Sciencemadness Discussion Board - So my house was raided today.

So my house was raided today.

Pages: 1 2

spong - 24-9-2010 at 03:08

The police were surprisingly really nice about it once I explained what I was doing. The guy in charge of the chemists was a bit rude, they found permanganate and peroxide and thought I was making methcathinone. They also found the Cl2 generator and assumed I was using it for making HCl salts of drugs. I explained it was for AlCl3 and they took my two bottles of AlCl3. They only really took the unlabeled chemicals, some benzoquinone, saponified phthallate ester in a flask, they took bags of paracetamol and aspirin tablets too. They started talking about how they would have to confiscate and destroy everything because it wasn't stored correctly but its pretty much all here. They didn't even touch a flask of bromine so I don't think that's what they were worried about. They did take my spud gun I used for a physics assignment but I could get my old teacher to talk to them and explain. They said as long as I had a reasonable explanation for all my chemicals I should hopefully be ok.
For any Au$tralians on here, watch out. These guys came because I bought some glassware from Laboy glass and customs flagged it. If you'be ordered anything from overseas I'd watch our and keep a neat lab and have uses ready to reel off for all the chems. It only these guys had come after Sunday, I was going to set up a proper lab and cleaned everything up.
Does anyone know what I should be expecting now?
I think I'll have to move out of Au$tralia if I ever want to persue this hobby further.

madscientist - 24-9-2010 at 06:32

Don't say another word to the police. It is impossible to talk your way out of trouble, and you never know what words may dig you deeper. I emphasize: NOT A WORD. I'd look into a free consultation with an attorney immediately.

EDIT: The reason they were "nice" is because you were talking, and they wanted you to keep going. They were hoping you'd incriminate yourself.

[Edited on 24-9-2010 by madscientist]

spong - 24-9-2010 at 06:48

I really hope that's not the case, they seemed genuinely friendly. One of them was out to get me though, for some reason they were badgering me about sulfur(?) and I asked why they were worried about that and people don't use it to make meth, probably stepping into one of their little traps, they then asked 'how would you know' etc...
Wouldn't they have confiscated more of it if they thought I was really running a meth lab? Like virtually all the chemicals are still here.

madscientist - 24-9-2010 at 07:40

It could be that they're going to let you off the hook - it's hard to know though. I'm sure they play the "good cop bad cop" routine in Australia too.

It's worth ringing up a couple attorneys for free consultations and getting their opinion; they'll be able to give far deeper insight than you or I ever could. You don't want to end up getting framed for some "intent to manufacture ___" charge for something you've never even heard of... cops and prosecutors have no concept of chemistry being interesting to anyone for any reason other than drugs or terrorism. Could this happen? Maybe - but I can't tell you with any confidence "you're screwed" or "you're fine;" only attorneys have the expertise necessary to do so.

[Edited on 24-9-2010 by madscientist]

mr.crow - 24-9-2010 at 14:36

Well that fucken sucks. Lawyer up and let us know how it goes.

They got a search warrant based on importing glassware? Yikes

psychokinetic - 24-9-2010 at 15:24

When I was asked how I knew X and Y weren't used to make meth, I replied that anyone with half a brain knows how it is done.

I hope nothing too bad comes out of this, spong.

mewrox99 - 24-9-2010 at 15:46

It sucks your house got raided

At the start of my hobby, a cop came to my house over glassware I got from labwarehouse. (See thread Police Notified for buying beakers!)

Luckily they didn't come in. I'm apparently flagged even though I'm only 14 because my neighbor decided that unconfined KNO3/Mg flash powder was a chemical explosive

This was before I had a home lab, I used to do some pyro. In my garage there was nothing spectacular just some metal powders, KNO3, iron oxide and copper sulfate. Yet the cops took everything and I got a youth aid warning.

A few months after that I decided to have a real home lab and bought glassware, which lead to the same cop which took my pyro stuff coming to my door

And this is in NZ. Australia is far more fascist

Take there retarded laser laws. Be very careful about buying glassware in the future. Most of these glassware companies tip of the police and your probably flagged now

spong - 24-9-2010 at 16:39

Yeah I remember reading about that thread, I used to be into fireworks too so I have perc, KNO3, Al powder, S etc. I told them that was why, they weren't very impressed but they didn't touch any of it, they were only really concerned I may have been making drugs. They didn't even look at a jar of green, purple and crackling stars +fuse or black powder. I'm surprised your neighbours complained about that though, mine put up with an awful lot haha.

The cops aren't your friends

madcedar - 24-9-2010 at 21:07

The police are not your friends and never will be. Firstly they need a warrant to enter your house...but you let them in didn't you! Big mistake. SAY NO MORE TO THEM. After telling them your name the rest of the conversation is "no comment" FOR EVERYTHING (including the weather).

You're only 14 and they basically got nothing on you so you'll be fine as long as you stick to saying NO COMMENT. Please get a solicitor. This is very important. So as soon as you read this, make a call to a solicitor and if the police call then say NO COMMENT (got that!!) and if the police come to the door again don't let them in without a warrent (no matter how friendly they are). Remember, they are NOT YOUR FRIENDS.

Mr. Wizard - 25-9-2010 at 12:42

This link takes you to a great You Tube video. After you watch it, watch part 2.
This guy is really good.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6wXkI4t7nuc

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=08fZQWjDVKE&feature=relat...

Perhaps this has more relevance for people in the US, but all may benefit.

spong - 25-9-2010 at 18:29

Quote: Originally posted by Mr. Wizard

This link takes you to a great You Tube video. After you watch it, watch part 2.
This guy is really good.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6wXkI4t7nuc

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=08fZQWjDVKE&feature=relat...

Perhaps this has more relevance for people in the US, but all may benefit.

Fuck that's ridiculous, if police here are anything like American ones I'm in a lot of trouble.

Nicodem - 26-9-2010 at 01:26

Possibly the stress from this unfortunate event will cause you more harm than the police would. In most of the world the police and laws are not like in the USA, so don't get scared too much on basis of such trivial comparisons. If you are young, preferably a teenager, don't have any criminal record, not overly religious or politically active, part of the major ethnical group, middle class, living with straight parents, then you should be fine and you would better stop worrying about it. Forget about it and if you hear anything more from the police rather immediately call an attorney instead of trying to defend yourself. Just say to them that they scare you and you don't feel safe talking to them without a legal representative as you are too young and inexperienced to understand the consequences. If the police wanted to, they could frame you for illegal storage of hazardous materials - unfortunately amateur chemistry is already inherently illegal in most countries due to the chemicals storage regulations and permits to run a any such business at your own residence. It is near to impossible for an amateur with limited financial resources to legalize such activities as there are always laws and residential regulations that a police officer could find to incriminate, confiscate everything, or fine you. Luckily if you fit the above personal criteria you can count on the police officers not being such dicks to actually get that anal on you - they are supposed to have more serious things to do!

spong - 26-9-2010 at 02:19

Thanks

that's calmed me down quite a bit. I haven't had any troubles with the law apart from a thing with an old air rifle a few years ago (my friends dad used to own it and I got it from him then another friend cut his thumb in the chamber and his parents told the police) They don't mind about it too much though, one of them was telling me how ridiculous the laws have got and how when he was a kid someone took an air rifle to show and tell and was shooting cans at school. I fit most of the other criteria so hopefully all will be well...

MagicJigPipe - 28-9-2010 at 09:18

Quote:

not overly religious

I don't know about Australia but in the U.S. this is a good attribute to have if it is the "correct" religion (Christianity).

Quote:

or politically active, part of the major ethnical group, middle class, living with straight parents

Look, I know racism exists still but I don't think being of another ethnicity, in the case of amateur science, exposes one to more scrutiny than those of the dominant (and I use that word lightly especially nowadays) one. Also in this case, being upper class would almost certainly be an advantage (money for lawyers, court costs, bribes etc...) Most Americans associate "drug cookery" with the white lower class! Don't you? I'm sure there is a survey around that gives this conclusion.

And the last one; what? I realize that there are private citizens that hate gays but I'm just not seeing this one. I really don't think that, in general, federal agents give one shit or another about the sexuality of your parents. It might even be a benefit considering that (and I can't prove this but don't you get the same gist?) most people don't associate gays with crime.

Of course all this comes from my experiences in the U.S. and probably doesn't apply to Australia although I can't imagine it being extremely different (not considering large differences in ethnic makeup).

What do you think, Nicodem?

Polverone - 28-9-2010 at 10:57

Quote: Originally posted by MagicJigPipe

Quote:

or politically active, part of the major ethnical group, middle class, living with straight parents

If you're not set up to cook meth I wouldn't worry about being charged with that, but what else might they come up with? If the police want to look hard enough there's probably something they can find to use against you, even if it's unrelated to the activity that first drew their attention. If you're white and clean-cut it reduces the chances they'll keep looking for something. And of course, yes, the more wealth you have the better the probable outcome for you, whether you're innocent or otherwise.

[Edited on 9-28-2010 by Polverone]

psychokinetic - 28-9-2010 at 11:49

If you're an Arab, or even remotely brown, you may be mistaken for a Muslim (oh yeah, brilliant logic there), and so that one conical flask you might have is FOR MAKING BOMBS OH NOES. (more great logic).

