;
  • Report:  #1174659

Complaint Review: Henry County sheriffs - McDonough Georgia

Reported By:
Darryl - McDonough , Georgia,
Submitted:
Updated:

Henry County sheriffs
100 Henry Parkway McDonough, 30253 Georgia, USA
Phone:
770-288-6272
Web:
http://henrycountysheriff.net/Portals/4/PDF/FCDTF%20Web%20Site%20Page%205-26-11.pdf
Tell us has your experience with this business or person been good? What's this?
Report Attachments

Hello, Randy Travis 

My name is Darryl Mattox, I was recently arrested by the Henry County (Henry County Special Investivation Unit ) here in McDonough, Ga 30253 and I would would like to report an unlawful entry and excessive force investigation to Henry County 

I.C.E. Task Force  

on Tuesday Septemper the 2nd I recieved a knock on my door here in my apartment community at (Mandalay Villas) Town Center Parkway Dr here in Henry county Georgia From unknowingly Two Undercover i.c.e task force officers I first stated immediatly who is it and I got no answer saying police or search warrant or any other proper response. Me not knowing if the knock on the door was maintaince that had been scheduled the previous week I did want to keep them waiting so I open my front door to have ice task force officers force there way into my residence while stating to me that I had already know why they where there stating that my (Three Japanese Maple Trees) where indeed marijuana and that's why they where there.

once they where inside forcing me to the floor I was repeatedly struck by close hands in the face while I had possibly both set of knees in my back while I am laying on my stomach by one  and or both officers that entered my home while all the while they where inside apprehending me telling  me to stop resisting. As soon as the door opened they attack me and forced there way inside with out properly identifing themselves as officers or showing me a search warrant or arrest warrant. they came into my home unlawfully and forcibly  because they suspected that my 3 Japanese maple plants where indeed marijuana and I was booked into the Henry County Jail Shorty After and charge With intent to distribute marijuana and manufacturing marijuana along with posseion of marijuana less then an oz. I was received bond for the 3 charges after staying over night and having a bond hearing the next day and set bond at $15,000



9 Updates & Rebuttals

Darryljr

McDonough ,
Georgia,
PLAYING

#2Author of original report

Mon, September 08, 2014

#1 General Comment

Playing..

AUTHOR: Tyg - ()

