Quote :

"KopBusters rented a house in Odessa, Texas and began growing two small Christmas trees under a grow light similar to those used for growing marijuana. When faced with a suspected marijuana grow, the police usually use illegal FLIR cameras and/or lie on the search warrant affidavit claiming they have probable cause to raid the house. Instead of conducting a proper investigation which usually leads to no probable cause, the Kops lie on the affidavit claiming a confidential informant saw the plants and/or the police could smell marijuana coming from the suspected house. The trap was set and less than 24 hours later, the Odessa narcotics unit raided the house only to find KopBuster's attorney waiting under a system of complex gadgetry and spy cameras that streamed online to the KopBuster's secret mobile office nearby. The attorney was handcuffed and later released when eleven KopBuster detectives arrived with the media in tow to question the illegal raid. The police refused to give KopBusters the search warrant affidavit which is suspected to contain the lies regarding the probable cause. The team of eleven freedom fighters wore red "Free Yolanda" shirts as they clashed with the police demanding answers for the illegal raid and the drug plant. The police would not comment but later stated they were trying to charge KopBusters with a crime. It is not illegal to grow plants under a light in your home but it is illegal to lie on an affidavit and plant drugs on a citizen. This operation was the first of its kind in the history of America. Police sometimes have other police investigating their crimes but the American court system has never dealt with a group of citizens stinging the police. Will the police file charges on the team who took down the corrupt cops? We will keep you posted."

Possible NSFW site. Someone please embed the videos
http://nevergetbusted.com/node/178


Interesting story. The kicker is that the cops served the warrant only 24 hours after it was set up. I wonder what the outcome of this will be.

12/8/2008 3:50:54 PM

i have this native hibiscus with leaves that look exactly like marijuana leaves


yall should get em, theyre nice plants

that means you can COMPLETELY get em hook line and sinker

gotta go all out man

hell, even tomatoes

12/8/2008 3:54:12 PM

how did the cops even find the "pot" plants so quickly

12/8/2008 3:58:23 PM

well, I see the problem. the cops didn't shoot all of these morons.

12/8/2008 3:59:30 PM

This
is
fucking
awesome
yes
yes
yes
**drool**

12/8/2008 4:01:25 PM

Quote :

"how did the cops even find the "pot" plants so quickly"

12/8/2008 4:05:29 PM

They use illegal imaging systems which I suspect are some type of thermal camera. I also suspect its considered illegal because it violates a right to privacy or illegal search.

He explains it in the video though - this was on digg yesterday.

12/8/2008 4:10:05 PM

good deal...when did this happen?

12/8/2008 4:17:37 PM

Quote :

"how did the cops even find the "pot" plants so quickly"

Did you even read first post. It says it is the 2nd line......

12/8/2008 4:18:12 PM

Another reason to be a Libertarian.

12/8/2008 4:29:11 PM

So what makes the FLIR cameras illegal?

I guess that simply having a grow light is not probable cause for the cops so there is no reason for them to use the thermal cameras, but I don't see why they would be "illegal".

OK answered myself. Violation of 4th amendment, illegal search and seizure

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kyllo_v._United_States

[Edited on December 8, 2008 at 4:38 PM. Reason : 2]

12/8/2008 4:36:14 PM

Quote :

"Did you even read first post. It says it is the 2nd line......"

no, the question is not "how did they find the plants", it was "how did they find the plants so quickly".

If this house was busted in <24 hours, this indicates the house or neighborhood or area was under constant surveillance. It is known that cops do fly-overs with helicopters occasionally, or maybe occasionally drive-bys looking for this kind of stuff, but they cops got a warrant and arranged a raid within a day of turning the lights on, they must have noticed the lights within hours.

12/8/2008 4:50:34 PM

He might have tipped them off himself. His aim is to sell DVD's, after all.

But constant aerial infrared surveillance wouldn't surprise me either.

12/8/2008 4:56:39 PM

I didn't watch the vids, but I imagine they rented a house in a ghetto. They probably also talked to the landlord were like, "hey you don't mind that we grow some plants in here, right? <wink wink, nudge nudge>" and then when moving the stuff in, left it outside for a long time, drawing attention to the pots, soil, lights/fixtures, maybe even asked a neighbor to help them carry it inside. I think they would pretty much have to go over the top to draw attention so the landlord/neighbors would tip the cops off. Uncorroborated anonymous tips aren't enough for probable cause, but I imagine if the landlord went to the police, that would be enough for the warrant to look at the house with infrared cameras or maybe even enough to bust the door down.

That or the Odessa police are really that crazy, constantly watching. I'd believe either to be honest.

12/8/2008 5:01:42 PM

well the guy was pretty convinced the odessa police setup someone else earlier and that they constantly go through areas using the light camera.

my thoughts too are that this is in a poor area.

12/8/2008 5:07:24 PM

They said somewhere that they even fed 'information' to police annon that stuff could be going on at the residence.

12/8/2008 5:26:21 PM

gg kop busters

12/8/2008 7:42:18 PM

So they fed information to the police that they were growing "something" in the house?