SWilkin676 - 28-9-2010 at 17:47

Just be glad you're not this guy - he not only looks funny and I suspect is Aspergers - he has technology in his car ~GASP~

And was foolish enough to mention chloroform to the pool store salesguy who naturally assumed he was going to make a BOMB with it. Talk about chemically illiterate.

http://www.tcoasttalk.com/2010/08/28/chemistrys-my-hobby-por...

mewrox99 - 28-9-2010 at 20:12

That pissed me off so much :mad:

mewrox99 - 28-9-2010 at 20:18

And yes the is one 'explosive' thing you could make with pool chlorine and that's NCl3

But seriously that case is disgusting, I really hope that he gets acquitted

What really annoys me is how the morons in the pool shop thought they were experts on chemistry.

MagicJigPipe - 28-9-2010 at 22:47

It just goes to show that, while folks like [deleted] consistently deny that there is anything to worry about as long as you're not doing anything wrong, the opposite is likely true.

I hate not being able to talk to people about my interests outside of this forum. I hate feeling like I have to sneak around to buy chemicals and glassware. I even thought about ways that I could use a fake name and address the other day. Maybe my paranoia is irrational and I am going insane--or maybe it's well founded fear based on hard evidence (e.g. above). Either way I believe we (the USA and countries similar to it) are headed towards a scientific blackout of epic proportions. Our fear of drugs, bombs and environmental hazards will cause us to lose our continuing advancements in pharmaceuticals, weapons (a good thing?) and energy production. We should be prepared to kiss our kush living goodbye if we wish to live in absolute safety because to do that is to limit the investigation of the unknown and thus the aspirations of future scientists.

mewrox99 - 28-9-2010 at 23:30

I don't think your fears are unjustified

DDTea - 29-9-2010 at 05:10

Basically: don't piss off the po-po's. What you should know about law enforcement: if they want to make your life suck, they can and they will. From what I understand, in these circumstances they basically confiscate your stuff and give you a slap on the wrist--at least they do that with minors. If you're lucky, you may have come across as smart kid with a bright future, in which case they won't want to shatter your dreams. No guarantees, though!

If the po-po's want any further contact with you, I'd highly recommend getting some legal advice. If not, then take the loss and lay low. If you're genuinely interested in chemistry, study it. As fun as splashing around with chemicals in a garage is, working in a proper lab and doing meaningful research is better by a factory of 12*e^[35(pi)i]. Your lab is expendable, so just accept the loss and move on.

Quote: Originally posted by SWilkin676

Just be glad you're not this guy - he not only looks funny and I suspect is Aspergers - he has technology in his car ~GASP~

And was foolish enough to mention chloroform to the pool store salesguy who naturally assumed he was going to make a BOMB with it. Talk about chemically illiterate.

http://www.tcoasttalk.com/2010/08/28/chemistrys-my-hobby-por...

By the way, if you guys still haven't figured this out: it's not about what you're *actually* doing, it's about what someone *thinks* you're doing. People have legitimate fears of terrorists and drug cooks; they probably don't even *know* that people think of chemistry as "fun" or a "hobby." Call it science illiteracy, but it's still a very real issue that you've got to deal with.

[Edited on 9-29-10 by DDTea]

woelen - 29-9-2010 at 05:21

DDTea, what you are saying is only partially true. There is one big difference between YOUR lab and a company's or university's lab. In YOUR lab you can do the research you like to do, but if you just want some fun with e.g. a cool demo for your kids, then you also can do that. In the company's lab other are deciding for you what you may investigate. Of ocurse, that can be very fun and it also can be very rewarding, but having your own lab with own equipment and own chemicals is different from a company's lab. Which is better? That's not the question, both are good. The main difference is that one is YOURs and the other isn't.

I would be VERY unhappy if my lab stuff would be confiscated. I now own 300+ different chemicals, most of them in tiny quantities but good enough for doing interesting research and I own worth $10000 of electronics, glassware, high-voltage compounds and general stuff like heaters. I think I investigated well over $2000 in chemicals and $10000 in all kinds of equipment. This is not something which one easily can replace. All this was built up over a period of 15 years!

madscientist - 29-9-2010 at 06:53

DDTea's right - you have to be careful.

There's so many ways to make drugs, explosives, etc. that they can pin you with almost anything if they really want to.

For example, the AlCl3 mentioned to reassure the cops that you weren't gassing illegal alkaloids with HCl... it can be used to make P2P, a direct precursor to amphetamine.

DDTea - 29-9-2010 at 06:58

woelen: understood about having your own lab, and quite honestly, I agree. It really *is* nice to be able to investigate whatever you'd like. What sucks, though, is having to pay for it (unless you're someone who knows how to get people's money, like Sam Barros...)

For a teenager, though, my advice is still the same: learn all the theory and how to work in a lab before you decide to bring your work home. Get all your footwork and fundamentals down because those will open up way more doors for you than anything else. I agree that experimenting at home is exciting and the hands-on approach to science is what attracts a lot of people to the field (it's what attracted me, at least), but at some point you've got to get serious, otherwise you'll just end up doing things the harder/longer way. So spong: now may just be a good time for you to do some serious studying and come back to your hobby in a few years. The more you know, the broader your creativity will be.

Magpie - 29-9-2010 at 07:33

I agree that it is risky (if not downright stupid) to talk about your chemistry hobby outside of this forum. I know this sucks, but it is reality and you have to deal with it.

I never had a home lab until I retired from 40 years as a chemical engineer in industry. I always wanted a lab but job, family, and family oriented hobbies took all my time and money. I did as some are recommending: worked hard on my education and achieved a measure of satisfaction practicing chemistry on the job.

But there is nothing like having your own self-directed lab. Since I joined this forum almost 8 years ago I have vastly expanded my knowledge and field of interest from the narrow requirements of my former employments.

I also greatly admire the knowledge of some of the younger members of this forum. They are going to be so much better prepared for school and work because of their participation here. I can think of one young German participant who knew more chemistry at age 20 than I will ever know.

[Edited on 29-9-2010 by Magpie]

spong - 30-9-2010 at 01:32

Yeah I know it's not the best thing legally to have a lab at home but I'm 19 now and I've been mucking about with chemistry/physics/pyrotechnics for 11 years easily, I'd never give it up unless I really had to. It has helped a lot with my education too, I'll bet pretty much everyone on this forum has much more in depth knowledge than classmates or workmates in the same field. At uni, people will mindlessly recite what they heard a lecturer say and have no idea what it actually is. The lecturer was asking about hydrogenating a double bond and the answers are all things like 'H2PDC(in words)' but very few of them would understand what they've said.
I think I'll be fine with all this, I know they could easily get me in trouble if they wanted, hell, they could put me in jail for the rest of my life if they tried but I very much doubt they would. One of the chemists even said told mum they need someone like me working for them

Nicodem - 30-9-2010 at 06:23

Quote: Originally posted by MagicJigPipe

Quote:

not overly religious

I don't know about Australia but in the U.S. this is a good attribute to have if it is the "correct" religion (Christianity).

I would tend to believe that Australia is not much different than most of the Europe when it comes to this issue. In most (secular) countries of Europe it is not a good idea to express your religious ideas during a (secular) police investigation, regardless of which religion or church affiliation you are. If you even remotely connect any of your actions or behaviour within an religious context, then you risk of being considered by the police as someone who is not taking the secular laws equally or more seriously as religious believes. And since these can sometimes be in conflict... you risk ending up under the suspicion of being able of doing anything, from little things like lying to big things like mass murdering (Europe has a tradition of religion based mass murdering aka genocides, even in the very recent history - the fears about these things are imprinted in the modern culture and prejudices).

Quote:

In the wast majority of Europe, in some countries more, in some less, being part of an ethnic minority sucks big time when having whatsoever business with the police. I imagine it is a similar problem as being black and having anything to do with the police in the USA. In some countries in Europe it is even much worse if you are white, but of "wrong" ethnic origin, than it would be if you were black.

Quote:

And the last one; what? I realize that there are private citizens that hate gays but I'm just not seeing this one. I really don't think that, in general, federal agents give one shit or another about the sexuality of your parents.
...
What do you think, Nicodem?

I think that you should start using an English-English dictionary. It appears that even though I'm not a native English speaker I know more meanings of words part of this language than native speakers do:

Quote:

straight
/streɪt/

6. honest, honorable, or upright, as conduct, dealings, methods, or persons.

The meaning of "straight" as "being heterosexual" is only a slang parlance, which might be common where you live, but it is nevertheless not a formal meaning of the word as though in schools elsewhere.

psychokinetic - 30-9-2010 at 12:10

Quote: Originally posted by Nicodem

It appears that even though I'm not a native English speaker I know more meanings of words part of this language than native speakers do

Yeah, that's about par for the course.

DDTea - 30-9-2010 at 20:56

Quote: Originally posted by spong

Yeah I know it's not the best thing legally to have a lab at home but I'm 19 now and I've been mucking about with chemistry/physics/pyrotechnics for 11 years easily, I'd never give it up unless I really had to. It has helped a lot with my education too, I'll bet pretty much everyone on this forum has much more in depth knowledge than classmates or workmates in the same field. At uni, people will mindlessly recite what they heard a lecturer say and have no idea what it actually is. The lecturer was asking about hydrogenating a double bond and the answers are all things like 'H2PDC(in words)' but very few of them would understand what they've said.
I think I'll be fine with all this, I know they could easily get me in trouble if they wanted, hell, they could put me in jail for the rest of my life if they tried but I very much doubt they would. One of the chemists even said told mum they need someone like me working for them

Let me give you a word of advice: don't ever get yourself labeled as "trouble" by either your professors or classmates. That kind of reputation is hard to shake, especially when you may need those people for recommendations in the future. It can undermine years of hard work.

