drug dealer loses his stash

[bababouy]

After watching this place for a while, we have grown used to where the drug dealers hide their stash. We notified the street gang unit for this department and told them that we were seeing quite a bit of drug activity and would they like to know whats going on. They were aware of the individuals that frequent the bar in the plaza and said to call them directly when things looked suspicious.

Our team observed this subject as he stashed a package on the side of the dumpster, then departed the area. We notified our contact that was on duty that night and told him what we were seeing. They responded a few minutes later and checked out the package. It turned out that there were about 50 individual bags of cocaine in a sock. Each baggie contained one gram. The officers decided to take the package and told us to notify them if or when these guys came back for the package. The rest kinda speaks for itself.

 

[looney2ns]

Now that's funny stuff.

The people leave their cars parked back there should give that a second thought.

 

[erkme73]

It's a good thing the cops showed up. Hopefully they informed the perps how they knew what was going down. If they hadn't showed up, I'm sure that would have turned into a violent exchange between the seller and the buyer... "You ripped me off" either would claim, bang, bang. Especially since you can't call the cops to report a fraudulent transaction when it comes to illicit drugs.

Of course if the the cops don't tell them how they knew of the bust, the buyers may still think they've been set up by the seller.

Imagine if these drugs were legally available (strictly regulated and controlled)... All of this criminal activity would no longer be the only avenue to obtain them. Makes too much sense - and yet look at the resources wasted and the crimes committed, all as a consequence of having no legal way to obtain an item for which there will always be demand.

 

[drew91101]

Imagine if these drugs were legally available (strictly regulated and controlled)... All of this criminal activity would no longer be the only avenue to obtain them. Makes too much sense - and yet look at the resources wasted and the crimes committed, all as a consequence of having no legal way to obtain an item for which there will always be demand.

Look what happened with prohibition..that worked out well [insert sarcasm here]. But you are right, makes too much sense.

 

[Smitty Blackstone]

If it were legal, and there was no need for huge spending for this war on drugs, many people would be out of work.
Hmmm.

Sent from my SM-N920P using Tapatalk

 

[drew91101]

Its a good thing we have the government to solve all of our problems!!

 

[Fastb]

Bababouy,

The police didn't catch the perps with the drugs in their possession, nor did they witness the perps making the stash.
I've heard claims that video evidence, on its own, is not enough to convict (at least in Seattle). Probably varies by jurisdiction.
Q: Does Nighthawk provide video evidence to the Police?
Q: Do you know if "video evidence only" (ie: no LEO eye-witness) is enough for a conviction?

Good work, by the way. I'm getting pretty familiar with that alley!

Fastb

 

[bababouy]

Bababouy,

The police didn't catch the perps with the drugs in their possession, nor did they witness the perps making the stash.
I've heard claims that video evidence, on its own, is not enough to convict (at least in Seattle). Probably varies by jurisdiction.
Q: Does Nighthawk provide video evidence to the Police?
Q: Do you know if "video evidence only" (ie: no LEO eye-witness) is enough for a conviction?

Good work, by the way. I'm getting pretty familiar with that alley!

Fastb

@Fastb The minutes after the cops departed, and before or while the guys in the pick up returned, our team was able to send the officers a clip of the drop. They watched it on their laptops and told us to call them direct if someone returned for the package. They have become familiar with our service and have grown to trust us when we call in a suspicious call like this. You can see one of the officers on his cell phone during the initial discovery of the package. This is because the dispatcher told them that the package was in the dumpster. once the officers were en-route, they called our monitoring center and we were able to direct them to the right spot.

To answer your questions Fastb, video evidence, such as this one, is definitely enough for conviction here in FL. We have customers all over the U.S. and we have never had a problem prosecuting a suspect in a crime that we assisted in arresting.

 

[erkme73]

@Fastb The minutes after the cops departed, and before or while the guys in the pick up returned, our team was able to send the officers a clip of the drop. They watched it on their laptops and told us to call them direct if someone returned for the package. They have become familiar with our service and have grown to trust us when we call in a suspicious call like this. You can see one of the officers on his cell phone during the initial discovery of the package. This is because the dispatcher told them that the package was in the dumpster. once the officers were en-route, they called our monitoring center and we were able to direct them to the right spot.

To answer your questions Fastb, video evidence, such as this one, is definitely enough for conviction here in FL. We have customers all over the U.S. and we have never had a problem prosecuting a suspect in a crime that we assisted in arresting.