While I do think the police overstep their bounds, sounds like this was more of a setup to sell DVDs or play "gotcha" with the police.

12/8/2008 7:58:26 PM

if the police were given multiple reports from different people that all were giving the same evidence..what the hell do you expect to happen? i'm not saying it's right--but if they hadn't done anything somebody would be bitching about that too

12/8/2008 8:00:01 PM

Those FLIR cameras are badass. I recently rented one to use on a project at work. They're so much fun to play around with, looking at people's "hot spots." It cost something like $125 a day to rent, so they're definitely not cheap.

On a side note, it's sometimes possible to monitor people's power consumption as an indicator of what they're doing inside. Usually it's not just the amount of power (kW or kVA) being consumed, but the electrical "fingerprint" based on the indicative current waveforms caused by grow lamps with electronic ballasts.

12/8/2008 8:07:34 PM

YEAH

what HE said!

12/8/2008 8:09:27 PM

cops are crooked

/thread

^^that would probably necessitate a warrant too

[Edited on December 8, 2008 at 8:11 PM. Reason : ^]

12/8/2008 8:11:43 PM

I'd be really curious to hear the legal arguments as to how passive monitoring of some bands of the EM spectrum is legal where other others require warrants.

12/8/2008 8:19:27 PM

it's probably discussed in the scotus decision...

12/8/2008 8:24:50 PM

Quote :

"While I do think the police overstep their bounds, sounds like this was more of a setup to sell DVDs or play "gotcha" with the police."

it's no different than those "To Catch A Predator" shows. Who cares if it is a setup, if the police were doing the right thing then it wouldn't matter.

12/8/2008 10:17:51 PM

Big difference. The guy had people call and give anonymous reports to the police that people were growing stuff in the building or suspicious activities were going on. So the police responded. Not to mention that the guy has no proof that they lied to get the warrant, and until he does call me crazy for being highly suspicious of his claims.

12/9/2008 12:13:27 AM

^

Quote :

"Who cares if it is a setup, if the police were doing the right thing then it wouldn't matter. "

[Edited on December 9, 2008 at 7:04 AM. Reason : ]

12/9/2008 6:53:38 AM

If multiple people report to the police that illegal activity is going on in a location, I expect the police to obtain a warrant and search the location. It's all part of the investigative process (regardless of what the guy selling DVDs says). So the setup bit hinges on whether they just set this house up and let it sit, or if they were actively trying to get the attention of the police.

12/9/2008 8:47:51 AM

I think that if the cops broke the law, they should get prosecuted.
Also, if the setup guys broke the law, I guess they, too, should get prosecuted.
However, if the setup guys broke the law, and the cops also broke the law, but somehow the cops get out of it because the setup guys broke the law, that would be 100% bullshit.

12/9/2008 8:54:26 AM

i haven't seen any article where they said they fed the cops information about something being grown within the house. could someone show me something that says otherwise?

if they did feed them information then it is in fact bullshit. but if they or anyone associated with them did not do it then this is really all on the cops.

12/9/2008 9:10:46 AM

Yea I was speculating in my earlier post as to "how did the cops even find the "pot" plants so quickly." I would like to believe that cops, even in Odessa have something better to do than cruise the streets with infrared cameras looking for weed plants. Furthermore, I'd like to know just how police use FLIR cameras to find such a small grow. If you look at the first picture that joe# posted, you can't see the standing guy's leg/feet heat signature behind that couch or whatever it is. I could understand I guess, if the whole house was lined with high wattage grow lights, but 2 plants, with what, 2 lights in the middle of a room?

As much as I like stickin it to the man, this stunt seems like BS.

12/9/2008 9:23:53 AM

Quote :

"Also, if the setup guys broke the law, I guess they, too, should get prosecuted."

You guess? You guess that they should get prosecuted for distracting police from another legit duty to promote a shitty dvd?

12/9/2008 11:53:08 AM

hah if the douchebag was calling in tips to get the cops over there then he is a retard and damn right he can be charged for that


plus thats bull jive, if thats the case its not police corruption, at least not the kind i gve a damn about

Quote :

"it's no different than those "To Catch A Predator" shows. Who cares if it is a setup, if the police were doing the right thing then it wouldn't matter. "

ha it is different you dipshit, MSNBC wasnt targeting police officers, but criminals that came to the house with specific intent to commit a crime..and then going "nanny-nanny-boo-boo!! WE GOT YOU!!!"

they were working in conjunction with law enforcement to prosecute those with criminal intent, backing it up with evidence of the intent to commit the crime, hell the few cases that they didnt really have anything in the chat logs that was damning they let the dudes walk

Quote :

" think that if the cops broke the law, they should get prosecuted. Also, if the setup guys broke the law, I guess they, too, should get prosecuted. However, if the setup guys broke the law, and the cops also broke the law, but somehow the cops get out of it because the setup guys broke the law, that would be 100% bullshit."