It's much, much better in the long run to keep a very low profile and simply be known as, "that smart guy who always breaks the curve and gives amazing explanations in study groups."

Watch what you tell people also. It's like the game telephone: saying, "I like to make pyrotechnics," quickly becomes, "[blah blah] makes bombs!" If people are uninformed about someone/something, they have a nasty habit of filling in the blanks on their own to create the most "interesting" explanation.

quicksilver - 1-10-2010 at 08:44

Quote: Originally posted by DDTea

Just my opinion, but that is one of the most valuable tid-bits of advice you could ever follow. The likelihood of that one aspect of social awareness can spell the difference between success and mediocrity in a variety of areas.

The implications are further reaching than many people imagine.

[Edited on 1-10-2010 by quicksilver]

Bismuth - 2-10-2010 at 07:02

Well...

Spong, I'm worried you got pulled up by that. I might have a lot more things in my lab to worry about than what you have. In the given context, the word 'might' could also be synonymous with 'definitely'. Darn the attractiveness of energetic chemistry. Well, I think I should throw in the towel.

MagicJigPipe - 2-10-2010 at 10:30

Read this again. I changed my post and lowered the anger level. (walk away and count to 10)

Quote:

It appears that even though I'm not a native English speaker I know more meanings of words part of this language than native speakers do

You are acting like a pompous asshole. You know good and well that I know the various definitions of straight and merely assumed the incorrect definition.

Quote:

Yeah, that's about par for the course.

Really? REALLY?

You seem to just be pissed because I disagreed with you. What the hell is your problem?

[Edited on 10-2-2010 by MagicJigPipe]

Nicodem - 2-10-2010 at 10:38

Quote: Originally posted by MagicJigPipe

You pompous asshole. You know good and well that I know the various definitions of straight and merely assumed the incorrect definition.

You have to admit that you have some suspiciously rapid assumptions when it comes to assholes and related topics!

Sorry, I could not resist the temptation.

MagicJigPipe - 2-10-2010 at 10:45

Yes, your suspicions are correct. I prefer coffee over espresso.

Wait, what were you talking about?

[Edited on 10-2-2010 by MagicJigPipe]

quicksilver - 2-10-2010 at 13:07

I think there is a bit of "putting your head in the lion's mouth" when talking about an energetic materials hobby publicly; principally because it's so damn easy to be misconstrued no matter how you try to cover your interest.

"I've done some reading on" and "I once knew and engineer..." all seem like safe ways to discuss some element of this hobby but there are people who WANT to believe that people with certain interests are inherently up to no good.

It seems similar to those who are obsessed with hidden meaning with the Bible or conspiracies; some folks just won't allow a superficial discussion to stay put. Those are obviously different realms but the broader concept is similar.

There used to be a "code" that some people used almost like a Masonic handshake but since the problems with terrorism and other serious issues it's fallen into disuse because we really DO live in times of a serious nature & genuine concern appears to have more validity as each year passes.

IF you do want to know the secret code, PM me with the number of carbon atoms in Butyl Nitrite and I will show to you on the condition you use it with wisdom & continue it's secrecy.

psychokinetic - 2-10-2010 at 16:40

Quote: Originally posted by MagicJigPipe

Quote:

Yeah, that's about par for the course.

Really? REALLY?

You seem to just be pissed because I disagreed with you. What the hell is your problem?

Uh? I don't recall you saying anything to me at all.

MagicJigPipe - 2-10-2010 at 18:12

Sorry, the second sentence was for Nicodem.

manimal - 2-10-2010 at 21:43

Quote: Originally posted by Nicodem

I disagree with your assessment of the increase in likelihood of person x being subjected to unusually intense police scutiny or harrassment without justification as a function of skin color y and sexual orientation z. You suggest without justification that if spong were a handicapped Jamaican transsexual, for example, he would be facing proportionately increased legal difficulties as a result.

I could argue contrarily that being a handicapped Jamaican transsexual would work in his favor because if his case were to generate publicity, his minority status would garner increased sympathy from civil liberties organizations and media outlets who are already accutely atuned to the demographics of criminal activity. Minority crime is essentially bad publicity for the Justice Department and PD public relations departments.

spong - 3-10-2010 at 01:25

Quote: Originally posted by manimal

You suggest without justification that if spong were a handicapped Jamaican transsexual, for example, he would be facing proportionately increased legal difficulties as a result.

Fellas I my be in a spot of trouble...

And yeah I've given up on trying to talk about my hobby unless I really trust someone, when I was younger I was known as 'the kid that makes bombs' because I was into pyrotechnics. Urgh.

Chainhit222 - 3-10-2010 at 08:21

stay safe man

Magpie - 3-10-2010 at 08:31

Quote: Originally posted by manimal

I could argue contrarily that being a handicapped Jamaican transsexual would work in his favor because if his case were to generate publicity, his minority status would garner increased sympathy from civil liberties organizations and media outlets who are already accutely atuned to the demographics of criminal activity. Minority crime is essentially bad publicity for the Justice Department and PD public relations departments.

I agree. I often purposely leave a box of my mother's Depends (adult diapers) in plain sight in the back of my car. My purpose being that if I get pulled over by the cops they'll back off assuming I have enough trouble already.

anotheronebitesthedust - 3-10-2010 at 09:53

Quote:

being a handicapped Jamaican transsexual would work in his favor

Fuck I wish I would've thought of this earlier. I'm definitely going to start wearing my fake dreadlocks, fishnet t-shirt with leather skirt and high heels, along with my helmet and blackface more often from now on.

entropy51 - 3-10-2010 at 10:27

Quote: Originally posted by manimal

I could argue contrarily that being a handicapped Jamaican transsexual would work in his favor

You could argue it, but then how would you explain the fact that 14% of young men are African American, but 40% of young men in prison are African American?

Chainhit222 - 3-10-2010 at 11:02

time to take up crossdressing

bbartlog - 3-10-2010 at 11:36

Quote:

how would you explain the fact that 14% of young men are African American, but 40% of young men in prison are African American?

I believe it's more like 44%. However, this is primarily driven by the fact that young African American men commit violent crimes at around seven to eight times the rate at which young white men do (check out the NCVS data on this if you think all the FBI UCR information is somehow the product of a racist system). Of course there may be law enforcement discrimination on top of this; as I recall, studies suggest that while being black does not increase the chance of being convicted of a crime at trial (ceterus paribus), it does result in harsher sentences than a similar white defendant would receive.

manimal - 3-10-2010 at 15:54

Quote: Originally posted by Magpie

I suggest instead that you put on blackface and don a pair of spectacles and a tweed ivy cap and claim to be a prestigous black professor. That way, if the cop arrests you, the POTUS will put him on the spot by jetting him out to DC for a couple of beers and some televised sensitivity training.

Quote: Originally posted by entropy51

You could argue it, but then how would you explain the fact that 14% of young men are African American, but 40% of young men in prison are African American?

My point is that the rhubarb about ethnicity has little to do with the legal circumstances of the OP, so speculation on how things might play out differently for different individuals can be used to make a case that supports either stance. Frankly, I have no idea why the topic has swerved onto this particular offramp, but I will proceed anyway unless Polverone says it is off-bounds.

Evidently, you are concluding that because members of group A are criminally indicted X percent more frequently than members of group B, then a random member of A is ~X percent more likely than a random member of B to face indictment in similar circumstances, all else being equal. But this argument commits a logical fallacy, known as false cause. That is, that correlation does not imply causation.

Consider an analogous example: Soup manufacturer ABC fails to properly sterilize its equipment, and as a result, its quarterly soup shipment to stores is contaminated and causes food poisoning among consumers at a rate 5X that of ABC's main competitor, and is subsequently recalled. Brand ABC ships its soup in red cans, and those of its competitor are blue. The recall effects 20% of all soup brands packaged in red cans at the supermarket chain that is ABC's principle customer. Conclusion: A third soup brand that is sold at the chain, which also comes in red cans, is approximately 20% more likely than the competing brand of blue-canned soup to be removed from the shelves. Obviously, this argument fails to account for some crucial details.

However, it's not outside the realm of possibility that the authority overseeing soup recalls, or, to return to the original topic, the police, will exploit the circumstances described above by singling out one of the parties in an unjustifiable manner. To pursue this tack would require substantiating this.

[Edited on 4-10-2010 by manimal]

entropy51 - 3-10-2010 at 16:52

Quote: Originally posted by bbartlog

I believe it's more like 44%. However, this is primarily driven by the fact that young African American men commit violent crimes at around seven to eight times the rate at which young white men do

Most of them are not in prison for violent crime, but rather for drug offenses. See crack disparity. Drug offenses are the reason that we lock people up at a rate much higher than almost any other country.

It's not about canned soup, it's about people who are punished more severely for drug offenses because of their ethnicity. Anyone who believes minorities get a pass from the cops isn't paying attention.

Rogeryermaw - 3-10-2010 at 17:14

just so you know, in the u.s., whites are not treated any better that blacks as far as drug offense is concerned. there just happens to be a much higher percentage of blacks that think they are above the law and they idiotically flaunt how"ghetto" and "tough" they are by pursuing these activities in public, around children without regard to how their actions negatively affect said children. i don't need figures to back me up. i've been locked up 3 times for for simple marijuana offenses in my much much younger days and i am white. if you are low-key and keep your activities a secret from people who would use it against you then chances are you won't have to be statistic. it just happens to be a part of that culture that if you don't show the world how bad you are, you get ostracized by the ghetto gangsta i'm badda den you n got mo gold in my teef crowd. why would they want that any more than we want to be criminalized for acts of science just because the spoon-fed dumbed-down masses can't understand where the world goes when they close the drapes?

