Are there drug dogs at amtrak

Instead either Kurup or Moore told him that the dog had shown strong interest in the room. The government tried to claim Estes had voluntarily consented to the search. Estes maintained there was nothing "voluntary" about the entire situation -- beginning with him being ordered to end his phone call all the way through to the officers' misleading portrayal of the drug dog's actions. The court agrees with Estes. The United States has not met its burden to show that consent by Estes was freely and voluntarily given.

When initially asked, Estes expressly refused to consent to the search of his room or his bags. The context in which the statements were made strongly suggested that if Estes did not now consent to a search, his bags would be seized and a search warrant would be obtained.

Particularly after refusing to consent to a search just minutes before, the court does not find that a free and voluntary consent to search then occurred. Going further, the court notes that it is "troubled by the lack of credibility which permeates Kurup's testimony in this case. Kurup described a very consensual and casual conversation with Estes on the train platform. The fact is that the encounter with Estes had been carefully planned by the drug interdiction team composed of Kurup, Detective Moore, and canine Officer Hill.

When Kurup approached Estes on the train platform, there was an obvious immediacy in the encounter. Then there's Kurup's misleading depiction of the drug dog's actions.

Further concern arises after the dog did not alert to the room, which was a fact only appreciated by Kurup and the police officers. Notwithstanding the clear lack of probable cause for a search and seizure, Estes was then informed that the dog had shown serious interest in the room. Estes would likely have no idea of the difference between an alert and only interest in the room. At no time was Estes told of his right to refuse consent. Finally, while Kurup alleges Estes gave consent, there is no independent verification of this actually happening.

And, just like that, the marijuana baggie and illegal weapon are gone. The average citizen isn't going to know the difference between "interest" and an "alert" when watching a drug dog in action -- something officers like Kurup are more than happy to take advantage of.

And, as this case highlights, the difference between the two apparently has little effect on law enforcement's actions. Kurup likely thought he had a chance to snag a pile of guilty cash or at least participate in a decently-sized drug bust. Instead, all he found after misleading Estes and engaging in a warrantless search was an illegal possession charge -- one that won't stick with all of the supporting evidence stripped away.

Thank you for reading this Techdirt post. We work hard every day to put quality content out there for our community. Techdirt is one of the few remaining truly independent media outlets. We do not have a giant corporation behind us, and we rely heavily on our community to support us, in an age when advertisers are increasingly uninterested in sponsoring small, independent sites — especially a site like ours that is unwilling to pull punches in its reporting and analysis.

But in order to continue doing so, we need your support. We offer a variety of ways for our readers to support us, from direct donations to special subscriptions and cool merchandise — and every little bit helps. Thank you. Filed Under: amtrak , drug dog , illegal search , madhu kurup , shaun estes. Subscribe: RSS. View by: Time Thread. I never had a gun, never had any "personal use marijuana" it was planted so know the facts!!

Ironically the same officers pulled an similar stunt on to Caucasian guys in a case that occurred not to long before mine United States v. I was in jail for 13 months for this case. After it was over I filed a civil suit against the officer Madhu Kurup and won.

However when I was searching for a lawyer to file a civil suit against the jail in hopes to get back all the money I spent while I was in jail as well as false imprisonment and a few other things they strung me along and turned me down and now They're telling me that I've exceeded the statue of limitations as if it was my fault no one wanted to take my case.

I believe that should be another article, "having a right to council in a criminal case but not a civil case. If you could help me with any information I would greatly appreciate it! Have a Techdirt Account? Sign in now. Want one? Register here. Subscribe to the Techdirt Daily newsletter. Comment Options: Use markdown. Use plain text. Make this the First Word or Last Word. No thanks. Become an Insider! This feature is only available to registered users. Register or sign in to use it.

Sign In Register Preferences. Thu, May 5th pm — Tim Cushing. If you liked this post, you may also be interested in Anonymous Coward , 5 May pm. Protecting the guilty from that illegally acquired evidence Or is it forged evidence?

Did they actually have evidence of finding those things at the scene other than the detective saying they did? Anonymous Coward , 2 Mar am. Kratoklastes profile , 5 May pm. I am surprised that the writer of this piece didn't mention the now-established fact that drug-detection dogs and explosives-detection dogs are strongly influenced by 'cues' from their handlers.