And, if you're dealing with your average, not-so-bright criminal, they don't lawyer up, and when the see the video evidence, they melt.

 

[hmjgriffon]

@Fastb The minutes after the cops departed, and before or while the guys in the pick up returned, our team was able to send the officers a clip of the drop. They watched it on their laptops and told us to call them direct if someone returned for the package. They have become familiar with our service and have grown to trust us when we call in a suspicious call like this. You can see one of the officers on his cell phone during the initial discovery of the package. This is because the dispatcher told them that the package was in the dumpster. once the officers were en-route, they called our monitoring center and we were able to direct them to the right spot.

To answer your questions Fastb, video evidence, such as this one, is definitely enough for conviction here in FL. We have customers all over the U.S. and we have never had a problem prosecuting a suspect in a crime that we assisted in arresting.

Prepare for competition, this is way too cool of a business idea.

 

[TonyR]

Great stuff! Better than what's on the tube right now!

 

[Parley]

I love your videos. Keep posting them.

 

[erkme73]

Nice idea, now go and tell that to the dozens of people I looked after in one of the medium secure mental health units in the recent past here in the U.K. Every single one of them was there because of illicit substance use. Every one of them thought that it would not affect them. Every one of them was wrong, and it's not going to go back into the box for any of them today or at any point in the future. Their lives are buggered. Some will never be let out, and the ones that are eventually let out will almost certainly be a blight on society and everyone that lives anywhere near them.

I commend you for having the heart to help those in need. But, the fact that some people are predisposed (genetically), or situationally, doesn't justify the completely insane war on drugs. People still huff paint, glue, dental sedation gasses, etc. Simply making something illegal, and investing trillions (globally) will not somehow prevent abuse.

What we do know is that the number and severity of problems that arise from making drugs illegal are FAR greater than the problems the drugs themselves create. I won't bother preaching (and I'm already sorry for hijacking @bababouy topic) what all those 'unintended consequences' are, but if drugs were legal, and we invested just 5% of what is currently being spent on enforcement (DEA locally, state, nationally, globally), judicially (mandatory sentencing), and incarcerations (with only 5% of the worlds population, the US is home to 20% of the world's prisoners), we could actually provide care to those those addicted at a level that exceeds even the most optimistic hopes.

50 years ago, the THC compound in marijuana (the component that produces the high) was, at best, about 3%. Today, there are strains that are over 30%. Likewise, the purity of most illicit drugs has become increasingly more potent. Why? Because with mandatory prison terms and ever-increasing penalties for getting caught, the war on drugs has incentivized higher potency. A dealer who gets charged with 10 lbs. of weed gets the same penalty for 3% THC or 30% THC. So, rather than carry 10 lbs. at 3% (which has a greater chance of being discovered), a 1 lb. brick at 30% provides the same effective return, with a smaller, more concealable form.

So not only has the war on drugs been ineffective, it's actually made the concentration and potency of what exists stronger - and arguably more dangerous. And after trillions spent globally, can anyone honestly say that drugs are any less available now than they were 30 years ago (before the war on drugs began)?

I'm not saying that legalization doesn't have it's own risks - clearly it does. But when you consider what we know we're spending on a program that we know doesn't work (and makes things worse), at some point we have to step back and admit we've come off the rails.

As @drew91101 pointed out, in 1918, the Federal government decided alcohol was too evil, too dangerous for Americans to have. They went to each of the existing state, and convinced each state legislature to ratify the 18th Amendment. A year later, alcohol was illegal. It gave birth to organized crime, and a whole slew of other much-more-serious problems than the alcohol every had. It got so bad, that in 1932, the Feds realized that the demand for alcohol couldn't be legislated away, and they once again went to the states to repeal their previous Amendment. By 1933, alcohol was once again legal. Regulated, but legal. 13 years of prohibition - and .gov wised up. What happened between then and now, that we're are so incapable of seeing our follies?

Sorry to go so far OT. This is just another prime example of how government can make a mountain out of a mole hill. Everything it touches just absolutely turns to crap.

 

[hmjgriffon]

I commend you for having the heart to help those in need. But, the fact that some people are predisposed (genetically), or situationally, doesn't justify the completely insane war on drugs. People still huff paint, glue, dental sedation gasses, etc. Simply making something illegal, and investing trillions (globally) will not somehow prevent abuse.

