Rectal Exams Run Amok: Drug-Sniffing Dogs Must Be Stopped
The story was released on September 16, 2014. Here's the original write-up:
The case of Timothy Young made national headlines in 2012 when New Mexico police anally probed him in search of drugs (no contraband was found). His ordeal was the result of a false positive alert by a drug-sniffing police dog. Incredibly, the same dog was involved in a case involving another New Mexico resident that resulted in forced rectal exams that uncovered no drugs. That case ended with authorities paying a $1.6 million settlement (Young's case is still pending).
Although presented as impartial and infallible, it turns out that such dogs are not only often poorly trained, they are frequently wrong.
Cops, explains Andy Falco, a former K-9 handler and officer for the Anaheim Police Department in California, "will often motivate their dog or cue their dog to alert when there's absolutely nothing there." A 2011 analysis by the Chicago Tribune of police departments in the greater Chicago area found that vehicle searches initiated after dogs alerted failed to turn up drugs or drug paraphernalia 56 percent of the time. Other studies find false positives as high as 74 percent and 80 percent.
Yet in 2013, the Supreme Court ruled that as long as police say the dog is trained or accurate, "a court can presume that the dog's alert provides probable cause to search" people, vehicles, and property.
"If [police] have a dog that will alert on cue," says Reason Senior Editor Jacob Sullum, who has written extensively on the issue, "that's a very useful tool to have to search people you have other grounds to think are suspicious." Sullum stresses that there are no uniform or reliable certification standards for training drug-sniffing dogs.
While convinced of dogs' potential usefulness, Falco agrees that police dogs are generally poorly trained and handled.
Indeed, in the wake of such appalling cases such as Young's in New Mexico, Falco worries that drug-sniffing dogs will be completely discredited. "I've seen cases where people have trained their own dogs in their backyards and then taken it to work as a drug dog. I've seen that happen," he says. "We're going to lose them because we're not using them the way we're supposed to."
About 4 minutes. Produced by Will Neff. Additional camera by Paul Detrick.
Scroll below for downloadable versions. Subscribe to Reason TV's YouTube channel to receive automatic notifications when new videos go live.
Editor's Note: As of February 29, 2024, commenting privileges on reason.com posts are limited to Reason Plus subscribers. Past commenters are grandfathered in for a temporary period. Subscribe here to preserve your ability to comment. Your Reason Plus subscription also gives you an ad-free version of reason.com, along with full access to the digital edition and archives of Reason magazine. We request that comments be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment and ban commenters for any reason at any time. Comments may only be edited within 5 minutes of posting. Report abuses.
Please
to post comments
People hold a moment of silence for everyone killed by climate change.
Must have been a short moment given that there's currently 0 of them.
I like the DDT comment
Both comments are worth the price of a click
And perhaps a moment of silence for everyone who will be killed by not having access to cheap energy...
They're poor and not white, so who cares about them? /greenprog
Whatever you do, for your own sanity, do not read the comments about this on the NYT site.
Yeah, that's what was discredited.
I admire his optimism, but the SCOTUS decision alone would seem to indicate that there is no chance in hell of the Authorities ever being asked to give up one of the most effective tools it has to terrorize the Proles.
Cops, explains Andy Falco, a former K-9 handler and officer for the Anaheim Police Department in California
Drink!
"If [police] have a dog that will alert on cue," says Reason Senior Editor Jacob Sullum, who has written extensively on the issue, "that's a very useful tool to have to search people you have other grounds to think are suspicious." Sullum stresses that there are no uniform or reliable certification standards for training drug-sniffing dogs.
Which in itself is funny, because we've seen a plethora of 'justified' searches based on two cops sans K9 claiming they 'smelled marijuana' two blocks away and were able to kick in exactly the right door in a 125 unit apartment complex.
Honestly, I don't even know why the cops bother with K9s.
Typically, you only want to train dogs to smell out one thing so they give less ambiguous signals.
How many dogs have they trained to alert for nonconsensual crimes?
Fun fact, marijuana is [mostly] legal here, and a hunnert percent of drug dogs are trained to sniff out marijuana. So the dog 'alerts' on a perfectly legal product, justifying a search. Oh it's going to be fun times in Washington.
Dogs are great tools for cops. Whether it's terrorizing people with a trained attack animal, or getting probably cause, cops can use dogs to shift responsibility for their abuse to the dog. Doggy did it. Doggy said you are a criminal.
Speaking of rectums:
At least the teachers went home safely.
Girl rape-bait... totality of the circs... hth
*smooches*
In hopes of distracting everyone from their inexcusable criminal neglience and enablement of a rapist, they're going to make this boy out to be worse than Hitler. They'll hold off on playing amateur To Catch A Predator for a few months, then they'll try it again.
So, in everyone's opinion, what should have happened here?
You cannot punish the child without proof. But, you are liable for exposing other chilrenz to a known predator.
Lose/lose for the school. I think it was a good plan, but poorly executed. Also, in this instance, probably merited police involvement (for as much as it pains me to say that).
Yes. The problem was that they halfassed it. There are a dozen ways they could have pulled it off better with professionals.
If they could have gotten an undercover cop with backup to do it, that would have been best.
Um, why are school officials playing FBI sting?
But why should we be surprised? Just one more kid fucked by the teacher's union.
I don't see anywhere in that article if they notified the girl's parents before conducting this brilliant plan. I can't even begin to think of how I would react to something like this other than to say "probably not calmly"
Good point.
Would a jury convict the man that beat the living tar out of this teacher? I say no. Swing away
"If this was problematic for the administration it would have been better to express that on the front end instead of the back end," said attorney McGriff Belser III, who represents Simpson.
Are we not doing "phrasing" any longer?
They are extremely useful in bypassing fourth amendment rights.
Can we train them to alert when they smell someone carrying a pocket constitution?
Dogs are remarkably empathic animals. I wonder if they can be trained to alert for crimethink?
"Dogs can smell cancer ? on Society."
Do you know what life was like before the war on drugs and anal probes? Well do you!? I tell you, it was hell!
Will Neff? How's Phyllis doing?
I consider using the dog to sniff to attempt to justify a search to be an unwarranted search in of itself.
This.
Police dogs are divining rods. Just another way the constitution has been made a joke. "My doggy says you're a criminal. Now you're going to find out why they call it Doggy Style."
Gjkliyt the Alien is reading this article, shaking his heads, and saying, "wow, that anal probing is too messed up even for me!"
The last time a heard a figure on this, something like 20% of Americans were regular users of marijuana. Maybe they're alerting at every search! In which case the cops are doing a fine enough job before the dog got involved, and they can just get rid of the dogs entirely and save some cash.
Oops posted too quickly. When I say "get rid of the dogs", that's not what I meant...
my best friend's mother-in-law makes $66 /hr on the laptop . She has been without a job for ten months but last month her payment was $17790 just working on the laptop for a few hours. you can try this out...
???????? http://www.netjob70.com
That was an interesting article.