I dont see that as a good point. If someone has a warrant, you find them, arrest them, and then decide to search the vehicle, it makes sense. He had a warrant for theft at that. She secured the warrant, and searched the vehicle. You may find something you may not, but you did a full investigation and recorded what you found. Nesto is so bummy he's trying to get charges dropped to get his bond lowered which won't matter because he doesnt even have $1. The items found are different charges and he'll still be sitting up in that jail on the other charges that Wooten indicted him on.
Nesto is bummy and needs to pay for what he’s done to all those people. The courts have a duty to present everything;each side is there to win. They are going to pull out everything they can. And yes this is a good point because if they did not follow proper protocol based on jurisdiction then they would inevitably have done sloppy work and could cost this case to go south. Let’s just hope that it goes in our favor.
@@IAMSHYD Yes, both sides have the right and duty to argue their sides. I agree. I'll wait for Pam's legal take on this. But Im not understanding how people are agreeing that the search of the car wasn't legal if she had a warrant to search it. They're saying he wasn't in the car so there was no reason to get a warrant to search it? Since when did that become law?
@ I agree with you. I don’t understand that either. Pam will definitely break it down for us. If they’re bringing it up it must mean something; I don’t know the laws to that degree either but I’m thinking that they are trying to figure out why the officer felt the need to ask for a warrant to actually search the vehicle. And I think that’s where the issue is going to be. What made her suspect something was in the car. This case is going to be crazy sis!
But she seen and new he was driving the vehicle, he may have had a warrant for one thing but nesto had all types of complaints and she was watching him for 30days anyway I thought? Also if she knew at the time those vehicles were stolen, and the truck was in shirley name how would officer fields no that wasn't stolen or shirley was his wide, she did her due diligence imo He's trying to get things thrown out but it may have nothing to to do with nothing
Thank you Dennis
Get back in court room!! Thanks Dennis!!
Thanks Dennis!!
Good info Dennis
Glad it was helpful!
Thanks for the updates Dennis!
What was the detective’s response to the so called “grilling” and the points that Hoover scored?
I dont see that as a good point. If someone has a warrant, you find them, arrest them, and then decide to search the vehicle, it makes sense. He had a warrant for theft at that. She secured the warrant, and searched the vehicle. You may find something you may not, but you did a full investigation and recorded what you found.
Nesto is so bummy he's trying to get charges dropped to get his bond lowered which won't matter because he doesnt even have $1. The items found are different charges and he'll still be sitting up in that jail on the other charges that Wooten indicted him on.
Nesto is bummy and needs to pay for what he’s done to all those people. The courts have a duty to present everything;each side is there to win. They are going to pull out everything they can. And yes this is a good point because if they did not follow proper protocol based on jurisdiction then they would inevitably have done sloppy work and could cost this case to go south. Let’s just hope that it goes in our favor.
@@IAMSHYD Yes, both sides have the right and duty to argue their sides. I agree. I'll wait for Pam's legal take on this. But Im not understanding how people are agreeing that the search of the car wasn't legal if she had a warrant to search it. They're saying he wasn't in the car so there was no reason to get a warrant to search it? Since when did that become law?
@ I agree with you. I don’t understand that either. Pam will definitely break it down for us. If they’re bringing it up it must mean something; I don’t know the laws to that degree either but I’m thinking that they are trying to figure out why the officer felt the need to ask for a warrant to actually search the vehicle. And I think that’s where the issue is going to be. What made her suspect something was in the car. This case is going to be crazy sis!
@@IAMSHYD 💯💯💯
But she seen and new he was driving the vehicle, he may have had a warrant for one thing but nesto had all types of complaints and she was watching him for 30days anyway I thought?
Also if she knew at the time those vehicles were stolen, and the truck was in shirley name how would officer fields no that wasn't stolen or shirley was his wide, she did her due diligence imo
He's trying to get things thrown out but it may have nothing to to do with nothing
I thought the car search wasn’t relevant to the case pending trial. It impacts the case he isn’t pending trial for yet…the CP charges.
The DA Says they didn’t even need the car search didn’t they?
That's was my thing, why he concerned about something he's not going to trial for yet
@@sayjay26 I think he’s just doing what Ernest and Sonya are telling him to do.
@@ItIsHelen worrying about the wrong stuff,...
@@ItIsHelen thanks ✌️✌️✌️
❤❤❤❤
Bye
OMG
"IF" this is true she would have been in violation of the 4th amendment. Exclusionary rule.
👀
1
Is this the same Detective Fields involved in the YSL trial?
Think she’s the Roswell Dective unless she came from Atlanta PD
Thanks Dennis ❤
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1