What we do know is that the number and severity of problems that arise from making drugs illegal are FAR greater than the problems the drugs themselves create. I won't bother preaching (and I'm already sorry for hijacking @bababouy topic) what all those 'unintended consequences' are, but if drugs were legal, and we invested just 5% of what is currently being spent on enforcement (DEA locally, state, nationally, globally), judicially (mandatory sentencing), and incarcerations (with only 5% of the worlds population, the US is home to 20% of the world's prisoners), we could actually provide care to those those addicted at a level that exceeds even the most optimistic hopes.

50 years ago, the THC compound in marijuana (the component that produces the high) was, at best, about 3%. Today, there are strains that are over 30%. Likewise, the purity of most illicit drugs has become increasingly more potent. Why? Because with mandatory prison terms and ever-increasing penalties for getting caught, the war on drugs has incentivized higher potency. A dealer who gets charged with 10 lbs. of weed gets the same penalty for 3% THC or 30% THC. So, rather than carry 10 lbs. at 3% (which has a greater chance of being discovered), a 1 lb. brick at 30% provides the same effective return, with a smaller, more concealable form.

So not only has the war on drugs been ineffective, it's actually made the concentration and potency of what exists stronger - and arguably more dangerous. And after trillions spent globally, can anyone honestly say that drugs are any less available now than they were 30 years ago (before the war on drugs began)?

I'm not saying that legalization doesn't have it's own risks - clearly it does. But when you consider what we know we're spending on a program that we know doesn't work (and makes things worse), at some point we have to step back and admit we've come off the rails.

As @drew91101 pointed out, in 1918, the Federal government decided alcohol was too evil, too dangerous for Americans to have. They went to each of the existing state, and convinced each state legislature to ratify the 18th Amendment. A year later, alcohol was illegal. It gave birth to organized crime, and a whole slew of other much-more-serious problems than the alcohol every had. It got so bad, that in 1932, the Feds realized that the demand for alcohol couldn't be legislated away, and they once again went to the states to repeal their previous Amendment. By 1933, alcohol was once again legal. Regulated, but legal. 13 years of prohibition - and .gov wised up. What happened between then and now, that we're are so incapable of seeing our follies?

Sorry to go so far OT. This is just another prime example of how government can make a mountain out of a mole hill. Everything it touches just absolutely turns to crap.

Amen brother, also think who profits from the wars on drugs. A lot of people say the biggest supplier of illegal drugs is the US govt, at least here in the US. Prisons are owned by corporate entities, judges and lawyers get paid off to send people to prison and then our tax dollars pay for it. Then you look at big pharma, they give people stuff that is worse than crack and it's totally legal. Most pills have worse side effects than what they treat. It's all based on money and things that have been arbitrarily made illegal. It's a yuuuuge load of horse crap.

 

[erkme73]

Amen brother, also think who profits from the wars on drugs. A lot of people say the biggest supplier of illegal drugs is the US govt, at least here in the US. Prisons are owned by corporate entities, judges and lawyers get paid off to send people to prison and then our tax dollars pay for it. Then you look at big pharma, they give people stuff that is worse than crack and it's totally legal. Most pills have worse side effects than what they treat. It's all based on money and things that have been arbitrarily made illegal. It's a yuuuuge load of horse crap.

While I don't disagree with anything you say, I usually temper those thoughts because to many who haven't been 'red-pilled' yet, this seems too conspiratorial. But, take Amendment 2 in FL - which was for the legalization of medicinal weed... The organization that was most vocal (and even attempted to get a countering Amendment on the ballot) was a political action committee funded nearly entirely by, guess who... Big Pharama.

Now, why would a >$50B revenue industry be against a plant? Follow the money...

My position is in no way intended on minimizing @colmcille's very legitimate concern about the consequences of legalization. But, to think that the only two interests in this game are those for/against easier access to drugs is naive at best. Unfortunately, government is neither noble, altruistic, or self-less. There are ALWAYS ulterior motives. What we see/hear in the media is spin designed to appeal to those who don't have the time or interest to scratch just beneath the surface of the issues.

And, for the record, I don't partake in any drugs (illicit, or big pharma), or alcohol. I, do however, subscribe to the theory that as Americans, we ought to have the liberty to choose what we do with (or put in) our bodies - so long as it does not affect the liberty of others.

 

[nayr]

Why carry a pound of weed at 30% when you can carry an ounce of concentrated hash oil at 85% THC by volume.

Its been keeping my mom recovering from Stage 4 cancer in her face from becoming a Heroin addict; lil dab of that and she can forgo 6-7 pills.. unfortunately we all have to become drug smuggling criminals to get it in her hands.

