Police misconduct,illegal stop and search,false arrest

I need information in finding out how do i go about filing a complaint against a police dept.,and 3 officers. My Fourth & Fifth amendment rights were violated during an incident on the highway in the state of maryland. I need help finding an attorney that deals with racial profiling,emotional distress,among other things.please email me with any useful information!!!!

you need to start off by providing sufficient evidence to prove racial profiling was involved. it's going to be very difficult to provide any if racial profiling was present.

* blink~blink *

What does "its going to be very difficult to provide any if racial profiling was present" mean?

Perhaps it would be more succinct to simply say, "It is difficult to prove a charge of racial profiling".

But, then again---what do I know? I've paid for gas and driven off without pumping any.

Rather than solicit advice on the Internet, it might be more fruitful if you consulted with members of your church or parish, or talked to family or friends, or even people in your workplace. It's also prudent not to disclose particulars or details of any potential lawsuit with any one other than the person you retain ... one can never be quite certain of the actual legal expertise, education or experience in an open forum such as this. While there are no doubt numerous highly-qualified individuals who participate in such a forum, you also run the risk of encountering one or two others more familiar with Wikipedia The Free Encyclopedia, (for example) available also on the Internet, and who's article on the 4th Amendment appears to have been pasted nearly ver batim. Your own local police department (non-emergency, of course) can answer your questions and perhaps guide you in the direction you need. Good luck!

I do not believe this site is intended to be a substitute for retaining of competent "real life" legal advice. Anyone who believes otherwise is misguided. The Internet provides countless search engines--but for those too inept or too disinterested to click "search", there is nothing wrong with compiling an answer and replying here. Realizing you DON'T know something, but seeking out the right answer is the definition of LEARNING and that is why most of us are here. Sorry--remind me again--why are you here?

As for your advice, what expertise would someone in a parish have? Or people in a work place? They probably do not have, offhand, the answer to the question the poster is asking and they do not have a law library or search engine at their fingertips. And, many people may be reticent to divulge the particulars of a "real life" difficult situation to coworkers/family because of privacy issues. Were I to find myself in a position such as the poster described, I don't think I would call up everyone I knew--in particular, coworkers, for fear being involved in this type of incident would hurt my employment status. I also believe your sterling advice to "talk to the local police" ( about how to file a complaint against them???) borders on absurd.

"Hello, Chief, could you help me file a complaint with significant legal ramifications again your officers that could result in a lawsuit costing you your job, as well as taxpayers millions of dollars should I win? <cheerful smile>"

Surely, you jest.

Also, you state the poster is to consult with people at work and at his/her parish, then in the next sentence you caution them to NOT discuss it with anyone aside from their counsel. Which one of those two diametrically opposed courses of action would your expertise recommend?

Furthermore, while my posting offered facts available to anyone who isn't too lazy or too illiterate to use a search engine, in it I also recommend twice that the poster seek REAL competent legal advice from a local attorney.

Also, it seems disingenuous to join a message forum on the INTERNET only to immediately advise people NOT to USE this type of forum. Perhaps you misunderstood and thought your participation in this forum was mandatory? Regardless, it is unwarranted to criticize accurate information, regardless of where it came from, especially when you offer nothing substantive of your own, aside from "Talk to people in your church or workplace, but don't discuss your case with anyone but an attorney".

Ummmmmm, 'kay. Allllllllllrighty, then.

If you sit in a court room and actually LISTEN to the litigants, you will hear a lot of case law being cited. Guess what the study of law entails?? For those of us who study it---the answer is RESEARCH. Looking up "answers". Finding out what has gone before (precedence) in support of, or likewise, in juxtaposition to our position. No one inherently "knows" the answer to legal questions. Attorneys, in particular, new ones, RESEARCH---and know WHERE to look to find the answers they need.

I was in court yesterday for a civil matter addressing an issue of prescriptive easements on a property that had a defective deed. Before going to court, I spent a great deal of time looking up other rulings that were similar in nature to my own case. RESEARCH. And, you can bet these other rulings were quoted "VERBATIM" ( not ver batim, as you incorrectly write). I can just imagine the opposing attorney yesterday interjecting with a distainful sneer, "Aww, pshaw, Judge. Don't listen to him. He is just quoting something he looked up on the Internet that the Supreme Court said. He didn't REALLY write that himself." Those who participate in this genre understand the necessity implicit accuracy.

These postings are full of what people think, from an emotional standpoint. I would much rather share words of import, words of authority from sources that do, quite often, know more than I do, instead of merely blathering on about my emotional response to any topic raised.

"Nothing in the world is more dangerous than sincere ignorance and conscientious stupidity." (Martin Luther King, Jr. ) I fear that you, my dear, are in possession of a healthy measure of both.

My comments are only directed towards the person who asked originally asked a question. I do not (and will not) use a forum such as this to postulate, exacerbate or otherwise inflame any person or persons, nor do I automatically jump to the conclusion one is wrong because one either disagrees or expresses an opinion contrary to my own. Those of us gainfully employed are well-aware that Human Resource Departments can direct towards a legal department that may or may not offer resources available at a discount to employees. Ministers or other clergy are also bound by a certain oath of confidentiality that is often lacking elsewhere. Family members, friends, etc may have encountered a difficult legal situation and can provide possible legal referrals or references. There is no need to openly discuss one's personal business, particularly that of a legal nature, but there may be a need to talk to someone who is familiar and who's judgement is already trusted. My opinion is that...merely my own..and to the best of my knowledge, the First Amendment has yet to be repealed. To the person who originally asked, I repeat what I said earlier...good luck

Didn't you get the memo? The First Amendment HAS been amended to deny anyone not knowing the difference between "WHO'S" and "WHOSE" the right to post on public message boards. How this escaped your keen notice is simply beyond me.

So, on behalf of First Amendment-loving, law-abiding grammatical and syntactical purist worldwide, I really must take a stand on this since both of your utterly riveting posts used the word incorrectly. ( Please feel free to peruse the following Wikipedia site for a FREE tutorial on contractions: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Contraction_%28grammar%29 )

Please, dear, issue an immediate formal apology and a Writ of Certiorari ( in triplicate---Westside Law keeps copies!!) that has been reviewed by your parish or minister, coworkers, family, neighbors, friends ( if you have any) and of course, the Pizza Delivery man for your (discounted, of course) Human Resource Department, and submit it for review.

All future attempts at superiority really SHOULD include a proof reader who has progressed past the sixth grade.

My, oh my, oh my!

Do you have Pit Bull or Rotweiler in your blood?

Sick 'em! (Grrrrrrrrrrrrrrrr)

*wiggling eyebrows*

There is a TOP TEN in here somewhere. I can just feel it from the top of my blonde ex post facto to the bottom of my 'beslippered' corpus delicti.

Ahhh. And they say Latin is dead.