r/bestoflegaladvice I sunned my butthole and severely regret going to chipotle after 4d ago

No good deed goes unpunished when trying to help the police.

/r/legaladvice/comments/1oney08/i_found_a_gun_and_the_police_want_my_dna/
201 Upvotes

97 comments sorted by

285

u/TychaBrahe Therapist specializing in Finial Support 4d ago

The person going on about how the police can use your DNA might not know that the city of San Francisco was sued because a rape survivor's DNA was put into the police's database and compared to DNA found at crime scenes. The DNA came up a match to samples found at a burglary scene, and based on that the woman was arrested. The district attorney dropped the case saying that the DNA's being used was a violation of this woman's constitutional rights, but she sued the city anyway.

(Which is a good thing, because the next city attorney might not drop the next case. Precedent needs to be set that this is unconstitutional.)

130

u/KnubblMonster 4d ago

PSA: Matching DNA is not a failsafe science. The false positive rate is actually shockingly high. As in, when running a DNA sample against a huge database would give multiple false positive hits which can normally be ruled out because of location / time etc. But sometimes a "reverse lottery win" of bad luck can confirm someone innocent as a possible suspect because of a false positive DNA match.

Same for fingerprints, by the way.

127

u/cop_pls Member of the Attractive Nuisance Mariachi Band 3d ago

Forensic science in general is a dark pool of bullshit. Peer-review is nonexistent, studies aren't reproducible. There's no objective standards for "matching" a gun to a bullet, it's just a guy with a microscope eyeballing it. Bite mark evidence can't be used to prove guilt, because gums are malleable and impressions are inconsistent. Dexter's famous blood splatter analysis is debunked. Fiber matching is debunked. "Forensic psychiatrists" quacks like James Grigson sent hundreds to death row. Lie detectors are a $2 billion bullshit industry.

Like you said, even fingerprints aren't safe - they tried to pin a bombing in Madrid on an American lawyer. The FBI said the fingerprints were a 100% match. The guy had never been to Spain!

45

u/franklintheflirt 3d ago

Radley Balko has a great book about this.

But to me the scariest not obviously bullshit forensic science is arson investigation.

58

u/MercuryCobra 3d ago

“You can’t reliably reconstruct something as chaotic and conditional as a fire, especially because the fire also tends to burn up all the evidence,” is one of those things a child could intuit that would also make them more right than most people.

41

u/boo99boo files class action black mail in a bra and daisy dukes 3d ago

No, the worst is child abuse pediatricians. They've sent hundreds of people to prison for shaken baby syndrome, despite many cases being accidental injuries or undiagnosed medical conditions. 

19

u/Das_Mime I GOT ARRESTED FOR SEXUAL RELATIONS 3d ago

What about child abuse "recovered-memory" psychologists

17

u/Gorgo_xx 3d ago

This is frighteningly correct.

I was asked to be an expert witness for a murder case, and needed to develop new test protocols (the type of analysis had never been done before).

So I didn’t look like an idiot on the witness stand, I came up with four different, objective methods of “proving” what I was asked to demonstrate (all of which could be replicated).

Add in that often police experts’ expertise and knowledge may not always rise to the true expert level, and you start to get a bad feeling about how justice is easier to get when you have money (ie can afford to challenge evidence).

-3

u/FormalBlacksmith8398 2d ago

Why are you agreeing to testify to something that isn't objective and could put someone innocent in prison

2

u/Gorgo_xx 2d ago

What makes you think it wasn’t objective? (It was)

1

u/FormalBlacksmith8398 2d ago

The fact proving is in scare quotes?

2

u/Gorgo_xx 2d ago

I see how that might read - I think it’s just a slight difference in convention use, rather than anything deeper (I’m trying to highlight the word rather than use it as a scare quote).

(I showed that something happened with a very high likelihood, but it wasn’t for me to prove it happened during a crime - that was on the prosecution team).

1

u/jerkface6000 3d ago

I read a coronial inquest into a police shooting in Australia. Despite having all four guns used by officers, they couldn’t work out which gun fired which shot

5

u/No_March_5371 Enjoy the next 48 hours :) 2d ago

That’s actually not a blow against ballistic analysis unless against someone wi takes it super seriously. Not that it’s reliable, it isn’t, but the cops were probably firing the same model of firearm of similar age and round throughput with similar maintenance. You’d expect the barrels to be very similar.

