to play video games, to raid the fridge.

You can bet your ass if my chief found that I had done similar, I would be looking for a new job.

What relevance does his Wii have to their ability to execute the warrant? None. Ergo you have no right to do as you wish beyond the scope of the warrant. You are on private premises without consent, a right only granted you by virtue of the court allowing a warrant. Like my mention of me being an EMT - even if you call 911, it doesn't necessarily grant me access to your property. Why do you think a warrant is needed in the first place? Because one of the tenets of our society is that property is sacrosanct unless something makes it worthy of forfeit.

That means you don't goof off and do whatever the hell you feel like. For 9 minutes or 9 hours.

What if it was someone else's property? A housemate? What if it was broken?

cops

[BigHungryJoe]

I think most people realize that cops are just bullies fulfilling their dream of getting paid to be a bully.

Not only that, but anyone willing to ruin someone's life over a little pot (like these cops) has a serious lack of ethics.

Re:cops

[Golias]

Which part of smoking pot is the part that makes it worth criminalizing?

The part where we are a democratic country full of stuffy neo-puritans.

Statistically, a majority of Americans have tried pot.
Also, a majority of Americans are opposed to legalization.

Which means there are a significant number of assholes in this country who think it's perfectly fine if they use pot and get away with it, but YOU should go to jail if you get caught doing the same thing.

Most libertarian crackpots like me are painfully aware that "live and let live" is not actually a majority philosophy, and we've got an uphill battle to sell our political views to the rest of society.

Re:cops

[gad_zuki!]

>Not only that, but anyone willing to ruin someone's life over a little pot (like these cops) has a serious lack of ethics.

The police are the enforcers of the law. It blows my mind that people blame the lowest guy on the ladder for laws and policies. Joe Cop isnt writing state and federal law. Considering you are in a democracy you are just as guilty as anyone else for these laws being in existance. Perhaps having a scapegoat makes you feel better about yourself, but youre 100% wrong to target the police on these matters.

If you ever got off your high horse and talked to some cops you might have many share the same attitudes you do.

What about some basic personal responsibility? If owning pot is such a legal nightmare that it can ruin your life if arrested, as you state, why dont these people move to countries where it is legal instead of pretending they have immunity and then blaming the police for getting caught?

Re:cops

[sponga]

Actually, the guy was running a chop shop and had a house of stolen goods that will easily be traceable.

These are the scumbags who collect all the stuff from your car that had its window smashed in to grab that thing that is worth $5, still doesn't justify this though. Although this happens all the time where officers go through these drug deals houses and they have all the latest expensive gadgets and toys.

Although to be truthful, I have seen silly stuff like this even on the show COPS. I remember they did some Miama drug raid and found all these silly toys this guy had, everytime they would pull something out they would play with it and set it down.

9 hours of searching though the house, something like a year of previous surveillance leading up to get the warrant for the raid and the operation they listed cost about $4,000. I was surprised they listed the actual cost of the operation, but the previous surveillance had to involve lots of paid man hours of just sitting watching in the car.
Which basically makes the warrant voided and illegal as soon as the cops turned on that Wii.

Shitty ass article on Slashdot cannot even link to a Youtube link or comment by the police, here all of 10 seconds it took me.

Link to video
http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=8bc_1253652224&c=1#comments

Link to article and comment by the Department
http://www2.tbo.com/content/2009/sep/21/undercover-drug-investigators-embarrass-polk-sheri/
_____

With guns drawn and flashlights cutting through darkened rooms, Polk County undercover drug investigators stormed the home of convicted drug dealer Michael Difalco near Lakeland in March.

As investigators searched the home for drugs, some drug task force members found other ways to occupy their time. Within 20 minutes of entering Difalco's house, some of the investigators found a Wii video bowling game and began bowling frame after frame.

While some detectives hauled out evidence such as flat screen televisions and shotguns, others threw strikes, gutter balls and worked on picking up spares.

A Polk County sheriff's detective cataloging evidence repeatedly put down her work and picked up a Wii remote to bowl. When she hit two strikes in a row, she raised her arms above her head, jumping and kicking.