Polverone - 3-10-2010 at 17:16

"Black" names reduce résumé call-back rates by 50% even for identical résumé contents.
Police officers are multiple times as likely to mistakenly shoot an unarmed black as an unarmed white.
Minorities are disproportionately likely to be stopped and frisked by the NYPD, even after correcting for estimated crime-participation rates.

If you need more studies, you can find hundreds on Google Scholar.

If you prefer anecdotes, here's one. A colleague from work was leaving a technology conference with 2 other men. As the 3 were walking to a parking garage he was stopped by two police officers on foot who wanted to know if he knew anything about a nearby carjacking that had taken place earlier that day. His two companions weren't addressed at all.

He was black and his companions were white. The carjacker was black. So of course he, a Stanford graduate, a clean cut upper middle class professional dressed in business attire, was expected by police to know something of local crimes, no doubt via the telepathic black hive mind if not direct involvement.

manimal - 3-10-2010 at 17:18

Quote: Originally posted by entropy51

This may be true, but it misses the mark as far as explaining ethnic disparities in crime because most whites are also incarcerated on drug charges. I believe that the percentage of incarcerated whites who are drug offenders is higher than the respective percentage for non-whites, that is, that a higher percentage of non-whites than whites are violent offenders. I can't recall the specific details, but they can surely be googled.

Quote:

It's not about canned soup, it's about people who are punished more severely for drug offenses because of their ethnicity. Anyone who believes minorities get a pass from the cops isn't paying attention.

I didn't suggest that it was 'about' soup. I was making an analogy to underscore the flawed analysis because it applies similarly in both cases.

Rogeryermaw - 3-10-2010 at 17:28

i don't trust "studies and polls" when they are of a social nature. "surveys can prove anything marge. forfteen percent of all people know that!"(simpsons)

my point is not to be inflammatory but these are my observations in real life. i have spent more time than most immersed in predominantly black neighborhoods and watched how they freely flout the law right in the public eye. also to point out that it makes no difference what your skin color is. the l.e. wants to look good and have a story to brag to his friends about. if they could make a name for turning in their own mothers...well BYE MOM!!!!!

one anecdote i can recall is the man laying on the ground next to his brain at the convenience store about two blocks from the automotive shop i was working in. no arrest was made because cops are too chickenshit to show up at a violent scene involving firearms till 3 hours after the perp is gone.

but i couldn't count on my fingers plus yours how many times they showed up to arrest the transient WHITE man that slept on the ground in front of the liquor store across the street from the same shop.

[Edited on 4-10-2010 by Rogeryermaw]

Polverone - 3-10-2010 at 17:45

If you categorically reject studies of social phenomena, how can you trust your own observations of social phenomena? Maybe when you thought you were living in a black neighborhood full of scofflaws you were actually living in a white neighborhood full of Mennonites, and what you thought were crimes were actually barn raisings.

[Edited on 10-4-2010 by Polverone]

Rogeryermaw - 3-10-2010 at 18:09

no sir you are correct and wise! there is valuable data to be obtained from such input. but, like any news media outlet, publication or survey or poll, all are subject to bias in favor of the opinion of the target demographic. also i truly hope that my statements are not taken out of context and considered racist or bigoted. i have friends from every part of the full spectrum. i know gays i know blacks i know people from every wavelength on the visible spectrum(and some not so visible). but i try to keep my eyes on everything in range and make my own conclusions based on what i observe. i personally have helped a black family escape disaster when their vehicle was struck broadside on a hill and overturned. this happened right in from of that same auto shop(busy, rough, part of town. if you want to know i'll send you coordinates for google earth. used to be called arkansas radiator till it was bought out by performance radiator). i left my post at the shop, ran into the street through traffic. and held their suv on its side so they could crawl out of the broken windshield and then let it fall on its roof after they were clear. never even got so much as a thanks. the point is, i don't arbitrarily hate. but my observations of life in different groups has made me quite cynical.

btw i never lived in predominantly black neighborhoods. just worked there. also choose a better group than mennonites. i had the displeasure of finding out how rude they can be when my crew was in michigan(referenced in the phosphorus thread)after having met many of them. i prefer amish. much more friendly!

[Edited on 4-10-2010 by Rogeryermaw]

Polverone - 3-10-2010 at 18:29

I don't think you read any of my linked articles, because they didn't come from polling firms or the news media

I know that social phenomena are impossible to faithfully replicate in the laboratory, but so is continental drift, fossilization, or a supernova. Yet geology, biology, and astronomy still manage to discuss these phenomena and develop models with predictive powers far better than random chance. That doesn't mean every published biological or sociological paper should be taken as gospel, but they shouldn't be rejected if you cannot identify any methodological flaws or show outright fabrication of data.

Rogeryermaw - 3-10-2010 at 19:22

actually i am in the midst of scrolling through them now

. i don't completely discount any source of information as having something worthy to impart. i just like to make my own decisions based on my observations and try to be as objective as possible. can't call myself a scientist if i let my personal feelings or the bias of other sources make those judgment calls for me. the best middle ground is to absorb all the input and then use my experiences as the final determining factor for what opinion i will hold toward any given subject. and since you went to the trouble to show me a set of data i owe it to you to give it a fair shake so while i am not speed reading it i am exploring it! and thank you for the leg work!

also,(and i'm still only working on the first article)what companies were these sent to? the answer to this may actually cause a bias due to the aristocratic nature of large firm with primarily "good ol boy" executive bases. that answer may be in the reading but i'm still working on it.

and i know this is off topic but i was just admiring a physical aspect of a chemical. i bought some grain alcohol to synthesize ether and have been storing it in the freezer. it loses SO MUCH mass when it is cold! also wonder if you read my question about frozen benzene. keep my volatiles in refrigeration and my fridge was too low. it started freezing and the crystals are SO COOL!. very large and hexagonal...like enlarged benzene rings!

edit: meant volume not mass

like the footnote about better neigborhood living not necessarily being favorable...i know why! spoiled rotten rich kids are definitely not better workers. the study goes on to say that it is not dependable due to the inconsistency of human actors.

[Edited on 4-10-2010 by Rogeryermaw]

[Edited on 4-10-2010 by Rogeryermaw]

manimal - 3-10-2010 at 19:40

Quote: Originally posted by Polverone

"Black" names reduce résumé call-back rates by 50% even for identical résumé contents.
Police officers are multiple times as likely to mistakenly shoot an unarmed black as an unarmed white.
Minorities are disproportionately likely to be stopped and frisked by the NYPD, even after correcting for estimated crime-participation rates.

Apparently the second link is broken.

Polverone: I do not dispute that police often apply measurably differing treatment to differing ethnic groups in certain circumscribed circumstances like traffic stops or confrontations in high-crime neighborhoods, dependent on many circumstantial factors. I never claimed that police obtrusion is an evenly-applied or desirable thing in general. Regarding the 'black resume' study; it is somewhat outside the scope of this debate, but I will nonetheless posit that a possible factor is the self-correction of negative externalities imposed by affirmative-action restrictions on hiring, via a sort of spontaneous Pigouvian tax that falls back upon black job applicants. Economic blowback, if you will.

I believe the original question was whether being caught with ambiguous chemicals would lead to greater 'legal difficulties', whatever that implies, for people of varying race. It is possible, but then, the officer charged to investigate such a scenario will likely not be an inner-city beat cop. Investigating and/or making an arrest pursuant to something chemical-related (possible anarchist/terrorist/drug mfgr, or what have you) is not an occurence as routine as pulling over a suspicious-looking black motorist, telling him off, and letting him go with a warning, in which case race could convincingly play a deciding factor. A direct comparison is therefore not in order. If such a comparison could be made (that is, if data on it existed) I express doubt that discrepencies approaching Nicodem's exaggerated(in my opinion) description would exist.

As for a potential 'harassment index' of being caught with chemicals I will concede a possible disparity between blacks and, for example, Asians, but it is difficult to say because to my knowledge there are no studies in existence that address it, and no case studies.

Rogeryermaw - 3-10-2010 at 19:51

as far as drug cooks, you have a fair mix of black and white producing meth and an overwhelming majority of blacks producing crack but how often do you see such minorities producing mdma or lsd? the chemistry is far to complicated for someone only interested in making a quick buck. that places the perp on a whole different level as to their place in society (i'm basing this on a level of education needed to engage in such acts) and may have a lot to do with the treatment they will receive once apprehended.

see this is nice. how often can a discussion like this take place without venom and hatred? it's good to have an intellectual discussion without petty name calling.

i'm finding this third article much more interesting...one thing i wonder though, is how the region of the study affects the outcome. is it the same in the south? how about the west coast? you get my drift.

[Edited on 4-10-2010 by Rogeryermaw]

Polverone - 3-10-2010 at 22:06

Sorry about the broken second link, but I can't seem to find an alternate link now.

I'm a clean cut white man without so much as a traffic ticket to my name. All the same, I don't want to interact with the police any more than necessary. I think there is ample cause for visible minority groups to be even more apprehensive about police interactions than I am, and police interactions aren't the only way they get the short end of the stick.

I mostly don't know what the members of Sciencemadness look like in person; I've only seen 3 in pictures and 2 in real life. I don't know who among us may have ancestors from Europe, Latin America, Africa, the Indian subcontinent, the Middle East, or elsewhere. "Them," members of minority groups, may actually be "us," members of Sciencemadness. So let's have a little empathy and, if we are to speak of minority group issues, not do so merely as outsider critics but as if we are talking to and about friends and colleagues (and we may well do so unknowingly).