Cops weigh everything, if you get get caught growing plants.. the'll weigh the soil and in the news your 5 plants will be reported as 120lbs of weed they took off the street.

 

[erkme73]

Why carry a pound of weed at 30% when you can carry an ounce of concentrated hash oil at 85% THC by volume.

Its been keeping my mom recovering from Stage 4 cancer in her face from becoming a Heroin addict; lil dab of that and she can forgo 6-7 pills.. unfortunately we all have to become drug smuggling criminals to get it in her hands.

Cops weigh everything, if you get get caught growing plants.. the'll weigh the soil and in the news your 5 plants will be reported as 120lbs of weed they took off the street.

Sorry to hear about your mom. What a dreadful disease. Fortunately, I think the tide of public opinion is changing on self-medicating with things that actually work and have little or no side-effects (compared to pharma).

I don't know what happend to cops, but it seems to correlate with the change from Peace Officer to Law ENFORCEMENT officer. Compassion is a quality that is very rare among the profession - and anyone found guilty of having it is quickly retrained.

Right in line with the crappy war on drugs is the civil asset forfeiture laws - where those same cops can charge your property (money, vehicle, home, etc) with being use in a criminal undertaking, and seize it. You, the property owner, are never charge (let alone convicted). This would make the former USSR blush.

 

[hmjgriffon]

While I don't disagree with anything you say, I usually temper those thoughts because to many who haven't been 'red-pilled' yet, this seems too conspiratorial. But, take Amendment 2 in FL - which was for the legalization of medicinal weed... The organization that was most vocal (and even attempted to get a countering Amendment on the ballot) was a political action committee funded nearly entirely by, guess who... Big Pharama.

Now, why would a >$50B revenue industry be against a plant? Follow the money...

My position is in no way intended on minimizing @colmcille's very legitimate concern about the consequences of legalization. But, to think that the only two interests in this game are those for/against easier access to drugs is naive at best. Unfortunately, government is neither noble, altruistic, or self-less. There are ALWAYS ulterior motives. What we see/hear in the media is spin designed to appeal to those who don't have the time or interest to scratch just beneath the surface of the issues.

And, for the record, I don't partake in any drugs (illicit, or big pharma), or alcohol. I, do however, subscribe to the theory that as Americans, we ought to have the liberty to choose what we do with (or put in) our bodies - so long as it does not affect the liberty of others.

I'll admit, SOME of it is on the conspiracy side, though I could point to many conspiracies that turned out to be true involving the US govt. Big pharma will be behind legalizing drugs when they figure out a way to make all of the profit from it I am sure. As for drugs, I take a few different ones to stay alive, diabetes and high blood pressure. Big pharma has an incentive to come up with drugs to keep us alive but never a cure, they make too much money, especially if you need insulin and things to live. I do drink beer, but whatever, there's a huge difference between drinking some, and being an alcoholic. Thing about making drugs illegal, it's yet another one of those things that only effect law abiding citizens. Criminals get, sell, and do drugs just fine, sure it sucks if they get caught, but making it illegal doesn't stop anyone who wants to do them from doing them. So I think that right there proves making them legal would not make things any different than they are now, except for who profits.

 

[hmjgriffon]

Why carry a pound of weed at 30% when you can carry an ounce of concentrated hash oil at 85% THC by volume.

Its been keeping my mom recovering from Stage 4 cancer in her face from becoming a Heroin addict; lil dab of that and she can forgo 6-7 pills.. unfortunately we all have to become drug smuggling criminals to get it in her hands.

Cops weigh everything, if you get get caught growing plants.. the'll weigh the soil and in the news your 5 plants will be reported as 120lbs of weed they took off the street.

Yep, I manage it pretty well, but if I ever do get diabetic nerve damage, THC helps ALOT, why should I, or anyone else have to suffer, because something has been arbitrarily decided to be "bad".

 

[hmjgriffon]

Sorry to hear about your mom. What a dreadful disease. Fortunately, I think the tide of public opinion is changing on self-medicating with things that actually work and have little or no side-effects (compared to pharma).

I don't know what happend to cops, but it seems to correlate with the change from Peace Officer to Law ENFORCEMENT officer. Compassion is a quality that is very rare among the profession - and anyone found guilty of having it is quickly retrained.

Right in line with the crappy war on drugs is the civil asset forfeiture laws - where those same cops can charge your property (money, vehicle, home, etc) with being use in a criminal undertaking, and seize it. You, the property owner, are never charge (let alone convicted). This would make the former USSR blush.

absolute power corrupts absolutely my friend.