“The Court further explained that the liberty component of the Due Process Clause protects persons from unwarranted government intrusions into a dwelling or other private places and also protects other spheres of our lives and existence, outside the home, where the State should not be a dominant presence. 109 The Court affirmed that “Freedom extends beyond spatial bounds. Liberty presumes an autonomy of self that includes freedom of thought, belief, expression, and certain intimate conduct. The instant case involves liberty of the person both in its spatial and more transcendent dimensions.”
-Pg. 986 RUTGERS LAW JOURNAL Vol. 37:971 “THE RIGHT OF PRIVACY IN STATE CONSTITUTIONAL
LAW” by Jeffrey M. Shaman
This journal article back up what I am saying. I am NOT saying that police CANNOT arrest someone in private without a warrant. If you get arrested and they don’t have a warrant, you should discuss it with your attorney to a federal civil rights lawsuit against the police and the department.
I think that police should discuss this matter of unwarranted government intrusion with the District Attorney Office before doing a escort or hobby sting. It is WRONG for police to arrest people without due process of law or misapply the law. I understand there is probable cause but arresting people without following the laws is WRONG. Probable cause is evidence that a crime may of occur. But it doesn't mean that cops can ignore the requirement of due process of law or misapplying the law. Originally Posted by frontman667
You are wrong. Probable cause is not evidence that a crime may occur. It is evidence that suggests that a crime did occur. When someone purchases a gun then a murder may occur, but since it has not occurred there is no crime and therefore no evidence to collect. What would a warrant be for? To collect evidence of a crime in the future? Give it up. You are not an attorney and you are dangerous to those that read you.