Rogeryermaw - 3-10-2010 at 23:23

well said. i have been involved with and still am involved with members of many ethnic groups both in occupation(not that i work now but i do keep the friends i have made around the country) and personal friendship. i really do hate to see division between such groups based on how these different peoples perceive these hate those or those hate these. we're all just meat bags doomed to be fertilizer one day. why spend what little time we have being small minded?

and was that clean cut statement a crack at my appearance? :cool:

madscientist - 4-10-2010 at 06:44

Prosecutors and police alike are going to go after those least likely to have the funds to fight any charges leveled against them. Demographically, this tends to be blacks.

When convicted, blacks tend to be sentenced more harshly than whites as mentioned previously - judges, consciously or not, associate you with poverty and high crime neighborhoods, which they connect to recidivism. Long sentences follow.

Being a minority does not shield you in any way except maybe when you are some filthy rich celebrity with the cash to stir up a giant media circus over the affair.

Rogeryermaw - 4-10-2010 at 08:52

Quote: Originally posted by madscientist

When convicted, blacks tend to be sentenced more harshly than whites as mentioned previously - judges, consciously or not, associate you with poverty and high crime neighborhoods, which they connect to recidivism. Long sentences follow.

i have to disagree with this particular statement having been at the business end of that gun before. i have personally sat in the courtroom waiting for my own trial and watched a black man with felony possession of crack-cocaine receive probation and walk away while i got to spend 90 days in jail for misdemeanor possession of less that 2 grams of marijuana. now tell me that's not lopsided.

i have considered that such outcomes may be intended to pacify watchdog civil rights people but that is conjecture not fact. the only fact i can back up is that the harsher treatment that it is perceived is laid upon minorities is sometimes trumped up by the media to generate sympathy. that's not to say it never happens that way. once again i am only going by my personal observations while immersed in the system myself, and not by friend of a friend anecdote.

[Edited on 4-10-2010 by Rogeryermaw]

madscientist - 4-10-2010 at 08:58

He may have struck a deal, gave the police names.

90 days for marijuana is outrageous but I'll refrain from commenting further, lest this turn into debate that ends up needing to be locked.

Rogeryermaw - 4-10-2010 at 10:14

please don't do that! i value input from all! i'm hard to anger and love a good discussion. if you have examples of info contradictory to mine i would welcome it gladly! i am always open to input from someone who may know something i don't. i do not see my experiences as being the rule or the exception. they are just my experiences. could be the judge just didn't like the way i looked or who knows what guided the hand of fate that day.

and why lock it? from looking back at the last couple of pages it seems we are all being mature and civil here. as long as it stays that way it's quite enjoyable.

damn! i'll tell you what's irritating. it sounds like jets are producing sonic booms over my house right now!

[Edited on 4-10-2010 by Rogeryermaw]

[Edited on 4-10-2010 by Rogeryermaw]

Mr. Wizard - 4-10-2010 at 13:06

“All political thinking for years past has been vitiated in the same way. People can foresee the future only when it coincides with their own wishes, and the most grossly obvious facts can be ignored when they are unwelcome.” - George Orwell

"In a time of deceit telling the truth is a revolutionary act." George Orwell

"The truth must be repeated again and again because error is constantly being preached around us," Goethe told a friend in 1828. "And not by isolated individuals, but by the majority! In the newspapers and encyclopedias, in the schools and universities, everywhere error is dominant, securely and comfortably ensconced in public opinion which is on its side."
"Infamy" by John Toland page 257

My observation is nothing gets people more irritated than telling them the truth they don't want to hear. It would be easier to dig the Suez Canal with a teaspoon than to change somebody's mind.

quicksilver - 5-10-2010 at 06:52

Quote: Originally posted by Rogeryermaw

i have personally sat in the courtroom waiting for my own trial and watched a black man with felony possession of crack-cocaine receive probation and walk away while i got to spend 90 days in jail for misdemeanor possession of less that 2 grams of marijuana. now tell me that's not lopsided.

i have considered that such outcomes may be intended to pacify watchdog civil rights people but that is conjecture not fact. the only fact i can back up is that the harsher treatment that it is perceived is laid upon minorities is sometimes trumped up by the media to generate sympathy. that's not to say it never happens that way. once again i am only going by my personal observations while immersed in the system myself, and not by friend of a friend anecdote.

[Edited on 4-10-2010 by Rogeryermaw]

Did you have a real lawyer or a public pretender?
The actual reasons studied by the ABA some years back is that legal representation is absent in most poor populations OR in scenarios where the defendant THOUGHT that they would walk on a light charge. Do you do the whole 90 days?
If you HAD a Public Defender as soon as the gavel came down he should have filed an appeal & requested O.R. bail as a 1st offense. You DID discuss defense stratagem with him or her correct?
If WAS a 1st offense; was it not?

Becasue if it wasn't a 1st offense; then you need to recognize that the fellow who walked on the coca charge may have been a 1st or he may have already done a jolt and the inn was full; thus you wash Sheriff's cars or pick up trash for awhile.
Too many missing facts.

manimal - 5-10-2010 at 13:08

Quote: Originally posted by madscientist

Prosecutors and police alike are going to go after those least likely to have the funds to fight any charges leveled against them. Demographically, this tends to be blacks.

OK, but we were discussing the potential discrepencies in treatment between being a member of the majority race and being a member of some minority race when finding oneself faced with a particular set of legal difficulties, not the potential discrepencies of being both of a different race and having a diminished financial capacity at the same time.

Quote:

Does this continue to hold after individual sentences between the two groups are matched for similar circumstances, such as severity of the crime and number of prior convictions of the defendant? If so, to what extent? After all, that is really the only way to arrive at a statistically meaningful comparison.

Quote:

Being a minority does not shield you in any way except maybe when you are some filthy rich celebrity with the cash to stir up a giant media circus over the affair.

I agree.

madscientist - 5-10-2010 at 16:33

Quote:

Does this continue to hold after individual sentences between the two groups are matched for similar circumstances, such as severity of the crime and number of prior convictions of the defendant?

Yes, that's what I had in mind.

Rogeryermaw, I think you misinterpreted me - I believe the drug war to be a pile of donkey dung, but I didn't want to say too much on that, lest I turn this thread down the path of a drug war flamewar.

[Edited on 6-10-2010 by madscientist]

entropy51 - 5-10-2010 at 16:52

Quote: Originally posted by madscientist

...I believe the drug war to be a pile of donkey dung, but I didn't want to say too much on that, lest I turn this thread down the path of a drug war flamewar.

Quote:

Instead of war on poverty they got a war on drugs so the police can bother me.

R.I.P. 2Pac.

Rogeryermaw - 5-10-2010 at 17:19

admittedly, this was my second offense. however i can't say how many times the other man in particular had been arrested. what i heard as they read the case against him was that he was in violation of his probation but instead of putting him into custody for violating, they reinstated his probation.

i had a public defender because on my first offense, i had a paid attorney and still served 45 days for a first offense class b misdemeanor. what is lopsided to me is that my offenses were misdemeanor and the man i was speaking about was a felony. that's what boiled my piss about the outcome. how can they justify caging a misdemeanor offense and releasing a felon?

again i can only site my experience and express that it is neither the exception nor the rule. but that day the minority received less harsh sentencing than a non minority even though the crime of the minority was rated higher.

[Edited on 6-10-2010 by Rogeryermaw]

madscientist - 5-10-2010 at 18:23

I've never heard of anyone getting leniency for possession of crack, particularly for a probation violation. (What would it take worse to look worse to your judge? Raping someone?) He must've gave names to the police. They won't mention this at court hearings because they're open to the public, and they do make some vague pathetic attempts at witness protection.

Basically you got nailed because you had guts, and he got off the hook because he didn't.

Rogeryermaw - 5-10-2010 at 19:50

i can't defend judging someone based on their appearance, just look at my pic: http://www.sciencemadness.org/talk/viewthread.php?tid=14556#...

i would hate to have someone try to ascertain details of my character based on that. but it is quite difficult to look decent in court after a week and a half in general population coming in the courtroom in orange county attire unshaven and disheveled...you would think that they know you won't look your best under the circumstances but it really does seem that they don't take that into account. some people have plain clothes delivered to them for court appearances but i didn't want outside help. i did the wrong and i was ready to own up to that. i refused friends attempts to bail me out too. i figured if i was going to do time then the time i had already spent should count towards it.

manimal - 5-10-2010 at 22:01

Quote: Originally posted by madscientist

Yes, that's what I had in mind.

It seems that many studies that do correct for environmental factors show weak or contradictory bias wrt racial category(eg, http://www.sciencedirect.com/science?_ob=ArticleURL&_udi...), and certainly an insufficient amount to substantiate Nicodem's hyperbole ("If you're a minority, you're screwed.").

Mr. Wizard - 6-10-2010 at 07:28

"R.I.P. 2Pac."
?????
A guy who lived a thug life, and died a thug, gets sympathy from what type of person? Maybe I just don't understand, and somebody can explain it for me.

Rogeryermaw - 6-10-2010 at 07:56

i don't either but he had a huge following and a lot of people like rap. not me personally but to each his own, no? think of it this way: i feel persecuted by the brainless masses because i know if i sat outside performing a distillation, if my neighbors could see me i would be labeled as a drug cook or a terrorist. is that fair? by no means. some other people like that lifestyle and to each his own. personally i have no sympathy for a thug dying as a thug. live by the sword, die by the sword, right? but i didn't know him so what can i say about him? that's like other people judging me as a witch for performing acts of science that are way over their heads. they see something they don't like or can't understand so it's automatically bad.

entropy51 - 6-10-2010 at 08:24

Quote: Originally posted by Mr. Wizard

A guy who lived a thug life, and died a thug, gets sympathy from what type of person? Maybe I just don't understand, and somebody can explain it for me.