 YOU are STILL attempting to play the victim!! ATTEMPTING?? You can rebut all you like. ARE WE IN CHURCH? YOU can make accusations against me all you like. THRRE YOU WORDS!! It STILL wont change FACTS!!! AND EXACTLY WHAT ARE THE FACTS?? LAWYER ARE YOU? Perhaps instead of wasting time playing the victim, you should look up what is commonly called "PLAIN VIEW CRIMES". ??? RIGHT PLAIN VIEW OF???  You would be amazed. the Law about plain view crimes varies from state to state, but the underlaying premisis is that if a crime is commited in front of an officer of the Law, or that if a crime is being commited INSIDE a building and the officer becomes aware of said crime, that THEY DONT NEED A WARRENT!!!! ???? WHO ARE YOU KIDDING YOUR PECKERWOOD a*s WOULD USE DOMISTIC VIOLENCE AS AN EXAMPLE I will give you an example. Lets say a cop is walking by an apartment complex building, and through the front window they see someone beating up their wife or commiting murder. Now IF the police had to wait for a warrant then odds are the VICTIM of the crime is going to be worse off or expire. In cases such as that, NO WARRENT IS NEEDED!!! In YOUR case, YOU had plants that looked EXACTLY LOOOOOOOOOOKED LIKE ???? like pot plants on YOUR PATIO!!! ON MY PATIO WHERE PLANS GO TO SOAK UP THE SUN By definition of the law, the police DID NOT NEED A WARRENT!!!! FUNNY YOUR STILL SAYING THEY DIDNT NEED ONE YOU YOURSELF WILL BE SURPRISED ON HOW WELL VERSED THE LOCAL COUNTY LAWS ARE IN GEORGA.. YOU know these are special plants from the far east, the cops (ONLY SAW WEED!!!) Since the supposed pot plants WERE in PLAIN VIEW to SOMEONE, WOW HOW STUPID COULD YOU BE TOO SELL DRUGS AND HAVE THEM GROWING OUTSIDE)?????????? ARE YOU DUMB OUR JUST PLAINT IGNORANT BECAUSE ARE REALLY SEEM TO THINK THERE WHERE DRUG  they have right of entry. As I said before, its was a lucky break for the cops because (YOU DID HAVE WEED)!! WHO SAID I HAD WEED THEY CHARGED ME WITH IT JUST AS THEY CHARGED ME WITH THE OTHERS RIGHT EXACTLY?? YOU can argue semantics all you like, the LAW is on the polices side. FUNNY YOU SAY THAT THE LAW IS ON THE POLICE SIDE YOU SEEM TO NOT UNDERSTAND EXACTLY WHO IS OBOVE YOU AND YOUR PITY PARTY DEPARTMENT??? (If YOU had NO DRUGS in YOUR RESIDENCE, then YOU would (AND I DO THANKS FOR CLARIFYING THAT FOR ME) have a 100% solid civil rights case)??? THANKS FOR MAKING IT VERY CLEAR TO ME AND THANKS FOR SUPPORTING ME SLL THIS TIME!!! Even the Judge is going to tell you it was unwise to have plants that look remotely like weed (WHILE having) THEY CHARGED ME WITH JUST LIKE THE PLANTS MR SMART a*s THERE WAS NO WEED HOW MANY TIMES DO YOU HAVE TO HEAR THAT YOU CANT UNDERSTAND OBVIOUSLY?? weed in YOUR residence. Its a "cart before the horse" situation. ????? YOU SHOULD DO STAND UP/ YOU had plants that looked like they were illegal, KEY WORD LOOKED !! THEN you have??? (DIDNT HAVE ANYTHERE SINCE WHEN DO YOU THINK YOU GUYS ARE STRAIGHT COPS ITS BEEN GOING ON FOR YEARS AN HENRY COUNTY GEORGIA ???? RIGHT?? IS YOUR COUNTY POLICE NOT AT THIS VERY MOMENT IN THE NEWS??? RIGHT  illegal substances in YOUR RESIDENCE??? YOUR FUNNY.  Yes (YES THANKS FOR CLEARING THAT UP FOR ME NOW I KNOW EXACTLY WHAT IS WHAT YOUR AWESOME) the preceeding act of entry into your home WOULD have?? AND IS RIGHT??  been a clear violation of your forth amendment rights IF ??? IF I DID NOT HAVE ?? you did not have drugs there. Its called an INVESTIGATION for a reason. THEY investigated a report of someone growing drugs on their patio and found (FUNNY YOU SAY AND FOUND ME WITH YOU MUST HAVE COMPLETED THE BAR AND LIE DETECTING BECAUSE YOU SURE ARE TRYING TO MSKE YOURSELF SOUND GOOD LOL YOU REALLY NEED SOMETHING LIKE A CAREER ?!!  YOU in possession of drugs. YOUR WORD (FUNNY YOU ARE SAYING MY WORDS MEAN NOTHING THAT THE SSME THING YOU WELL HEAR VERY SOON YOU THINK SINCE YOUR POLICE YOUR ABOVE THE LAW? YOU WILL HAVE TO ANWESER TO A SUPERIOR FOR ALL ACTIONS THAT TOOK PLACE THAT DAY) means NOTHING in a court of Law!!! ( YES A COURT OF LAW FUNNY YOU SAY THST HOW WILL YOU FEEL WHEN YOU AND YOUR TEAM ARR UNDER FIRE FOR ALL THE WRONG DOING THAT HAVE NOT JUST TOOK PLACE HERE ASWELL AS IN THE FUTURE I AM HERE AS A VOICE FIR ALL THE WRONGDIING YOU ALL HERE IN HENRY COUNTY HAVE BEEN DOING FOR YEARS FROM POLICE ENTERING UNLAWFULY PROFILING RACIAL PROFILING HAVING NEGATIVE HATE TOWARDS BLACKS IN YOUR COUNTY ITS BEEN GOING IN FOR HOW LONG NOW SND YIU GUYS HAVE FINALLY FOUND SOMEONE WITH A VIICE THAT ILL AND IS BEING HEARD AS YOU LOOK!!!!  The police, who ONLY had to (AN YOU WOULD SAY IT WAS BECAUSE YOU KNOW WHDT WAS SET SAID AND DID RIGHT YOUR WHERE NOT THERE WHERE YOU ???? RIGHT,, reasonably assume that what was on YOUR patio WAS indeed pot plants, ????? (THEN YOU FOLLOW WITH ALWAYS WIN?? NOT IN THIS CASE!!!) will ALWAYS win. YOUR word means nothing BECAUSE you had drugs. (AND YOU REPEAT MY WORDS MEAN NOTHING BECAUSE I HAD DRUGS YOU MUST HAVE A PART IN THIS NEVER HAD DRUGS THERE YOU ARE SERIOUSLY TWISTED AND TORTED WITH WHATS THR TRUTH AND WHATS NOT)!!! YOU SHOULD TELL THE COPS YHIS VERY LINE HERE-------->> So EVERYTHING you say in court is going to be suspect. AND THISSS------>I can not fathom HOW you cannot see this. I understand the [BIGindignation that you feel. YOU feel violated. (AND AS YOU SAID CLEARLY WAS)  YOU feel (I FEEL AND I KNOW THEY DIDNT THANKS FOR CLEARING THST UP FOR ME..) as if THEY had (NO RIGHT) RIGHT THEY DIDNT! -------> YOUR WORDS -----> to enter YOUR HOME,(not without a warrant).???? SAY THIS TO YOURSELF ------>> I think you are confusing TV with REAL LIFE. On TV, the police make this big show about getting a warrant. But those same shows also show that the police CAN enter a home or residence --------------->>> (IF THEY ARE SURE)??? -------> REPEAT THIS TO YOURSELF A FEW TIMESSSSS--->> they are sure a crime is being commited. They can also enter a home if someone inside calls for help, and ANYTHING in PLAIN VIEW can be used against you.