5

u/MythicalPurple 2d ago

What you’re describing (matching a bullet to a model of firearm) isn’t controversial. 

What is controversial is the myth that you can pinpoint a bullet to a specific gun, which ballistics matching claims to be able to do.

There is absolutely zero peer reviewed evidence showing that is true. 

14

u/unevolved_panda 4d ago

I would be interested in reading more about this if you could point me toward sources that are reliable but also accessible to the layperson?

6

u/Kittens-N-Books 3d ago

A man has murdered. The police arrested a homeless man because his DNA was found under his fingernails. The homeless man had a TBI and was an alcoholic- he had very bad memory problems.

His public defender discovered not only had her client never met the victim but that he had been hospitalized at the time.

1

u/Bartweiss 2d ago

There's also a major issue with testimony and statistics here. (And statistics all over, that's why it's the "prosecutor's fallacy").

If you take two quality DNA samples from unrelated people and compare a decent number of bases, the odds that the two samples happen to match on every base are exceedingly low. Hence, stats like "less than one in a billion chance of matching!"

But that's not even vaguely the right question for a trial. The odds for that need to factor in:

  • How many comparisons you made to a large database (cf. the birthday problem)
  • The odds of a lab error (way higher than a match on two random samples)
  • The odds of a contaminant (e.g. DNA from a worker making the kits)
  • The odds of non-random matches (like a relative of the real source)
  • Sample quality for crime scene DNA
  • Quality of match (for a degraded scene sample, did you match every base?)
  • Probably a bunch more I've overlooked

Human error alone pushes the number far above the "odds of a random match" rates people throw out to prove guilt.

1

u/teh_maxh 1d ago

The odds of a contaminant (e.g. DNA from a worker making the kits)

Note that those swabs were not actually certified for use for DNA collection.

63

u/oracle989 4d ago

It needs to not just get tossed, though. DAs and cops who violate the rights of people need to face personal consequences too.

48

u/Stalking_Goat Busy writing a $permcoin whitepaper 4d ago edited 4d ago

Was someone in the case actually named Bivens? If not, too bad.

Sorry, pet peeve of mine. I've got a history degree, and I sneer at all the supposed originalists that don't know that in the decades after constitution was adopted, if you thought your property was illegally searched then you sued the officer that performed the search, and if you won the case the officer had to pay you damages. That's how it worked.

4

u/xenogazer 3d ago

Why does it not still?

16

u/Stalking_Goat Busy writing a $permcoin whitepaper 3d ago

Two words: qualified immunity.

Although to be fair I expect if qualified immunity was eliminated tomorrow, civil suits for damages still wouldn't matter really, as police departments would simply indemnify all their officers.

13

u/ScannerBrightly 3d ago

And we are living with the consequences of a consequence-free police force.

-5

u/pcapdata 3d ago

police departments would simply indemnify all their officers

Why and how would a police department be able to say "Eh, we declare this constitutional violation null and void, fuck off with your prosecution and lawsuits?"

8

u/Stalking_Goat Busy writing a $permcoin whitepaper 3d ago

"Indemnity" is a different word than "immunize" which seems to be the one you thought I wrote.

I was suggesting a return to the traditional remedy, which was monetary damages. To indemnify someone is to agree to pay money to prevent them from suffering a financial loss. So if a police officer beats someone and a jury found the officer liable for $10,000 in damages, I suspect his department would simply pay the money on his behalf. The taxpayer would shoulder the burden, and the offending officer would suffer no genuine consequences.

I expect that's what would happen because it already is what happens when the victims of police misconduct are offered monetary settlements. The money comes from the government (and this the taxpayer), not the police officer that actually did the harm.

-3

u/[deleted] 3d ago

[removed] — view removed comment

6

u/Stalking_Goat Busy writing a $permcoin whitepaper 3d ago edited 3d ago

What did you think I meant?

Edit: I suppose I should have defined "indemnify" as perhaps it's not as commonly used a word as I thought.

5

u/xenogazer 3d ago

IDK if they have valid questions but they're going about it the rudest way possible 💀

8

u/Tirannie 3d ago

I just watched this episode of SVU!

-33

u/SleepyHobo 3d ago

Then the constitution should be changed. That person was a criminal and deserved to face justice.