Sympathy? Hardly! But he did express more than a little insight into misplaced priorities, don't you think?

Rogeryermaw - 6-10-2010 at 08:31

i'm afraid that for those of us less familiar with his actions in life, much clarification would be necessary. ol' tupac may not have been the most popular entertainer on this forum so some of us would need more background info about your reference.

spong - 10-11-2010 at 15:29

I thought I'd post back here and let everyone know what's happening, the test they ran came back negative for drugs obviously and the officer just had me sign a form allowing the spudgun they took to be destroyed so I didn't even get into trouble for that.
If all goes to plan I might be doing work experience over the holidays in one of their labs.
Turns out some good can come from being raided

Plus they now know I'm not up to anything bad so I can perhaps stop being so scared of ordering from chemical companies.

quicksilver - 11-11-2010 at 08:33

Quote: Originally posted by spong

[
Fellas I my be in a spot of trouble...

And yeah I've given up on trying to talk about my hobby unless I really trust someone, when I was younger I was known as 'the kid that makes bombs' because I was into pyrotechnics. Urgh.

Realistically, it may have started there.

MANY (if not most) of us started in our teens or younger making BP or rockets and burning leaves with magnifying glasses or playing with microscopes but those days are gone.
Children get expelled from school for bringing nail clipper or scissors to school. Standing up to the school-yard bully will get the brave little kid into long lasting counseling.
This is whole different world. and (IMO) it was the folly of two that caused this mess. It was idiots who used political motivation to harm and reactionary Left & Right politicians who capitalized on a vote getting agenda by focusing on the "object" instead of the personal responsibility issues.

There are standing instructions to mailmen, gas meter readers, delivery people, and Lord knows who - to "report" suspicious activity - that means ANYTHING to anyone because the concepts become so subjective. You neighbor, no longer is a neighbor. People don't know each other nor care about their community.
Idiots start fires, wake up sleeping people with noise, ruin others property, & generally become such selfish assholes that the idea of reporting people has become 2nd nature!

Many people don't know this but "road rage"has now taken the standard of the "sneak attack" via a cell phone. If someone drives in a manner you don't like; you call the sheriff and report the auto and license number and say they looked like they were driving drunk.......just so they might be stopped and hassled or get arrested if sufficient issues exist.

Neighbors report neighbors for the same reason: vicious revenge - instead of common communication & dialog. The hobby of high energy experimentation; be that in physics or chemistry is not a safe thing. We know that. But what we often forget is that it isn't safe from a standpoint that we jeopardize ourselves due to the lack of civility & care that at one time used to be the norm.

You start up a large Tesla Coil in the outdoors and you neighbor has reception problems. He, in turn doesn't ask you calmly to cool it as he's watching football, he reports you for making a destructive device or stealing energy, or whatever.
You bang on an anvil to snap some chlorate @ dinner time and a call is made that you're firing a weapon, etc.

But -=IF=- you also have a "reputation" that is flexible enough to attract attention, then expect a problem. If you have been so relaxed that you entered into a conversation with a stranger and used the first person description of a chemical experiment you have made an error in judgment If there-upon, the other party attempt to query further; you might as well say directly that if they believe you are doing anything illegal, they have the wrong impression; because the "cat's out of the bag" in that interchange. You might as well get very "direct".

[Edited on 11-11-2010 by quicksilver]

Magic Muzzlet - 11-11-2010 at 11:35

My God quicksilver.

Why did you post all that? After someone has something great to report, they can still do chemistry, you have to come and state all this stuff that could happen, will happen, happens etc. You seem *** paranoid and there is no need to say all this *** making other people worry! Truth of the matter is unless you are doing something illegal, why even bother worrying because you will probably draw more attention to yourself.

As if mailmen and all that really look out. Do you believe that? They may be told in their training or something to do so, but I can bet they don't give a *** about anything except finishing the job and getting home to have a beer. Now if something is obvious, your house is spewing out methylamine fumes or you are blowing stuff up, anyone in their right mind WOULD say something.

I understand there are different levels of severity in different states, but to say all you have making it seem like it happens everywhere isn't right. You never know what can happen, you need to be smart, and make sure you are clean. If you have obvious precursors you are asking for trouble. If all you want to do is make explosives, same deal. People who have a genuine interest in exploring chemistry at home should have enough common sense to not get screwed over. I can tell you that if you have your notes together, your stuff labelled etc you wont have trouble. I have been "raided" twice and each time nothing happened. NOTHING. Because I'm not doing things of questionable nature and believe it or not, the greater selection of reagents you have is a great indicator you aren't making illegal things. I also live in CA by the way, apparantly one of the worst places to do home chemistry?

There is enough paranoid talk on this forum, I am so sick of it. Can't people take a break. We aren't criminals(most of us), don't act like it. So spong, congrats on your visit and all going well. This is a great example of what can go right with amateur chemistry.

EDIT: Obviously I am only referring to the chemical side, not neighbor business, bad drivers....

[Edited on 11-11-2010 by Magic Muzzlet]

Polverone - 11-11-2010 at 13:42

Quote: Originally posted by Magic Muzzlet

As if mailmen and all that really look out. Do you believe that? They may be told in their training or something to do so, but I can bet they don't give a *** about anything except finishing the job and getting home to have a beer. Now if something is obvious, your house is spewing out methylamine fumes or you are blowing stuff up, anyone in their right mind WOULD say something.

I posted a thread years ago about how a meter reader really did report me to the police for possible drug activity, because I was heating material in a crucible over a gas burner in the car port. I wasn't trying to hide anything, I even said hello to the reader, and none of the equipment or activities on display could be mistaken for drug activity by anyone with even a passing familiarity with chemistry or drugs. And yet soon after the reader left a cruiser pulled up to the house and a police officer wanted to ask me a few questions. He was polite and he knew enough about drug labs to realize I was harmless after a few questions and a glance at the equipment, but it was still extremely unsettling. And if I had been doing something organic in glassware instead, would he have wanted to investigate further? To look inside the house? To seize equipment for inspection, or otherwise make my life much less pleasant?

quicksilver - 13-11-2010 at 09:26

Each community is different. We believe we know our communities. Some folks REALLY DO need to know that there ARE communities that they can get sniped and should watch their "P's" & Q's".

"WHY" did I say all that?

BECAUSE IT HAPPENS!

The fellow was somewhat lucky (in a sense) but he didn't simply walk away. And just because he made out OK is NO reason not to be aware that mailmen and meter-readers get a little lecture and then play junior G-Men.
Frankly, I damn well think it's a GOOD idea to remind people that others are TOLD to rat them out from a subjective perception!

YES I DAMN well believe that. If you DON'T -- GOOD FOR YOU!

You may live in a community with no "anti-meth" associations; itching to "stop the dope houses" or whatever.....But somehow I don't think so.

You have been "raided" (your term) TWICE and you think you have not a worry in the world? GOOD GOD MAN.......I think it's YOU who need to recognize that this shit HAPPENS and being aware of it is MUCH smarter than simply NOT talking about the differing methodologies behind it's happenstance.

One situation of a question by the authorities is common enough: but TWICE is another matter. Personally, I would be rather introspective if I have interchange with the authorities twice. That's not paranoia: that's self preservation. How many people have had to deal with utter bullshit because someone rat-fucked them?
But that's your thing. If you don't want to go there; fine. However, it was YOU who used the term "raided".
That is not a casual "what's up, fella'?" I think someone may have an agenda. If the subject is a sore spot with you I understand.
But if you're going to say I'm making things up; I'm not.
And if you want to attempt to chastise me for what I write or censor me, then I suggest you get reincarnated as NBK.
{Little joke there: to lighten this whole deal up.....nothing personal.}

You made a statement: "If you have obvious precursors you are asking for trouble"......do you have some idea what a LIST II chemical is and how common some are? Thus, the substantiation for a "raid" can be attained by OTC materials.

THAT is not paranoid; it's the smart thing to recognize that "probable cause" may exist through subjective misinterpretation of the most innocent of circumstances!

Bringing this subject to the attention of someone who may have a dawning interesting in this hobby as a generality allows them to make informed decisions.

You walked on two "visits"; that's good news. However by the second one you should now know that someone, somewhere has some agenda.... If you HONESTLY don't think so; if you honestly think that you had focused interaction with the authorities twice because of "bad luck"; I would be surprised.

But if you have anything that may help others; explore what that is to their benefit AS WELL as understanding WHY you bought it TWO times!
Noise, smell - or someone ratted you. Either way, the AGENDA was incorrect, as you can attest. But to ignore the possibility or incorrect intrusions being both a 4th Amendment issue as well as a serious expense, worry, and public humiliation are something of importance.

The subject is NOT something to be trivialized or discounted. What I posted was not only true, it was a fact of life & life can be very unfair. Recognition of that is not paranoia: it is maturity.
If you disagree: fine.

[Edited on 13-11-2010 by quicksilver]

Magic Muzzlet - 13-11-2010 at 10:38

Never said I did not live somewhere that has meth as a problem. The obvious precursors, and I'm sure you knew what I meant... I am talking you have nothing else much more than that which is used to make drugs. Acetic anhydride, nitroethane, mercuric chloride, 2,5-dmb and you know what else can go on. I mean if that's all you have, then it is obvious. I don't mean because you have some acetone....come on you must know what I meant.