Respond to this report!
 What's this?


Tyg

Pahrump,
Nevada,
Playing..

#3General Comment

Mon, September 08, 2014

 YOU are STILL attempting to play the victim!! You can rebut all you like. YOU can make accusations against me all you like. It STILL wont change FACTS!!! Perhaps instead of wasting time playing the victim, you should look up what is commonly called "PLAIN VIEW CRIMES". You would be amazed. the Law about plain view crimes varies from state to state, but the underlaying premisis is that if a crime is commited in front of an officer of the Law, or that if a crime is being commited INSIDE a building and the officer becomes aware of said crime, that THEY DONT NEED A WARRENT!!!! I will give you an example. Lets say a cop is walking by an apartment complex building, and through the front window they see someone beating up their wife or commiting murder. Now IF the police had to wait for a warrant then odds are the VICTIM of the crime is going to be worse off or expire. In cases such as that, NO WARRENT IS NEEDED!!! In YOUR case, YOU had plants that looked like pot plants on YOUR PATIO!!! By definition of the law, the police DID NOT NEED A WARRENT!!!! YOU know these are special plants from the far east, the cops ONLY SAW WEED!!! Since the supposed pot plants WERE in PLAIN VIEW to SOMEONE, they have right of entry. As I said before, its was a lucky break for the cops because YOU DID HAVE WEED!!! YOU can argue semantics all you like, the LAW is on the polices side. If YOU had NO DRUGS in YOUR RESIDENCE, then YOU would have a 100% solid civil rights case. Even the Judge is going to tell you it was unwise to have plants that look remotely like weed WHILE having weed in YOUR residence. Its a "cart before the horse" situation. YOU had plants that looked like they were illegal, THEN you have illegal substances in YOUR RESIDENCE. Yes the preceeding act of entry into your home WOULD have been a clear violation of your forth amendment rights IF you did not have drugs there. Its called an INVESTIGATION for a reason. THEY investigated a report of someone growing drugs on their patio and found YOU in possession of drugs. YOUR WORD means NOTHING in a court of Law!!! The police, who ONLY had to reasonably assume that what was on YOUR patio WAS indeed pot plants, will ALWAYS win. YOUR word means nothing BECAUSE you had drugs. So EVERYTHING you say in court is going to be suspect. I can not fathom HOW you cannot see this. I understand the indignation that you feel. YOU feel violated. YOU feel as if THEY had NO RIGHT to enter YOUR HOME,not without a warrant. I think you are confusing TV with REAL LIFE. On TV, the police make this big show about getting a warrant. But those same shows also show that the police CAN enter a home or residence IF they are sure a crime is being commited. They can also enter a home if someone inside calls for help, and ANYTHING in PLAIN VIEW can be used against you.