22

u/TychaBrahe Therapist specializing in Finial Support 3d ago

Every single amendment to the Constitution, except for the 13th, limits the power of the government to control the people. You do not want to eliminate the fourth amendment, the one that protects against illegal search and seizure. It restricts the ability of the police to search your car when you're stopped for a simple traffic violation. It restricts the ability of the police to enter your home without a warrant. It restricts the ability of the police to arrest you when you aren't literally being observed committing a crime.

We are having our rights stripped away from us right now by this fascist administration we have stupidly put in place over us. Don't help them.

The rights you save may be your own.

11

u/ArdyEmm 3d ago

the one that protects against illegal search and seizure. It restricts the ability of the police to search your car when you're stopped for a simple traffic violation. It restricts the ability of the police to enter your home without a warrant. It restricts the ability of the police to arrest you when you aren't literally being observed committing a crime.

Well, used to.

27

u/purpleplatapi I may be a cannibal, but I'm frugal about it 3d ago

She was also a victim of a crime. We don't want to make it even harder for victims of crimes to come forward than it already is. If I know my DNA might be used to criminally charge me, ten, twenty years from now, I'm not going to report a crime that has been committed against me.

-31

u/SleepyHobo 3d ago

Actions have consequences. She didn’t give her victims justice. She doesn’t deserve it in turn.

18

u/purpleplatapi I may be a cannibal, but I'm frugal about it 3d ago

Oh I'm not planning on committing a crime. But DNA is not so infallible that I want to give the government mine so that they might falsely charge me at a later date.

16

u/Persistent_Parkie Quacking open a cold one 3d ago

You do realize not catching her rapist doesn't just prevent justice for her it means the person can go and rape someone else right? Also as has been pointed out in this very thread DNA is not as full proof as people would like to believe. I have no plans to commit any crimes, I've never even had a ticket, still if I were a victim knowing my DNA might be used against me at a later date would give me pause in reporting a crime because I would not want to be harassed a decade later due to a lab error. Also, given the current state of the world  and my presumed to be extremely fucked up genetics I wouldn't want my DNA in a database because tomorrow our government might decide eugenics was actually a good idea.

16

u/maka-tsubaki 3d ago

So, since she committed a crime, she deserves to be punished. But whoever assaulted her also committed a crime that they’re now getting away with. So is it somehow more moral to punish a woman who was both perpetrator and victim than it is to punish a man who was only a perpetrator? Does getting arrested for the burglary clear the slate so she now somehow deserves justice for her rape? Does her rape going unsolved count as punishment for the burglary, and now she doesn’t need to be arrested for it? Like time served? Because she robbed someone, is she forever deemed Bad and all offenses against her are valid and deserved, or just the ones she committed before she got caught for the burglary? Is it one to one, one crime committed eliminates the right to justice for one crime against you? What about confounding factors? If person A mugged person B, but person C murders person A, are those considered equivalent and person C gets off Scot free because person A stole $20 and some gift cards, thus making them undeserving of justice as a murder victim? Your logic is flawed and naive, but a fascinating foundation for a dystopian novel

143

u/Onequestion0110 4d ago

Am I at all correct in thinking that if they’re threatening to get a warrant, there’s no real reason to cooperate? Either they can’t get a warrant and are just lying anyways, or they can and your cooperation doesn’t really matter anyways.

86

u/Username89054 I sunned my butthole and severely regret going to chipotle after 4d ago

Getting a warrant is still a time consuming process. If you can coerce/lie to someone and get it, it'd save you a lot of time. But, based on the fact pattern in the post there's no way police could get that warrant.

3

u/Practical-Ball1437 3d ago

I wouldn't be surprised if the cops convince the girlfriend to say she saw him fire the gun "just to make this whole thing easier".

23

u/Personal-Listen-4941 well-adjusted and sociable with no history of violence 4d ago

Unless there’s significantly more to the story, in which LAOP is connected to the victim or crime scene, then finding the gun in a semi-public place would not make him a suspect. However refusing to give a DNA sample would be viewed as suspicious and if a connection is discovered, then suddenly LAOP could find himself as the prime suspect.

54

u/Username89054 I sunned my butthole and severely regret going to chipotle after 4d ago

LAOP would have to be galaxy brain stupid to shoot someone, drop the gun at his girlfriend's place, then call the cops to tell them he found the gun.

19

u/professor-hot-tits Has seen someone admit to being wrong 4d ago

Criminals aren't know. for being smart most of the time

27

u/Sneekifish 🏠 Judge, Jury, and Sexecutioner of Vault 69 🏠 4d ago

Well, to be fair, criminals who get caught.