correct me if im wrong about this, im not familiar with how internal police work goes. but it seems to me that if the cop broke procedure in such a fashion as to not obtain a warrant to search, the most that could happen is that the case would be thrown out/whatever evidence was incorrectly obtained would no longer be admissible in court. Im sure thered by an internal reprimand or penalty. But i am not sure if police are actually tried in court over this stuff

either way, it seems to me that assuming your scenario ws true and both parties "fucked up" then they are two seperate fuck ups and both would be tried/dealt with separately. like if the case was to be thrown out for inadmissible evidence, the kid can still be tried for "fuckin with cops"

[Edited on December 9, 2008 at 12:12 PM. Reason : f]

12/9/2008 12:00:37 PM

Quote :

"ha it is different you dipshit, MSNBC wasnt targeting police officers, but criminals "

well, if police are breaking the law, they're criminals.

12/9/2008 12:09:49 PM

whaaaaaaa

The police may have not followed protocol to bust people (or at least convincingly claiming to) break the law.

how about this. get off the fucking couch and do something useful instead of worrying about cops BUSTING PEOPLE FOR BREAKING THE LAW and smoking your stupid fucking drugs

[Edited on December 9, 2008 at 12:10 PM. Reason : .]

12/9/2008 12:09:53 PM

^YEAH, let those cops be corrupt...why should we care

12/9/2008 12:12:15 PM

^^^true.

whats your point?


you cant compare MSNBC to this because they werent targeting uniformed, on duty police officers that have other shit to do. i mean youre right, there was a cop that showed up to the TCAP house

but he wasnt there in the administration of police duty. so your argument fails, basically no ones tax dollars where at work when that pedo cop went to that house, he was not on police time



[Edited on December 9, 2008 at 12:15 PM. Reason : d]

12/9/2008 12:12:44 PM

corrupt? I consider a corrupt cop to be selling drugs, taking hand-outs to not investigate, etc.

Too often cops are hindered in their investigations and arrests because of some stupid protocol/law. Such as in California, cops must post where/when roadblocks will be and allow people to turn around without going through the road block. There are so many stupid laws that don't really help law abiding citizens and cops out.

12/9/2008 12:15:12 PM

this thread started out as perhaps something positive

but now it seems like a "down with the system" pothead paradise

12/9/2008 12:16:30 PM

fabricating evidence and lying to get a warrant is pretty corrupt imo, no matter what their justification.

^the system is generally ok, until you have authority trying to skirt it...people in positions of power should be held to a higher standard. If police are to enforce the law, they damn sure better follow it to the T.



[Edited on December 9, 2008 at 12:20 PM. Reason : .]

12/9/2008 12:17:31 PM

laws regarding criminal justice, etc were put in place for the protection of the innocent. Unfortunately, you potheads have taken them to the point where you think they are laws to protect you from being arrested for breaking the law.

12/9/2008 12:17:33 PM

i am not sure any evidence was fabricated


they didnt exactly uproot the trees and stick a sack of dro in the pots

12/9/2008 12:18:35 PM

Quote :

"laws regarding criminal justice, etc were put in place for the protection of the innocent. "

and a cop breaking the law isn't innocent.

12/9/2008 12:19:49 PM

haha and im pretty sure those idiot lit up at some point during that time, so i personally do not believe it is farfetched that the police smelled burnin lettuce

12/9/2008 12:20:05 PM

the only reason that happens is because liberal judges and you potheads have forced the interpretation of laws to the protection of criminals .

if you keep tying cops hands, they're going to have to do something.


Let's see, if I call up the cops and tell them I've committed a crime and there's evidence in my house, the only thing cops should have to do is show up.

12/9/2008 12:21:53 PM

The fabricated evidence has to do with somebody related to the guy who started kop busters.

Quote :

"The Odessa narcotics unit illegally compelled an informant to plant drugs on Yolanda Madden. The informant testified in federal court he planted the drugs on her and he passed a polygraph confirming the same. Yolanda also passed a polygraph along with a hair follicle and urine test. Our broken criminal justice system ignored the evidence and railroaded her through court sentencing her to 8 years in prison."

I dunno how much of that is legit, but that is what they claim.

12/9/2008 12:23:12 PM

Quote :

"Let's see, if I call up the cops and tell them I've committed a crime and there's evidence in my house, the only thing cops should have to do is show up."

12/9/2008 12:23:51 PM

so it's ok to justify breaking the law if its for the right reasons I see now.

[Edited on December 9, 2008 at 12:24 PM. Reason : .]

12/9/2008 12:23:56 PM

do you even have proof of these cops breaking the law? Or just the word of a potheaded, biased group, set out to catch cops?

The thing is, I'm not sure they were really breaking the law, considering the proper and original interpretation of the law (protection of the innocent).

[Edited on December 9, 2008 at 12:27 PM. Reason : .]

12/9/2008 12:25:19 PM

no, and they might not have been...I'm sure that will come to light, but for you to defend the breaking of the law by those sworn to enforce it is laughable.

12/9/2008 12:27:31 PM