Darryljr

McDonough ,
Georgia,
Negative TRY again

#4Author of original report

Sat, September 06, 2014

I will just get plants that LOOK LIKE weed. (since when was it a crime to have plants growing on your premises???? Well, NOW that little "joke" has come back on YOU. (LITTLE joke? funny you should say such) (The lesson is YOU DONT ADVERTISE!!!)????Advertise () WHAT that I know how to grow trees from different parts of the world ?? Half of America smokes it!!! You would know right))??  Possibly MORE!!!!!(ummhumm))  Some people are just so ignorant and dumb that THEY advertise the ILLEGAL activity, NOT a bright idea. | Yet there are SO MANY that use it and YOU would NEVER know!!! | LISTEN TO YOURSELF SOMEPEOPLE?? YOU KNOW MY RACE SO BASICALLY YOUR SAYING (((redacted))) THEY ADVERTISE THERE ILLEGAL ACTIVITY then to make it CLEAR YOU (---> don't advertise it!! THEY don't use it in public or go out in public messed up!)) ( SO YOUR SAYING POLICE PROFILED ME AND THAT (((redacted))) !! One would think that (YOU?) as an adult would understand these little things. (It is STILL ILLEGAL) !!! (Until it is legal)?? right, ((((----> YOU have to be one of those people who NO ONE suspects of drug use)) rasist pregetist or NAH????  After your legal issues are over, GET RID OF THOSEI will just get plants that LOOK LIKE weed. Well, NOW that little "joke" has come back on YOU. The lesson is YOU DONT ADVERTISE!!!! Half of America smokes it!!! Possibly MORE!!!!! Some people are just so ignorant and dumb that THEY advertise the ILLEGAL activity, NOT a bright idea. Yet there are SO MANY that use it and YOU would NEVER know!!! THEY don't advertise it!!! THEY don't use it in public or go out in public messed up!!! One would think that YOU as an adult would understand these little things. It is STILL ILLEGAL!!! Until it is legal, YOU have to be one of those people who NO ONE suspects of drug use. After your legal issues are over, GET RID OF THOSE PLANTS!!!! Unless YOU have an immediate medical need for having them there, then get rid o PLANTS!!! Get rid of what plants oh you mean my very legal Japanese maple no thanks my case is solid PUN I dont need you input ! Unless YOU have an immediate medical need for having them there, then get rid of them!!!" Get rid of what my maples is having them a crime no no NO NO NO next case because this one is what DISMISSED ALONG WITH YOURSELF!!!  NEXT...! PLEASE KNOW YOUR facts IN ITS ENTIRETY before AND AFTER YOU SPEAK on any thing that Is clearly irrelevant TO YOU AND THANK YOU GOODDAY.....


Tyg

Pahrump,
Nevada,
Plants...

