Another bad combination: Drug laws and prosecutorial immunity
This is rich: A woman, bird-watching, is accosted by an officer who confiscates the sage she has in her fanny pack, searches her car, finds even more sage, and sends it all off for testing at the state crime lab.
Three months later, police return, arrest her in front of her boss, co-workers, and customers on felony charges of marijuana possession, take her away, do a strip search and a body-cavity search, and keep her in jail overnight. A month later, it is discovered that the Assistant State Attorney ordered her arrested without the “drugs” having been tested. When her attorney learned that, he demanded that the stuff be tested. Surprise! It was still sage.
She’s now brought a civil lawsuit against the Assistant State Attorney, but prosecutors have immunity—which is probably why these things happen: there’s no accountability, the prosecutor suffers no sanctions at all, so why not throw people in jail? Hell, some people have even been convicted because the prosecutor conceals evidence that would show their innocence, but even then the prosecutor gets immunity. Some prosecutors have had people jailed and mistreated when they were not even accused of any crime—the “material witness” mistreatment for which Ashcroft was sued: immunity. He gets to do that.
And soon they may come for you.
Here’s the full story (so far), which I found via Ed Brayton.
