I agree with your backup comments. I'm reminded the amount of agencies local, state, national,, reporting in since 1994 is less than 25% at best with not all of them fact checked. From that CATO got the one percent on average figure of misconduct across the entire spectrum of crime for the 800,000 law officers and the same result for the numbers of citizens. Unless the unknown results are wildly skewed the best we can say is 'hey only one percent of the cops are dirty and only one percent of the citizens are dirty." For sure 100 percent of our elected officials from POTUS on down are at fault from Clinton through Bush to Obama and all the legislators as well. So it's either take heart it's only one percent, or damn that's one in every hundred, or continue to ask, especially locally what's being done to correct recruitment, training, local procedures (high speed chases come to mind.) Add to that the Patriot Act it's easy to be disenchanted. All the more reason to provide as much facts as possible and do whatever is possible in all local areas.

Ditto on the request for Texas Law. I read everything I can on the Supremes and the Patriot Act. They clearly weren't doing an acceptable job as far as I can see. However they are, alone, of the three branches,filling the expectations and requirements of their office. I say that tongue in cheek - There are no requirements except nomination and Senate approval. A flaw in the system that shows.

III I am now deep into reading thsence of coe information available - and the background material - on the Rutherford Inst. which from the looks of it is a fine resource especially under the heading of Constitution.Noticing the absence of comments on the Patriot Act suspension of Civil Liberties I asked for their opinion on that subject. Meanwhile due diligence continues.

On the face of it it appears this is one example of the one percent of law enforcement of police acting in a criminal manner and one out of a hundred is too many. one percent is the same as the number of citizens and police should be held to a higher standard.

this problem was recognized back in the early 90's. A law requiring the nation wide information on police and police procedures and police misconduct was passed and signed by Clinton 1994. Since then he did nothing, Bush did nothing and Obama has for the first six years done nothing. What is available are largely the results of private organizations. Cato for one and Association of Chiefs of Police another.

In the meantime the emphasis went to suspension of civil liberties under the Patriot Act.under Bush and Obama.

Nothings going to change unless the citizens quit voting for the supporters of the fascistrpolice state.- the Government Party AKA Republicans and Democrats.

Here we go again. What is a Rutherford Institute? What were the facts if any of the incident? Gashes or just marks? Refused to consent to a warrantless search makes me want to ask for much more. Was it ín pursuit or was their a time element between the root element and the search? Given the sources I wonder why it isn't being investigated through legal channels and finally surprise surprise any time you are detained by a police officer that IS considered an arrest (per decades old Supreme Court rulings) as it takes away a citizens right of free movement. Traffic stops included. Nothing new there. Of course that ruling was based on probable cause and not on mere suspicion.

I wish I had time to do more but instead of going all incensed I'll go to the CATO Institute which has a program in place for just such issues.

Meanwhile I will take no position either way of this uncorroborated story.

Except to mention when you accepted the Patriot Act without thinking it through you get what you asked for.

How many times have you voted Democrat or Republican since then? And in doing so supported the suspension of Civil Rights and the Bill of Rights? And also did away with hthe need for probable cause and substituted mere suspicion?

Your main complaint should be changing the Constitution without an Amendment.

You get what you ask for and when you do nothing you deserve what you get. Welcome to the USSA.

Skipping back and fast backwarding to the beginning WHAT does Texas Law allow in this area?

a. Warrantless searches are not allowed.
b. Warrantless searches are allowed.
c. Warrantless searches are allowed under certain circumstances.
d. Other choices as of yet unknown

For B, C, D what steps if any are citizens of Texas taking to change, modify, edit, delete or add to this particular law.

What are the facts if any or must we, once again, do the research?