#5General Comment

Sat, September 06, 2014

 Dude you had TWO plants that look like weed plants, in PLAIN VIEW!!! THAT would be the extigent circumstance that THEY would need!! THEN you actually have drugs on the premises. Its a compounded issue. To THEM if it looks like a duck ect ect ect. I agree it was a rather shitty thing for them to do, BUT it was brought on by YOUR PLANTS!!!! YOUR CHOICE to have plants in PLAIN VIEW that even remotely look like herb!! You can cry foul all you like, but this is ALL on YOU!!! Then they book YOU for drug possession. there isn't a lawyer around who is going to be dumb enough to represent a case built on YOUR tort evidence. Don't you think the police are WELL versed in what it takes to LEGALLY make entry into a home?? All they have to do is show that from where THEY were viewing the plants, it definatly LOOKED like weed!!! THAT is ALL they need. growing pot plants IS illegal. So by YOUR premiss, THEY had no right to enter YOUR residence, because it was not pot plants. But since it looks like pot plants to them, THEY have right of entry because it LOOKS LIKE a crime is being commited. Then they catch YOU with smokeable processed weed. As I said before, YOU will more then likely skate on the growing charges, BUT they WILL hit you for having weed. Remember, YOU are an adult!! even if YOU don't realize the FULL scope of police powers, THEY STILL HAVE THEM!!!!! YOU are responsible for ANYTHING illegal in YOUR residence. It really just sounds like YOU are trying to get YOUR case overturned simply because the plants ALONE are NOT illegal. If you had no herb on the property, THEN you would have had a 100% civil rights violation case. But since YOU DID have drugs, then what happened was a "lucky break" for the cops. yes the preceeding act of entry was based on a false positive on the plants, BUT the entry in and of itself IS legal because the police REASONABLY BELIEVED that THOSE were pot plants. THAT is ALL the Law requires for a police officer to make entry without a warrant. Im not saying what was done is in ANY WAY right, I AM saying that YOU did this to yourself. The police didn't "plant" the drugs YOU were smoking. You can claim it all you like, but a blood,hair,urine test work up would PROVE that they DID NOT "plant" anything. That the drugs found in YOUR residence were being USED BY YOU and in NO WAY involved the police OTHER then YOUR arrest. YOU need to accept YOUR ROLE in all of this and quit trying to turn the police into bad guys. there are SOME bad cops. But 90% of them are good solid citizens just doing the best job they can. The constitution STOPS a lot of illegal entries. But in this case THEY had JUST CAUSE. YOU can flaunt the Law all you like, but a Judge is NOT going to find YOU having plants that look like weed very funny at all. In fact I can tell you that the Judge is going to look at YOU and ask that since YOU smoke weed, how YOU didn't notice that the plants YOU purchased LOOKED LIKE POT PLANTS!! Ignorance in ANY form is NOT tolerated by the legal system. Judges are about as funny as a car wreck. So the Judge is NOT going to think it "funny" in ANY WAY!!! You and I both KNOW the WHY behind what you did. It looks like a duck but its really a chicken so the cops cant do anything to you. BUT!!! THEY CAN AND DID!!! So its not really funny anymore. The police are MORE like a gun then an investigative unit. SOMEONE, probably a neighbor turned YOU IN for growing pot plants. WHEN this "crime" is investigated, it LOOKS like maybe a hybrid pot plant. So they gain entry and find drugs. The ONLY way this ever worked out for YOU is if you had no drugs there. But you DID have drugs, so THIS is the consequenses of that act.


Darryljr

McDonough ,
Georgia,
Violation of tort laws

#6Author of original report

Sat, September 06, 2014

The term “tort” has been derived from the Latin word “tortum” which means crooked or something twisted. The acts of nuisance, negligence, defamation, assault , trespass, property damage are considered to be the torts. Some torts are also considered to be crimes and are punishable with imprisonment. 

