I think this will end up being one of the harder issues for us to come to a common ground on. There are a couple of issues with this and I can see it from both sides. You don't want cops to be able to pull anyone over at any time for any reason, and I agree. I don't think we should be subject to the random whim of authority figures to be free to do as they please, but I do think there are such things as good police work.
Just one point of interest also is how you are going to prove that a cop (other than his own admission) never had the intention of enforcing the original violation. No one can know for sure whether the cop was going to write a warning or citation. Also, if I end up finding a more serious offense out of a traffic stop I will never write a citation for the original violation. All the criminal has to do is challenge the traffic violation, win that, and then the rest of my case goes right out the window because that was my P.C. for the stop.
Now, the other side of that argument, and the one I support, is that you have to have a clearly articulate line of events to justify why you ended up arresting someone for a more serious violation that wasn't apparent from the beginning. Let's say that I see a tail light out, I stop the driver, I see-smell weed, I search the car and find a dead body in the trunk. As long as I can articulate all of those events then I've just potentially caught a liquidateer. I know that's extreme, but it's a good example of how small fishing trips can land you the big fish. Our courts agree.
-- --- jaybird --- I am not the cause of your problems. My actions are the result of your actions. Your life is not my fault.