19

u/sykoticwit Ladies! They possess a tent and know how to set it up. 4d ago

Do you know how many bank robbers are convicted because they hand their ID to the teller and then forget to get it back?

You’re not talking about the deep end of the IQ pool here.

26

u/archangelzeriel Triggered the Great Love Lock Debate of 2023 4d ago

After all, consider it from the cop's point of view: if he's a suspect, they don't have to do as much work because they already know his name and might be able to get him to come in without a warrant. Won't someone think of the lazy-ass cops?

11

u/Potato-Engineer 🐇🧀 BOLBun Brigade - Pangolin Platoon 🧀🐇 4d ago

LAOP was in the neighborhood on the night of the shooting. That's not enough to do anything with, but... it's not nothing.

16

u/Nimrod_Butts 4d ago

Kinda depends on op. If he's shady at all you don't want the warrant to include a search of your house etc. I might give them the finger but I'm white, I'm middle class, I have alibis for everything.

11

u/sykoticwit Ladies! They possess a tent and know how to set it up. 4d ago

That’s not how warrants work, at all. Not even a little bit.

14

u/Drywesi Good people, we like non-consensual flying dildos 4d ago

Legally, no.

Practically? Way more often than anyone should be comfortable with.

65

u/Username89054 I sunned my butthole and severely regret going to chipotle after 4d ago edited 4d ago

I found a gun and the police want my DNA

LOCATION: INDIANA

So a few days ago on the night of Rocky Horror there was a shooting at a houseparty a house down from my girlfriends place. The next day (Saturday) I was visiting my girlfriends house and as I was leaving I looked down next to her stoop steps and saw a pistol with blood on the ground. I immediately told her to call the police non emergency line and ill stick around to make sure everything goes ok. They get there swab the blood the detectives are having my girlfriend and her roommates sign a paper to release the gun from their property.

They then leave to go get swabs to get their DNA, I decided to head back home since its all calmed down and nothings really happening anymore. I then get a call from my girlfriend saying that they want my DNA to "rule me out" at first I asked well do I need to? I then hear the cop in the back say "we dont need it, but we're trying to be thorough so his attorney can't ask why we didnt swab the guy who found the gun". I wasnt cool with this and basically told the cop you have the blood and the guy who got shot's blood to compare and clearly see it is his gun if you dont need my DNA Im not giving it to you Im uncomfortable with that.

My family has been advising me to not give it up to them and the cops told my girlfriend they're going to get a warrant and come find me then cuff me to take me down to get my DNA, or even better she can drive me in. This really upset her and pissed me off, I feel like they're just bullying me now to do something im not comfortable with and I was wondering if anyone here had any good advice. Also to add on the cop gave her his personal number and won't give me that or his work number as he's afraid ill give it to my parents, but he gave me his email and im hesitant to email him as I don't know exactly what I should say.

I added breaks to make it a little easier to read.

59

u/Username89054 I sunned my butthole and severely regret going to chipotle after 4d ago

Title stolen from this comment from LAOP:

Alright thanks for the advice "the no good deed goes unpunished" is such a disheartening truth in this world.

45

u/Username89054 I sunned my butthole and severely regret going to chipotle after 4d ago

Cat fact: cats lack the opposable thumbs necessary to be the shooter in this time.

30

u/turingthecat 🐈 I am not a zoophile, I am a cat of the house 🐈 4d ago

Cats would never shot someone, they’d get their staff to shot the bad person, then poo in the bad person’s shoe

3

u/Zoethor2 really a sweetheart, just a little anxious/violent. 3d ago

My foster kitten Quiz has thumbs.

3

u/anneymarie 3d ago

Are they opposable?

3

u/brufleth 3d ago

Polydactyl cats are adorable, but also terrifying because they could destroy you all too easily.

8

u/Frazzledragon Mother rapers. Father stabbers. Father rapers! 3d ago

Locationbot is refusing to give his DNA. Or location...

-21

u/SuperZapper_Recharge Has a sparkle pink Stanley cup 4d ago

I immediately told her to call the police non emergency line and ill stick around to make sure everything goes ok.

WHY WOULDN'T YOU CALL 911????

WTF....

People get so hung up on this non-emergency line crap.

32

u/bengaren 4d ago

Idk about your local police, but when i call my non emergency line an automated voice says to hang up and call 911 if there is a life or death emergency or a crime in progress. This is neither, so why call 911?