Intentional Torts: An intentional tort would occur when an officer, without justification, intentionally commits an act which is recognized by the law as a tort. For example, if an officer were to use his baton to intentionally strike someone who had done nothing wrong. In the law of torts this would be recognized as a battery. In order to prove a battery; the plaintiff must prove that the officer intentionally caused a harmful or offensive contact to the plaintiff’s body. There are a several intentional torts that, by their nature, are likely to be the subject of lawsuits against police officers. Examples include: assault, battery, intentional infliction of emotional distress, trespassing and false imprisonment. These torts will be examined in detail in the sections on particular police conduct. 

Negligence Actions: Another type of tort for which an officer may be sued is the tort of negligence. There are four basic elements of a negligence action.

  1. A duty owed- All persons generally have a duty to act with reasonable care toward those they come into contact with.
  2. A breach of the duty-A person breaches their duty when they fail to exercise reasonable care.
  3. Causation- The breach of duty must be the cause in-fact and the proximate cause of the plaintiff’s injury.
  4. Damages-The plaintiff must suffer some damages as a result of the breach of duty.

Violation of Civil Rights- 42 U.S.C. sec. 1983: This type of lawsuit is the type that officers most often face. This statute was created in order to provide citizens with a remedy for redressing violations of civil rights. Section 1983 does not create any substantive rights but is a mechanism for enforcing rights that are granted by the United States Constitution or by a federal statue. In order to establish a 1983 claim, a plaintiff must establish that a violation of the Constitution or some federally established right has occurred as a result of some action that was taken under color of state law. The elements of a 1983 action are:

  1. Violation of constitutional or federally protected right.
  2. Violation must have occurred as a result of some action taken “under color of state law.” Under color of state law does not mean action taken pursuant to state law, instead “a misuse of power possessed by virtue of state law and made possible only because the actor is colored with authority of state law” constitutes “color of law.”

    * Monroe v. Pape, 365 U.S. 167 (1961).
  3. The plaintiff must have suffered some damages. It should be noted that courts will sometimes grant “nominal” damages in order to vindicate a plaintiff’s rights. Nominal damages of $1.00 are not uncommon in 1983 actions.

NOTE: The federal courts do not have exclusive jurisdiction over civil rights actions brought under section 1983; thus a plaintiff can bring a lawsuit alleging a violation of civil rights in a state court.

Lawsuits against the agency for a department’s pattern and practice of violating civil rights.

Criminal Actions

  1. State criminal code: It must be recognized that when officers commit an act, which is not justified by some law enforcement purpose, and that act constitutes a crime the officer may be criminally charged. For example, if an officer slaps a compliant suspect for no reason then the officer may be charged with simple assault.
  2. 18 U.S.C. sec. 242: This statute is a federal statute that creates criminal liability for the intentional violation of rights granted by the Constitution or by federal statutes. As a matter of policy the United States Justice Department reserves use of this statute for the most egregious cases. Some considerations which are taken into account before the Justice Department will proceed are: the extent of injuries; the availability of independent witnesses; the history of the officer involved in the incident and whether or not punitive action sufficient to satisfy federal interests have already been imposed. This statute is nearly identical to sec. 1983 in that the government must show that an officer’s action, committed under color of law, has resulted in a violation of Constitutional or federally granted rights. The difficulty that federal prosecutors face when prosecuting a section 242 case is the government's burden to prove that the violation of rights was intentional.
  • Varying Levels of Care:
    1. Simple Negligence-Reasonable Care
    2. Gross Negligence
    3. Shocks the Conscience
      1. Deliberate Indifference: requires a person suing the police to prove that an officer, supervisor or final policy maker knew of and disregarded an excessive risk to person’s federally protected rights
      2. Intent to cause harm unrelated to the legitimate object of arrest.

 

 
       
 

 

LLRMI® is a Division of Public Agency Training Council®

5235 Decatur Blvd Indianapolis, IN 46241 800.365.0119


Darryljr

McDonough ,
Georgia,
They Had No Warrant

#7Author of original report

Fri, September 05, 2014

Police cannot without a warrant enter a private home and search or seize a person or property absent exigent circumstances and reasonable belief that a crime was committed.


