Jump to content
SASS Wire Forum

Legal question ?


Widder, SASS #59054

Recommended Posts

The local LEO's track a murder suspect to a Lawyers office (the suspects Lawyer).

 

They have a warrant for his arrest.

 

Laying inside a glass bookcase in the Lawyers office is a weapon that the LEO believes is the murder weapon and ceases the weapon without the approval of the Lawyer.

 

Its proven thru various test that the weapon IS the murder weapon.    

 

QUESTION:  can that weapon be used in court as evidence against the suspect OR, can the defendants Lawyer object based on it being seized without a search warrant for the Lawyers office?   In other words, would it be considered Illegally seized by the LEO?

 

..........Widder

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It will probably be admissible since it was “in plain sight”.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Search and seizure law is all over the place. Was it within the area of the suspects control, plain sight etc. The gun is not going to grow legs, so best to err on the side of caution and secure the glass bookcase, and get a search warrant. Regardless of how the evidence was collected a lawer will file for a suppression hearing and try to get incriminating evidence tossed.

Is it nice to have the murder weapon, absolutely, but tens of thousands of murder cases have been successfully prosecuted without the murder weapon ever being recovered.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Arrest the lawyer for the murder. I think things will work their way out from their. Especially after holding for 24 hours and then possibly a 72 psych evaluation. 

 

Is that abuse? You bet. 

 

I am am not a lawyer but I am sure in some way one of those 2, the lawyer or the suspect, is going to jail and someone’s got to fess up or maybe they both go to jail.

 

I would say more but then it would get political so I will just leave it at that.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Howdy,

Most of my legal training comes straight from TV.

But I would bet my dollar the JUDGE will decide that.

And another dollar that which ever way it goes it will be appealed.

There is a local case where a fella was imprisioned with no murder weapon

and no BODY.  The woman is missing. 

And every year or two there is a story about someone being found

after being missing for years....  Gotta wonder.

Best

CR

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

My experience, and a lot of it, defense attorneys do not have to tell the truth, only the prosecution has to be honest. Suspect brings the recording that was taken of him murdering someone for the attorney to hide. Counsel does not have to share that info with the prosecutor or wants to know how suspect obtained it. Same as defense attorney enters not guilty for the defendant, defendant found guilty, was the lawyer lying to the court and he knew defendant was guilty in the first place. Maybe those attorneys should go to jail and serve the same amount of time as the defendant. Now another true story, suspect bit a woman on her breast then murdered her. Suspect caught, teeth impression taken with search warrant and match the bite mark. The suspect's attorney knowing this has defendant's teeth filed while in jail, they take impression which of course does not match the bite mark. Prosecutor found out about this and took the impression also after the filing to compare with the two they now have and of course they do not match which was shown to the jury in trial. Of course he was found guilty of murdering the teen girl and nothing done with the attorney for trying what he did....

Link to comment
Share on other sites

They had a warrant for the suspect not the lawyer. "In plain sight" may, repeat, may allow it in court, BUT we play safe, arrest the suspect as per the warrant, contain the lawyers office UNTIL a judge will issue a warrant for the weapon. That also is 'iffy'. How do we know the weapon was the murder weapon? Lots of questions with out knowing all the facts. Personally I would go with getting a search warrant for the lawyers office and if obtained there is no question in court about the weapon being admissible during the trial.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The basic test for seizing evidence is, If you've got a legal right to see it, you can seize it.  If the police play their cards right, they can seize the gun and depending on the circumstances, list the lawyer as a witness for the prosecution.    I can think of a circumstance where the lawyer could be open to criminal charges for possession of stolen property if he knew or should have known the gun was stolen.  Tampering with evidence may also fit in some jurisdictions, depending on the circumstances.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I been sittin' on the sidelines, reading this and thinking, "This is worthy of me".

 

Let's ignore that it's a lawyer and a weapon.

 

If Widder was at my house when the cops came to arrest him, and there's a lid sitting on the table, they can seize it. Reefer's illegal.

 

But if there was a pistol on the table, I don't see how they could touch it (they probably would, but that's another thread). My gun, in my house. Perfectly legal, where I live, to have them laying around, no lock on it, fully loaded. Has nothing to do with Widder's crime.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, The Original Lumpy Gritz said:

Could Widder be related to Alpo? :lol:

OLG

 

Thank you.....That's a compliment..... :D

 

Alpo and his threads probably garner more interest and discussions in the Saloon than some of the rest of us combined.

 

Of course, hanging around the Saloon doesn't say much for some of us..... :lol::lol:

 

..........Widder

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Widowmaker Hill SASS #59054 said:

 

 

Of course, hanging around the Saloon doesn't say much for some of us..... :lol::lol:

 

..........Widder

 

 

Just think of all the free entertainment we get- :lol:

OLG

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, DocWard said:

 

Did I ever mention I play piano in a brothel for a living?

 

Thread just brought back some really, really bad memories with attorneys and I let them get to me this time. Sorry

thumbs up.jpg

Link to comment
Share on other sites

A lawyer knowingly having possession or knowledge about physical instruments of a crime (For example the murder weapon) becomes a very complicated issue. In many jurisdictions the lawyer would be legally required to turn the weapon in.

Apparently Attorney / Client privilege does have limits.

 

The news letter in my link above plays devils advocate with this very issue.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well, after reading the above post, I've come to this conclusion:

 

1.  Would it be considered legal for the LEO to seize the weapon in the Lawyers possession without a proper search warrant?  Maybe so, maybe not.

 

2.  Would such evidence be allowed permissible in court?   Maybe so, maybe not.

 

Thanks everyone for your comments and thoughts.

 

Merry Christmas.

 

 

..........Widder

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use.