Court rejects consent was invalid because officer was too nice. As a threshold issue, none of the three had standing since they weren’t on the paperwork for the rented car and didn’t show they had permission to drive it. Alternatively, the consent shown on video was voluntary. United States v. Goode, 2011 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 144899 (E.D. Pa. December 16, 2011):<\/p>\n
The defense argues that Trooper Lora\u2019s friendly and respectful demeanor was so much so as to be actually and literally disarming and, hence, violative of Mr. Goode\u2019s exercise of his free will. The Court declines to entertain an argument (or cynicism, generally) that would lead to a finding that politeness and good humor on the part of law enforcement officers can be subject to such alchemy as to unconstitutionally eviscerate the will power and intelligence of a fully functional adult. It is difficult to imagine the precise admonition that would have to be given to police officers to explain that they should beware of being \u201ctoo nice\u201d lest the exclusionary rule be invoked. Such a situation would set on its head the truism that more flies are caught with honey than with vinegar.<\/p><\/blockquote>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"
b2evALnk.b2WPAutP Continue reading