Darryljr

McDonough ,
Georgia,
...........he police can only enter your home without an arrest warrant or search warrant if you

#8Author of original report

Fri, September 05, 2014

The police can only enter your home without an arrest warrant or search warrant if you consent to their entry, they are in hot pursuit of a fleeing felon, or an emergency situation. If none of those apply, then you indeed will have a cause of action against the police for unlawful entry.......


Tyg

Pahrump,
Nevada,
So...

#9General Comment

Fri, September 05, 2014

 So you DID have drugs on the premesis, just NOT the PLANTS that they were looking for. Sorry to say this buddy but THOSE look like pot plants. Especially the first pic. The second pic it only KINDA looks like weed. Unfortunatly, YOU probably resisted the arrest, which by the way, IS legal. Which would mean that YOU WERE fighting back, which means they CAN hit YOU in order to secure YOU as a prisoner. Its not NICE, but NOT illegal. THEN....from your own words..................... because they suspected that my 3 Japanese maple plants where indeed marijuana and I was booked into the Henry County Jail Shorty After and charge With intent to distribute marijuana and manufacturing marijuana along with posseion of marijuana less then an oz...........

.YOU HAD DRUGS THERE!!! THEY HAD A WARRENT!!! Guess what....YOU GET ARRESTED!!!!!! YOU smoke the plant so even YOU can see how the cops would suspect YOU of growing herb by looking at THOSE plants. So it IS NOT beyond the scope of their warrant to enter YOUR residence, BECAUSE it LOOKS like a weed plant. If YOU are growing weed on your porch then it stands to reason that YOU do your clean up IN THE RESIDENCE. Now I WOULD support YOUR claim BUT YOU HAD DRUGS IN THE RESIDENCE!!!! THAT pretty much invalidates ALL arguments YOU can put forward.

THEY had a warrant, YOU had drugs. Seems pretty cut and dry, pun intended. While YOU may not agree with or like THEIR tactics, WHAT would you expect them to do?? Answer your question with the truth while YOU are behind a locked door. Possibly getting a gun ready or flushing the drugs down the crapper?? Kinda hard to CATCH the criminal with the drugs if YOU are there to arrest them AND you inform said dealer that YOU are the police. You will probably skate on the growing and distribution charges since there are no pot plants. But YOU have a part in all of this. You and I BOTH KNOW that YOU got those plants BECAUSE they look like mary jane plants. So YOU can stop playing the victim, your hubris and ego are what has gotten YOU into this situation. YOU thought, HA HA!! I smoke it yet IM going to screw with THEM!!!

I will just get plants that LOOK LIKE weed. Well, NOW that little "joke" has come back on YOU. The lesson is YOU DONT ADVERTISE!!!! Half of America smokes it!!! Possibly MORE!!!!! Some people are just so ignorant and dumb that THEY advertise the ILLEGAL activity, NOT a bright idea. Yet there are SO MANY that use it and YOU would NEVER know!!! THEY don't advertise it!!! THEY don't use it in public or go out in public messed up!!! One would think that YOU as an adult would understand these little things. It is STILL ILLEGAL!!! Until it is legal, YOU have to be one of those people who NO ONE suspects of drug use. After your legal issues are over, GET RID OF THOSE PLANTS!!!! Unless YOU have an immediate medical need for having them there, then get rid of them!!! Its obvious that the police DO NOT appreciate the "joke" .


Darryljr

McDonough ,
Georgia,
violation of tort laws

#10Author of original report

Fri, September 05, 2014

  Unlawful entry is considered a violation of tort laws in accordance to trespassing regulations. Trespassing regulations can occur to a person, to a chattel or personal property, and to land. Unlawful entry is considered to fall within the trespass to land category. Unlawful entry can therefore be defined as an intentional action to violate the rights of person over his/her real property. This can entail various situations and it should be noted that unlawful entry does not have to constitute any harm or injury to the actual person to be considered as such. Unlawful entry is simply physically entering a property without the proper consent of the owner.

Reports & Rebuttal
Respond to this report!
Also a victim?
Repair Your Reputation!
//