While a female detective lifted a nearby couch looking for evidence, another sheriff's detective focused on pin action.

But detectives with the Polk County Sheriff's Office, the Auburndale, Lakeland and Winter Haven police departments did not know that a wireless security camera connected to a computer inside Difalco's home was recording their activity.

The recording obtained by News Channel 8 showed several members of the county's High Intensity Drug Trafficking Area (HIDTA) task force entering the house shortly after 8 a.m. According to the search warrant, their mission was to search for drugs, stolen property and the fruits of any illegal drug activity.

Now there are questions on how the impromptu bowling tournament might affect the case against Difalco.

Polk County Sheriff Grady Judd denies it will have any effect.

"That absolutely is not true; that doesn't invalidate the search at all," Judd said. "Now the defendant would like for it to invalidate the search, but unfortunately for him, it won't."

Judd, who watched the video during an interview last week, called the situation an embarrassment.

"I'm not pleased that they played that Wii bowling game," Judd said. The sheriff's office oversees the drug task force. Judd said he initiated an internal administrative investigation of the incident.

"That is not appropriate conduct at a search warrant," he said. "But I am less pleased with the supervision that didn't walk in and say, turn that off. That's what supervision should have done."

T

Re:cops

[DerekLyons]

I think most people realize that cops are just bullies fulfilling their dream of getting paid to be a bully.

That falls into the same category as believing the earth is flat or only 6,000 years old. It's horseshit.
 
 

Not only that, but anyone willing to ruin someone's life over a little pot (like these cops) has a serious lack of ethics.

Ah. Now I understand - you think it's unethical to enforce the law, and thus those who enforce the law must be bullies.

Re:cops

[Anonymous Coward]

The police are the enforcers of the law. It blows my mind that people blame the lowest guy on the ladder for laws and policies. Joe Cop isnt writing state and federal law. Considering you are in a democracy you are just as guilty as anyone else for these laws being in existance. Perhaps having a scapegoat makes you feel better about yourself, but youre 100% wrong to target the police on these matters.

You're missing a key point. Legalise marijuana and at least 25-35% of all North American police officers will be redundant. They are fighting for their jobs.

In Canada there is only one association of legal professionals who oppose decriminalisation. Guess who? Yup, the police associations.

So yes, they are to blame.

Ask any dealer how many times they have purchased confiscated material. They have us coming and going. I also happens to provide a convenient excuse for discrediting people whose political views upset the status-quo. Enforcement is totally at the option of the police. Don't you see anything wrong with that?

Marijuana use is so common that they have the option to cherry pick their victims. The intention is not to eliminate marijuana use. It is to exploit it.

This kind of short-sightedness depresses me and tells me that this device of oppression will not be defeated without violent revolution.

CARNIVORE that you fuckers. They know we're not going to take this forever, but the only language they understand is blood. So let it be theirs.

Re:cops

[Brooklynoid]

You said: Statistically, a majority of Americans have tried pot. Also, a majority of Americans are opposed to legalization. Which means there are a significant number of assholes in this country who think it's perfectly fine if they use pot and get away with it, but YOU should go to jail if you get caught doing the same thing.

Have you considered the possibility the majority of Americans who've tried pot and are now opposed to legalization are opposed because they've come to the conclusion that it should be illegal as a result of their experiences with it and not because they're assholes?

Just a thought.

Felonwii or misdewiinor?

[Stenchwarrior]

This will be a good test of our juctice system (cough) to see if the drug dealers get a lesser sentence because of some completely un-related shenannigans. I'm not saying the officers shouldn't be reprimanded to acting unprofessionally but this should in no way affect a judge's decision as how to punch the criminals.

Re:Felonwii or misdewiinor?

[MickyTheIdiot]

If they are criminals. Remember in the U.S. that is determined by a court of law, not bozos like us reading summaries of news reports.

Re:Felonwii or misdewiinor?

[zero0ne]

Look, the cops have a job to do, and that is uphold the law. they are NOT supposed to interpret it how they see fit, but uphold the currently written law.

If they can't execute a drug raid to the tee of their procedures (IE NOT using the suspects property), then they should get reprimanded and the suspect should have the charges dropped.

