Last week in New York, a Federal judge threw out key evidence that would prove a defendant guilty of Federal drug charges. The defendant had over 4 million dollars' worth of cocaine and heroine in her car, and voluntarily confessed on videotape that she had made the trip over 20 times to pick up drugs. The arresting officers witnessed four men putting duffle bags into the trunk of her car at 5 a.m. in the morning. They did not speak to her, and then fled the scene when spotted. Unbelievably however, the judge decided that the police had no cause to be suspicious. Even the New York Times called the judge's reasoning, tortured. It is absolutely incredible that this case was dismissed, and the defendant will go unpunished due to a technicality, which would be corrected if the Exclusionary Rule Reform Act was in effect. Last February the House passed this bill, which extends the exclusionary rule's good faith exception to warrantless searches. If the police have a reasonable good faith belief that a drug crime is occurring, as in this case, common sense should dictate that they be allowed to act accordingly. As a former Suffolk County assistant district attorney, I have seen firsthand the effects of drugs on our communities. It is about time we let our law enforcement officials do their job without tying their hands. We need this bill to become law so we can avoid such outrageous situations in the future.
Rick Lazio: “Last week in New York, a Federal judge threw out key evidence that would prove a defendant guilty of Federal drug…”
Editor's note · Context
Addressing the dismissal of a drug case due to a judge's ruling on evidence.
Share
More from Rick Lazio
Mr. Speaker, today is the 10th anniversary of a landmark piece of civil rights legislation, the Americans with Disabilities Act. It is in that spirit that I rise in support of the Developmental Disabilities Assistance and Bill of Rights…
He's not going to do it. Anybody that's lived a life of fraud, like this, is not going to do anything that's the right thing.
At some point, the party leaders need to press him for an actual credible plan, which I think he's largely lacking.
Do I think he might - maybe should think a little bit longer-term, about the perception, of the party, of tolerating unethical, probably illegal behavior? Absolutely.