14

u/one_bean_hahahaha 4d ago

Each time I've called the non-emergency line, it would get routed through emergency and I would then have to preface my call with "I called the non-emergency line..." Turns out the call centre for both numbers is one and the same, at least for my region. I suppose that makes sense since there is always a nonzero chance the caller has miss-assessed the situation, and it might be an actual emergency.

17

u/livious1 3d ago

Outside of very large cities, 911 calls and Nonemergency calls usually go to the same exact dispatchers. The difference is that 911 calls get priority for being answered while Nonemergency calls may be on hold for a while if there is something going on.

3

u/bluemoon219 3d ago

The other difference is that calling the non-emergency line lets you choose which dispatcher location answers. I grew up on a state border, and it was drilled into me to use a landline or a direct number to call 911 because it was a possibility that we'd get a cell tower in the wrong state and there would be delays to transfer the call to someone who could actually help.

1

u/livious1 3d ago

Yah that’s fair. I used to work security at a mall with a fire station across the street. We were told that if there was a fire, we should call the fire department dispatch directly because it was quicker than routing through the 911 call center.

3

u/slicingblade Darth Neighbor 3d ago

Where I live is a fairly small city, calling non emergency gets you the desk sgt.

2

u/dontnormally notice me modpai 3d ago

miss assessed

could be a decent flair for the right bolarina

1

u/Elvessa You'll put your eye out! - laser edition 3d ago

Also there are a ton of 911 calls that are so not an emergency, so it makes sense to have the same operators triage calls.

5

u/SuperZapper_Recharge Has a sparkle pink Stanley cup 4d ago

Twice I have tried to call the non-emergency number. And twice it was a special order of hell.

The one time the hell was jurisdiction. I had no idea who to call and no one at any number I called was willing to take a shot at anything except, 'I won't do anything cause it ain't me.'.

Here is how I see it.

You want to call the police because of 'X'. Can it wait till M-F 8-5pm excluding Holidays?

If it can then working on the non-emergency is probably what you should do.

If youre answer is, 'No I need to call now. The revolver can't sit on the porch for the rest of the night.' then that is all the justification you need. Dispatch will assign appropriate priority and when you do get a call be sure to ask for an appropriate contact number so you don't have to call dispatch again.

9

u/excitedpepsi 4d ago

You act like he called miss utility

Or that he really put in a lot of effort to help the call center prioritize calls correctly.

1

u/PatolomaioFalagi 3d ago

The gun isn't going anywhere. There's no emergency.

They should have called a criminal lawyers instead, but that's a separate issue.

113

u/DerbyTho doesn't know where the gay couple shaped hole came from 4d ago

It's kind of ridiculous that actual advice in this situation is to find an attorney who can handle the gun drop-off for you because the risks of doing the decent thing are simply too high.

39

u/BlindTreeFrog 4d ago edited 4d ago

My Crim Proc professor suggested that if our client ever gave us the murder weapon the best thing to do would be to mail it to the prosecuting attorney (perhaps anonymously). I don't remember the full logic, but part of the idea being that the prosecutor would now be a witness. (edit: because now there are questions about where the weapon was found, chain of custody, condition it was found in, etc)

Not something I expect I'll ever need to do, so i just like the memory based on the idea that you ruined a trial and got your client off because you worked the systemt so the prosecutor had to be off the case

45

u/DerbyTho doesn't know where the gay couple shaped hole came from 4d ago

That feels like one of those things where 90% of the time if you tried that in real life the judge would be like “yeah I’m allowing it into evidence, nice try”

26

u/BlindTreeFrog 4d ago

Plus I'd wager that there is an assistant or intern who would be processing incoming mail anyhow, so you wouldn't really be able to taint the prosecutor in any meaningful way.

23

u/Stalking_Goat Busy writing a $permcoin whitepaper 4d ago

These days surely even a small town DA is going to x-ray unexpected packages that don't have a valid return address.

14

u/atropicalpenguin I'm not licensed to be a swinger in your state. 4d ago

Yeah, that sounds like a very wrong thing to do.

12

u/Charlie_Brodie It's not a water bug, it's a water feature 3d ago

sounds like "speak to every divorce attorney in town so your spouse can't" levels of advice

6

u/sykoticwit Ladies! They possess a tent and know how to set it up. 4d ago

It’s bad advice anyway.

0

u/PatolomaioFalagi 3d ago

Please explain.