See, for instance, "Handler beliefs affect scent detection dog outcomes" Animal Cognition May; 14 3 : — My take on it - based on my very VERY dim view of anybody who wants to be a cop - is that all pigs including Amtrak's version of Paul Blart should be required to use body cameras at all times The State has a massive advantage over the tax-livestock, and so its case should need to pass the highest possible hurdle and its evidence should need to be unimpeachable.

Bad people might go free under such a system - but only if the pigs don't comply with the rules. Why such a set of constraints? Well, the median pig has is a pretty stupid individual and was a high-school under-performer exhibit A: many of them are former military ORs - known since the detritus of the labour market; exhibit B: they reveal a fortiori that they want to wield power over other people, but are restricted to the very bottom of the range of careers open to megalomaniacs.

These are not traits that select for honestly or adherence to rules that force the State into rights-observance. Plus, there's that whole "signing up to enforce the law, regardless of how obviously-wrong the law is" thing Pigs are worse-than-Beta, at the median - leaving aside the whole puppy-shooting schtick and the '12 year olds get executed if they don't comply within 2 seconds' , just ask any woman who has gone out with a pig, how things go when the relationship ends.

Small-N samples are problematic, but I know about a dozen women who dated cops and 5 men - and every single one of them was harassed when they put an end to the relationship. This is more evidence that pigs are psychotypically abnormal. I'm in no way religious, but Erasmus really nailed it when discussing the sort of person who is attracted to the 'profession' of soldiering - and the same type of person albeit a slightly-more-cowardly version is attracted to law enforcement.

From Erasmus' Panegyric : At the first mention and whiff, as it were, of a campaign, the dregs of humanity are roused to come out of their hiding-places, and collect like bilge-water from all over the world: men burdened by disgrace or debt or fearful of the threats of the law on account of their misdeeds, or men who are conscious of their crimes and so think they cannot be safe in time of peace, or who have dissolutely squandered their capital and are now led astray by sordid poverty to the worse crime of robbing others.

Finally, there are men whose evil disposition and evil mind so act on them as if they were born for crime that they would have dared to do such things at the risk of their lives even without the prospect of going unpunished or the offer of pay. If indeed we learn nothing so easily as depravity, there is also nothing so difficult to forget. Anonymous Coward , 6 May am. Mark Wing , 5 May pm. Thank you, train detectives, for keeping the streets safe from small amounts of marijuana.

JoeCool profile , 5 May pm. Nevada requires a concealed weapon permit, which he almost assuredly didn't have.

Ironically, he probably would have been better off legally with the gun in a holster at his side, but they might have started with shooting him if he did. Bergman profile , 6 May am. Yes it does, but he wasn't concealing it if it was in his luggage. Concealed refers to how you carry it on your person, not merely failing to superglue it to your forehead while it is in your possession.

JoeCool profile , 6 May am. In your carry-on luggage on a trip would be considered in your possession by LEO. This wasn't a bag in the closet at home, or a locked, checked bag in the baggage compartment. It's equivalent to being in a purse for a woman, which would be considered concealed carrying. Deputy Dickwad , 6 May am. Stupid peon's are not allowed to have Schedule I drugs and a weapon, just me.

When you've got a regular weapon, a gun phone, a tazer grenade, a sharpened toothbrush, whatever I plant a little if the sticky icky on you, and Blammo! Illegal weapon even if the weapon was not illegal before!

Too much good stuff! I'm lovin it! Can we stop calling them police officers and call them what we call everyone else that does illegal things. Or even better just write it as Criminal cops. And that dog will be able to detect if somebody has explosives. Often unnoticed by most of the rail agency's passengers, the four-legged security guards relentlessly scour the crowded concourses and platforms, looking for trouble.

The animals are specially trained "vapor wake" dogs, custom-bred to serve a very specific function: detecting the microscopic traces of explosives, which trail in the air behind would-be bombers. They were sampling the molecules those passengers left behind.

He knows what the mission is. On that morning in Chicago, decoys sent through the crowds, carrying real explosives under their clothing, were quickly identified.

Often, that identification came after the bombers passed. But at that point, the dogs caught the telltale scent of explosives, swiveled, and locked in on their prey, leading handlers to the danger. And you may think, this is not the station I want to attack. Amtrak officials argue that the randomness and unpredictability of the K-9 program adds to its effectiveness.

Indeed, in a recent hearing on Capitol Hill, the Amtrak dogs were held up as the gold standard of what security could be. I'll give you 10 whole body imaging machines. You give me 5, people in another room.