The visits I had were from ordering from chemical companies, ordered some touchy stuff, they told me I would need to be listed down. At least I was told, and I am fine with it because I'm no criminal. I think you misunderstood me. I did not mean that it never happens, I'm saying if you aren't doing illegal ***, why the *** should you worry. You make it clear you don't trust people in your community, don't trust mail men, why should they trust you. You shouldn't have something to hide.

Having a "raid" turn into a public humiliation and an expense should only happen if the owner of the lab doesn't comply and gives reason for suspicion, or there is something illegal going on! You know what I have found in life? Generally, people want to be good! Generally, people are good! A cop or agent has a serious matter: A possible drug or explosive lab. Let them in! Show them what your craft is, show them your love for chemistry and don't be all "get a warrant please". The "raid" which was a nice visit by 2 men was nothing but to check if something illegal was going on. It was no problem for me having some company, they were serious but I showed them what I had with a great attitude and they saw I was no problem. No sore spot there, just a testament to how well things can go. Just have to be nice. Same deal with the next one.

So I will give my personal advice that has worked well for me, many would probably disagree. You be open about what you do if someone inquires, and show your passion for the work that you love. You don't be paranoid. There is a difference about being aware of things that can bring attention, and being paranoid. That is basically it. But you know what, everyone has their opinions and way of life, I am only sharing mine and you sharing yours. Can't change peoples thinking but I don't believe you need to state all the possible hiccups that can occur. Try to be optimistic, can it harm anyone? Have a nice day

[Edited on 13-11-2010 by Magic Muzzlet]

madscientist - 13-11-2010 at 15:49

You can't ever trust the police. Their job is to bust you. The friendly thing is probably an act.

No one has anything to gain by talking to them or letting them in the door. Smile, tell them to have a nice day, and to come back with a warrant next time. You never know what you may unwittingly bring upon yourself otherwise.

quicksilver - 13-11-2010 at 16:37

Quote: Originally posted by Magic Muzzlet

The visits I had were from ordering from chemical companies, ordered some touchy stuff, they told me I would need to be listed down. At least I was told, and I am fine with it because I'm no criminal. I think you misunderstood me. I did not mean that it never happens, I'm saying if you aren't doing illegal ***, why the *** should you worry. You make it clear you don't trust people in your community, don't trust mail men, why should they trust you. You shouldn't have something to hide.

Having a "raid" turn into a public humiliation and an expense should only happen if the owner of the lab doesn't comply and gives reason for suspicion, or there is something illegal going on! You know what I have found in life? Generally, people want to be good! Generally, people are good! A cop or agent has a serious matter: A possible drug or explosive lab. Let them in! Show them what your craft is, show them your love for chemistry and don't be all "get a warrant please". The "raid" which was a nice visit by 2 men was nothing but to check if something illegal was going on. It was no problem for me having some company, they were serious but I showed them what I had with a great attitude and they saw I was no problem. No sore spot there, just a testament to how well things can go. Just have to be nice. Same deal with the next one.

So I will give my personal advice that has worked well for me, many would probably disagree. You be open about what you do if someone inquires, and show your passion for the work that you love. You don't be paranoid. There is a difference about being aware of things that can bring attention, and being paranoid. That is basically it. But you know what, everyone has their opinions and way of life, I am only sharing mine and you sharing yours. Can't change peoples thinking but I don't believe you need to state all the possible hiccups that can occur. Try to be optimistic, can it harm anyone? Have a nice day

What you're saying is logical. And generally I agree that people want to be nice (agreeable, socially gregarious). However we have a discussion here where some people in authority get their "brownie points" by their felony arrests. They may have nothing personally against you as a human being but they have a focus of their interaction and that's to arrest you.

My point (that may well be taken as extreme suspicion) is to protect oneself against the "chalk up another one for my side" attitude of law enforcement.
They actually DON'T CARE that you are a casual fellow making something interesting to entertain yourself intellectually: they want that bust.

My perspective (which obviously differs) is to be on a defensive footing silently-internally. I don't think it's an easy move to "win-over" a law enforcement officer as he is pointedly doing what's in his jobs' best interest.

Further; you had two such mistaken situations. There must have been SOME proponent to further waste the tax payer's money on a hobbyist. That information has multiple value: both to you personally & hobbyists in general.
It MAY have been a company you ordered from OR an individual. Either way you certainly don't want a repeat. So by examining the agenda; your introspection is a positive contribution. By remaining silent; the lessons learned be not be examined to their fullest and lost may be a very powerful bit of information.

I CAN see this from your perspective. I wouldn't want to re-live the issue either but as long as it's up in the air (as it were), you might find that there's a serious issue, person, or action that needs to be avoided.
In the OP's discussion, the "bad rep" MAY have had a causal affect on his harassment.

In additional, you stated: "I'm saying if you aren't doing illegal ***, why the *** should you worry."
Because mistakes obviously DO occur. And those mistakes are costly in several areas of life and social integration. They can be very unfortunate - especially if you are just some fellow enjoying a science hobby. I would are that "worry" is a bit strong, but suspicion and wariness are (again IMO) appropriate.
This is the same train of thought that goes "if I have not broken the law, why should I object to being searched (or stopped), etc"
This is a violation of your 4th Amendment rights and is a slippery slope. There is a Constitutional right to privacy. It have a very deep value.

Please see the attachment on the 4th Amendment and issue such as rights to privacy.

We may disagree on this. However, it's such a disastrous potential, I realistically can't see how it could be easily dismissed.

[Edited on 14-11-2010 by quicksilver]

Attachment: I_Have_Nothing_to_Hide-id998565.pdf (296kB)
This file has been downloaded 708 times

psychokinetic - 13-11-2010 at 18:36

I have nothing to hide, but I'm not giving you the environment, data, and tools to make stuff up.

quicksilver - 14-11-2010 at 07:37

I would examine this as well:
Does Law Enforcement ever lie? Even under oath, in Court, as an act of Perjury? Unfortunately I would say, "YES". And I would add that it happens volitionally and subconsciously.
Often in many courts, there is a "team" aspect to the activity and that leads to "winning at all costs". This is an ugly reality of life that has been proven true on many occasions in many nations.

The thrust of this whole topic (IMO) is actually geared to a positive note. The idea is to enjoy a learning experience and not fall victim to misinterpretation. It doesn't have to be infused with "paranoia" or continual fear. But just as many sport activities are demanding of continual awareness and caution, so should areas where there is a legal boundary.

There can be a great deal to learn from the topic & it's related subject matter.

[Edited on 14-11-2010 by quicksilver]

bbartlog - 14-11-2010 at 09:08

If you don't know your local law enforcement, you likely shouldn't take the chance. I actually agree in with Magic Muzzlet's statement 'Generally, people want to be good!' (including police). My interactions with police (over twenty years in Pittsburgh) have given me a pretty positive view of their overall level of professionalism; so while I still keep up on stories about various civil rights horror stories and police abuses, I think they are indeed the exception rather than the rule. And if I were still in Pittsburgh, and some police came and wanted to look around at my lab, sans warrant and just to satisfy themselves , I'd be happy to give them a tour.
But in some place where you don't know the local LEO , why take the chance? If you don't know the character of the local cops, let's say there's a 5% chance they're just itching for the chance to seize your property under flimsy pretexts and supplement their local slush fund with the proceeds. Maybe not likely but the risk is too great. Of course if you're in that sort of area and you're already on their radar you are really at great risk regardless of whether you cooperate or stonewall.

quicksilver - 14-11-2010 at 12:52

Realistically I think there is a difference in scope from "wanting to be (or do) good" & the threat of misinterpretation or self-aggrandizement ("I made a felony bust on a drug cook today"). I also don't disagree with Muzzlet's take on things in a general way. But I would see where "wanting to believe" that the leading questions & befriending can get a guy into trouble. And that's a trap that can be avoided.

However; also on a realistic note, if you simply "lawyered-up" & didn't offer shit, you may be in for a time. On the other hand, by talking, you can often dig your own grave via a dishonest official.
Frankly I don't think there's an easy answer to this or one that fits all occasions. There are simply too many variables, both in human nature & what the questioner is after.

Let's say the issue is REALLY harmless: the guy has a home-lab and does serious graduate-level experiments on polymers for his Thesis. The glassware alone is thousands of dollars and could be used for cooking without question. The you throw in some chemicals that could are LISTED (Acetic Anhydride is the classic) and they now have a good case for probable-cause investigation to pull all your (really expensive & important) materials into another lab for analysis for drug residue.

I see two issues here. One is the potential loss of a seriously expensive lab and another is why the HELL did the poor guy get investigated to begin with????

madscientist - 14-11-2010 at 16:06

Cops will act professional when they don't think they have something on you. Why would they do otherwise? They want people to trust them. It makes it easier to make busts.

Talk to any decent defense attorney and you'll find that severe interrogations (beatings, death threats, no phone calls, etc.) are common in almost every police force. It's not a few bad apples - most of them participate, and those who don't stay silent and get desk jobs. Lying under oath is, of course, also routine.

You cannot trust them.