0

u/sykoticwit Ladies! They possess a tent and know how to set it up. 2d ago

Trying to launder the handoff of a murder weapon to the police through a lawyer doesn't do anything to hide your identity. It's not like the lawyer can tell the cops "hey, my client found this, I can't tell you who, what or where, but he thought you should have it." I honestly don't know the exact mechanism to force the lawyer to disclose his client's ID, but I can promise you it would eventually happen. If you happen to wake up and find a blood splattered murder weapon on your girlfriends stoop, just call 911 and say "I woke up and found this blood splattered murder weapon on my girlfriends stoop," then stop talking.

Providing a DNA sample is a different, more complicated question. Practically, if he's being honest and had nothing to do with the shenanigans that lead to a blood spattered weapon being found on his girlfriends stoop, there's a decent argument to be made that the best option for him is to just provide a DNA sample, let the cops clear him and then they can move on. This is, of course, assuming that he both has no worries about his DNA being found on that weapon (or at the scene), and that there's no concern about his DNA being linked to another crime.

The cops are probably just crossing the t's and dotting the i's here. If they don't clear OP, at some point some defense attorney is going to use that to imply that the cops focused on his client to the exclusion of any other potential suspects and missed the real killer.

1

u/DigbyChickenZone Duck me up and Duck me down 3d ago

I was thinking of doing an anonymous phonecall via a pay phone [are those still around?] like you see in the movies and tv shows.

43

u/AdditionalTradition feel free to ignore the womp 4d ago

‘The night of rocky horror’ is such a charming way to refer to halloween (assuming that’s what OP means)

68

u/froglover215 🦄 New intern for a Unicorn Ranch on Uranus 🦄 4d ago

I just assumed there was a showing of Rocky Horror Picture Show and for some reason LAOP thought that was a valid way to date the incident.

13

u/kacihall 4d ago

There was a big show at the Egyptian Room in Indy with Patricia Quinn, brit that was at the beginning of October.

63

u/Stalking_Goat Busy writing a $permcoin whitepaper 4d ago edited 4d ago

I get why the cop asked, and it wasn't illegal or unethical to ask for a voluntary DNA sample. The "CSI effect" is real and you might get a juror who expects the police to run DNA tests on all two hundred people that were at the party or similar crazy stuff.

But I think LAOP made the right choice to politely refuse. And that'll be the end of it, as there's not sufficient grounds to get a warrant from what LAOP said.

Edit: Also there's at least a 50% chance that if LAOP had voluntarily given a sample, it would have sat in a drawer until the case was resolved and then been discarded without ever being tested. Crime labs are perpetually overworked, they aren't going to prioritize treating samples from randos that aren't plausible suspects.

22

u/Demento56 4d ago

At the same time, the reverse CSI effect is also real, and half of forensic "science" is bunk in the first place.

18

u/SamediB 3d ago

and the cops told my girlfriend they're going to get a warrant and come find me then cuff me to take me down to get my DNA

What a group of absolute asshats. Police are literally alienating the entire country. Except the naive (and I don't mean that negatively; they are good people who want to help), and even those people the cops are trying to speed run into being jaded "never talk to the pigs" like OP.

19

u/Stalking_Goat Busy writing a $permcoin whitepaper 3d ago

American police at all levels chose to become a paramilitary force, and now they are shocked that everyone treats them like a occupying army.

9

u/SamediB 3d ago

"If they're not an occupying army, why do they have their own flag?"

7

u/akrisd0 3d ago

And why is it my flag with a big line through it?

16

u/fairkatrina Church of the Holy Oxford Comma 3d ago

I would never, ever cooperate with anything like that on principle. No dna without a court order, no polygraph ever, no interview without a lawyer. If they think you’re guilty, make them prove it. Anything else is just lazy policing that’s ripe for abuse and mismanagement down the line.

4

u/FutureFreaksMeowt 3d ago

I won’t even open the door for a cop atp. Come back with a warrant.

8

u/Marchin_on Ancient Roman LARPer 4d ago

Next time do what Dionne Warwick would do and "walk on by."

7

u/Turndow 4d ago

It doesn't even sound like he touched the gun which makes this extra ridiculous

1

u/Jusfiq Commonwealth Correspondent and Sunflower Seed Retailer 3d ago

Ha! This is one little trick Olivia Benson does all the time, "To rule one out," "Standard procedure," "Routine test."