If the cop can't follow one simple procedure (playing Wii in a suspects premise during a raid is NOT part of their job duties at all), who is to say they are doing the rest of their job correctly?

How do we know they didn't plant the drugs there? how do we know they didn't steal some of his money or his weed?

Re:Felonwii or misdewiinor?

[Spazztastic]

Sorry grammar nazis, *PUNISH the criminals*.

I don't know, I think a public bitch slap from a judge would be pretty cool.

Re:Felonwii or misdewiinor?

[VeNoM0619]

I'm not saying the officers shouldn't be reprimanded to acting unprofessionally but this should in no way affect a judge's decision as how to punch the criminals.

This is akin to arresting you and taking your car out for a joyride spin. Sure you can argue they waste gas for the car, but they wasted electricity for their entertainment.

Besides, this is unlawful search. I would like to think that unless they had a warrant for this specific task, they could NOT search digital devices. Seeing how it was a drug deal, they could only search physical items (like maybe take apart the wii at the very worst case, but they could NOT digitally open it, or go through all their movies/home movies and watch them all)

Oh.. IANAL, but I use morality to make my decisions.

Re:Felonwii or misdewiinor?

[SeeSp0tRun]

Having the charges dropped is ludicrous. Because they played his gaming system does NOT invalidate the paraphernalia they were searching for and seized. This is an after-the-fact issue, that should be dealt with by internal affairs.

Re:Felonwii or misdewiinor?

[zero0ne]

No it's not ludicrous.

The Officers were NOT doing their jobs correctly, not following procedures, etc.

If the police officers did NOT include their usage of the Wii on their raid report or whatever it would be called, that is example #1 of the police officers not reporting exactly what they did.

If they lied about that, who is to say they haven't lied before in other cases or other parts of the report for this one?

Re:READ TFA!!!!!!!

[Jason Levine]

Slacking off every once and a while is one thing. The police chief even admitted that most house searches have "downtime." Still, playing Wii Bowling for 9 hours is a bit excessive.

So...

[fuzzyfuzzyfungus]

This must be more of that "New Professionalism" that Scalia was fantasizing about.

Re:slashdot users

[Anonymous Coward]

Burma Shave!

New CSI Miami Episode?

[NYMeatball]

Looks like the dealer... .... [series of long dramatic pauses] .... ...had more than weed up his sleeve. (Yeeeeeahhhhhh!!)

Re:READ TFA!!!!!!!

[Wyatt Earp]

Which of the laws are ridiculous? I kind of like the laws against theft, murder, rape and other things.

Maybe . . .

[jointm1k]

Maybe they were on strike.

Re:Maybe . . .

[natehoy]

Yeah, they should be spared.

Re:READ TFA!!!!!!!

[stdarg]

If cops put the same effort into those laws as they do into useless laws, it would be a better world. Why do they bust "johns" who hire prostitutes, and not go after the pimps who coerce and abuse the prostitutes? Why do they spend thousands of man hours setting up undercover drug operations, and not thousands of hours infiltrating gangs that go around raping and murdering?

When it comes to the good laws against rape, murder, theft, etc, the police are almost 100% REactive. With bullshit like drugs and prostitution the cops become PROactive.

I know street cops don't get to set policy at that level. I think it's understood that when people complain about cops and laws, they're including the whole system, of which cops are the face.

Wii

[xednieht]

the new Crack

Comment removed

[account_deleted]

Comment removed based on user account deletion

Re:READ TFA!!!!!!!

[Anonymous Coward]

>> Why do they spend thousands of man hours setting up undercover drug operations, and not
>> thousands of hours infiltrating gangs that go around raping and murdering?

1. Because they are afraid they might get shot while chasing dangerous gang members. In other words, they are too cowardly to do the job they are paid to do.

2. Because according our current ridiculous search-and-seizure laws, the local police force gets to keep a percentage of the proceeds from selling whatever they seized in a drug raid. So, the cops have a personal financial incentive to continue abusing and persecuting non-dangerous people whose only "crime" is possession of marijuana.