In probably 95% of cases, defendants sink themselves by running their mouths. As every defense attorney on the planet will insist, you should have only four words for the authorities: "I want my lawyer."

hkparker - 10-12-2010 at 16:52

Isnt it possible that would only make you look more suspicious? If you act like you have nothing to hide, perhaps they will be more relaxed about it, as opposed to you demanding a warrent and a laywer. I sure hope my house never gets raided, my neighbors seem to be ok with it though.

psychokinetic - 10-12-2010 at 22:22

You're damned if you do, and you're damned if you don't.

madscientist - 11-12-2010 at 04:46

If they are investigating you, they are already suspicious. If you consent to a search or start talking, be assured that their only thought will be "sucker!" It is not possible to "talk your way out of it." You can only dig yourself deeper.

Defense attorneys are the experts at keeping people out of legal trouble. They speak with authority when they tell you it is of the utmost importance that you remain silent.

hkparker - 11-12-2010 at 09:29

wow, I believe you, but thats really scary. I sure hope my house is never raided because my lab is outside (great for some things, bad for others) and is right on my neighbors fence. Hes seen me do a few things like run a blast furnace and he might have seen my synth of ether. Though he looked a little confused I was friendly to him and he seemed ok, not like he would be calling th cops anytime soon, but man I want to move inside.

quicksilver - 12-12-2010 at 07:24

There is a mind-set that despises "being wrong". Somehow "being mistaken means that they are less than efficient, less intelligent, & less effectual than a person who has not made a mistake. To people who think like that, every effort must go into proving themselves correct.
They see the world in black & white, good and evil. While "good and evil" can certainly exists anyone who enjoys the scientific principal, knows there are some shades of gray in both the physical world and emotional interaction.
Often people who feel comfortable with absolutes gravitate toward occupations like law enforcement because the world becomes very clearly defined.

To people like that, they are NOT swayed in their judgment by superficiality; they have something to prove. In their professional arena, they won't even become involved unless they are "correct". And "correct" means that the Prosecutor can win their case in court. Madscientist has it right on the money! (IMO) once the snowball begins to roll; it is destined to take on a larger shape and [social / legal] gravity makes the process unstoppable.

When you ask for a lawyer and do not speak, you are NOT maintaining your Rights. You are now a total adversary. Law Enforcement may superficially make the process of your prosecution more kindly when you speak, but you are simply making their job easier. The job will be done no matter if you speak or not. So why make their agenda easier? They have made up their mind already.

Everyone should take a moment and listen to this law professor and this cop and a "gentile debate", before they go ANY FURTHER. this IS A classic WHICH many HAVE SEEN AND NOW QUOTE AS IT IS RELATIVELY FAMOUS AS A DIALOG ON THE 5TH AMENDMENT.

http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-4097602514885833865...

vulture - 12-12-2010 at 09:00

It's easy to succumb to the logic (because it really is logic) of talking to the police "because you have nothing to hide".

1) Everybody has something to hide.
2) Innocent people get convicted all the time. It may not be many, but that doesn't matter if it's you.
3) You could be sacrificed for political or professional gain.
4) Somebody may be framing you.

Number 3 & 4 may be unlikely, but they do happen and why risk it?

Let them get a warrant and come back. Then still don't talk to them, have an attorney and document EVERYTHING.

hkparker - 12-12-2010 at 12:35

I watched the video, he has an excellent point. I hope this makes me more ready in case the cops ever do show up, I think it will. Everyone on here should see it.

" People with nothing to hide have nothing to fear from O.B.I.T "

franklyn - 12-12-2010 at 15:37

The classic science fiction television series " The Outer Limits "
episode titled " O.B.I.T. " dramatized the social decay incurred
by 1984 style surveillance , presaging the onset of omnipresent
scrutiny of daily life and behavior.
OBIT acronym for Outer Band Individuated Teletracer

Google , "The Outer Limits" O.B.I.T. , for online viewing links.
On youtube
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BSCTnWEb1bU

[Edited on 13-12-2010 by franklyn]

Pithy

The WiZard is In - 13-12-2010 at 13:55

(Donald J Haarmann) is “Tell the WiZ”
American Fireworks News
Issue 61 October, 1986.

While Big Bruce is involved with troubles of a political kind,
[M-80’s] I thought I'd write a column dealing not with the usual
technical matters, but a pithy one.

There is an insurance crisis? Now, where there is a crisis, there
has to be an explanation (of the political kind), and that is, who are
we going to blame it on?

Well, I blame it on the "liberals". (Those who believe, and you may
quote me, that everyone is responsible for everyone else, but no
one is responsible for themselves. Out.)

That is; whatever happens to you is someone else's fault,
"someone else" being not only individuals, but corporations, the
government, and that all important catch-all, "society". These
people also have a bad habit of turning explanations into excuses,
e.g., poverty and environment may be explanations for crime,
however, they are not excuses. were they excuses, we could
simply license criminals! depending upon poverty level, degree of
presumed depravation and such, you could be a licensed
pickpocket or mass murderer. Liberals also have trouble distin-
guishing people's wants from their needs.

A case in point. The recent post office shootings -- obviously an act
of a person well beyond the end of his rope. However, because this
person could not possibly have been responsible for the dastardly
act, (presumably society failed him in some way) who/what is to
blame? For the obvious (to the liberals) answer, read the New York
City Daily News, wherein an editorial lays the blame on (his) guns.
Now because guns are going around the country killing and
maiming, they most surely should be banned, or so the editorial
says.

Liberal thinking has infected the insurance problem under the
name "strict liability". This doctrine, started in New Jersey, states
simply that: if anyone is injured using a product, the manufacturer
of the product is liable. Period. For example, a few months ago
While cutting a piece of plastic on my Unisaw (the guard not in
[place), I mitered my thumb. (Proving all God's little pyro's
aren't always as careful as they should be, and don't pick a fight
with something that weighs twice as much as you and is a lot
stronger). My immediate reaction was one common to most people
who hit their thumb with a hammer-you hold onto your thumb while
walking around in circles, cursing your stupidity. Under strict
liability the manufacturer of the saw would have been liable.

The interesting part of all this is that obviously not all products can
come under strict liability. Which ones do or do not is up to the
courts. Can't get a product banned by your elected representa-
tives? NO PROBLEM. Just get a judge (any ONE will do) to bring it
under strict liability. It will disappear from the market over night.
Just think of the possibility with fireworks, etc.

A lot of blame for the insurance crisis has been attributed to the
legal profession. A quote and an observation will suffice to provide
my views.

"If a town has one lawyer he will starve to death; if it has two, both
will be rich men."

Anything that keeps a lawyer from making money/more money is
illegal.

Say, whatever happened to "de minimis non cuat lex" (the law does
not concern itself with trifles)? was reading the other day of a
community that passed a noisy lawnmower ordinance regulating
hours of operation and noise output, and such. What ever
happened to "Say Charlie, how about giving me a break with that
lawnmower at 7:30 on Sunday morning"? Sometimes it is
necessary to put up with a little inconvenience to keep what
freedoms we have left.

Laws such as this are examples of the Second Law of Political
Action, subscribed to not only by the "liberals" but the less easy to
define "conservatives": if you have a problem, passing a law will
solve it. Sure! Reagan's famous off-the-cuff remark "I have just
outlawed the Russians" comes to mind.

Common courtesy will go a long way in preventing the proliferation
of laws. There is nothing like the 2:30 a.m. machine gun string or
ground bomb, to drum up votes for more restrictive fireworks legis-
lation. (I know that ground bombs are already illegal, however, be-
cause making them illegal did not work they want to make the
illegal more illegal!)

The Press. Not long ago the editor's job was to separate the BS
from the news and to keep editorializing to a minimum. However,
now that TV news programs run an hour and a half or longer
regardless of what has NOT happened, the BS level has increased
exponentially. Further, to increase the number of viewers/readers,
each story (sorry, "news item") has to be bigger and more
attention getting then the last (a fact quickly picked up on by the
politicians). The result has been: "enough fireworks to blow up the
house / square block / 2 times n2 city blocks; the M80 that equaled
1/4, 1/2, one, two or more sticks of dynamite; the $200,000 worth of
Class C in a garage (so cleverly hidden, a bomb-sniffing dog was
needed to find it) and the 50 pounds of dangerous "bomb making
chemicals" seized (including a bag of charcoal, and 10 pounds of
kitty-litter). At least the current "crack crisis" has gotten the media
mind off fireworks. I just hope the hype continues until after the
next 4th.

Speaking of crack or whatever else is hot by the time this is pub-
lished, we do not need a national police force. The current hoopla
over crack (if last week's bust was 10 mil, you know this week's has
to be 12 mil, or it wouldn't make the 6 o'clock news) has resulted in
the call for the Armed Forces to be used to perform police
functions. I call this the Pandora's Box/Banana Republic solution.
Ask a visitor from almost any South American country for details.

File it under "lies, damned lies, and statistics", numbers intended
only to generate stories so politicians can get their faces on the
evening news, e.g., they gave officer Smith a list of 15 suspects to
arrest: five littering, five overdue library books, four jay walking,
and one a heavily armed and extremely dangerous felon. Officer
Smith made 14 arrests in one week! (Guess which ones.) The
number of arrests looked might good on the evening news.

"Equipped to"

The WiZard is In - 13-12-2010 at 14:10

You know what comes up all the time ...
The defendant was equipped to — make bombs/
fireworks/poisons gases/weapons of mass destruction/&c.

My standard reply to they who proffer such - you/your
daughter/mother are equipped to be whores.

What does that prove?!

Substituting Mother Theresa depending on the circumstances would
be a wise thing to do! As my lawyer said to me years ago —
Detective offices are on the second floor of the precinct -
you would be surprised at the numbers of defendants that fall
down the stairs.

Pages: 1 2