There was much furor this past week about a case in which police officers became suspicious that a man they’d stopped had stuffed drugs up his rectum. So, they got a warrant which led to a medical search that began with a cavity search and progressed to X-ray, multiple enemas, and finally a colonoscopy (all in a hospital environment). Turned out he didn’t have any drugs after all.  Across the country, cries of jack-booted thuggery were excreted, and the involved officers (and medicos) became the butt of many inflamed and flatulent complaints. Many wanted to see the officers jammed up.

I don’t want to get all anal about this, but it was pretty crappy for everyone to dump on the cops before hearing their side.  It turns out that the officers in question had reason to believe their suspect had done this before:  http://www.theblaze.com/stories/2013/11/07/new-details-emerge-about-new-mexico-man-at-center-of-police-departments-anal-probing-controversy/

If we can get serious for a minute, it’s well known in law enforcement that drug mules often hide their contraband in their rectums, just as some will swallow the baggie or condom full of cocaine when police approach.  There are numerous cases where these things have ruptured inside one or the other end of the alimentary canal, resulting in the untimely death of the suspect.  The cops are responsible for the person in their custody, even if that “custody” merely takes the form of investigative detention.  Thus, in all seriousness, they had a duty to, uh, probe the matter more deeply.

I hope this little tour through the bowels of legal responsibilities serves as a reminder to always get the other guy’s side of the story before trying to stuff a complaint up his nether regions. I will now clench this blog entry tightly shut, in hopes that, in hind-sight, we’ve gotten to the bottom of things.

1 COMMENT

  3. Hi Mas – just have to say that you may have flushed out some facts here, but this story still smells! I think that you are just trying to paper over the problem while stalling, instead of wiping it clean! Could this be your Water Loo?

    Best regards,

    Sam

  4. There are two problems with this “evidence”:

    1) While the arresting officer claims that the K-9 officer told him that the suspect had a history of hiding drugs in his rectum, the K-9 officer’s report makes no mention of that claim. Similarly, there is no record in any of the suspect’s prior drug-related cases of him having transported contraband in his rectum.

    2) There is at least a second case of the police in Deming going to similar extremes on a suspect without finding any drugs, on the basis of the same dog alerting to the alleged presence of drugs. However, that dog is not certified (its certification lapsed in 2011 and was not renewed) and its training is not current, in violation of the law.

    It should take more that one officer saying that another officer told him that a suspect has a history of hiding drugs in a body cavity before a person is subjected to this level of invasive search of his body (and billed for it by the hospital). Ken White at Popehat does an excellent job of showing how troublesome this case actually is. http://www.popehat.com/2013/11/07/what-is-the-quantum-of-proof-necessary-for-police-to-rape-and-torture-you-in-new-mexico/

  5. While I agree that cops should have some leeway in terms of their searches, the whole “prior history” of carrying drugs is basically hearsay and the Blaze seems to be quite behind the 8-ball in this case. Popehat published a very thorough analysis in the warrant and all the information from the Police report at
    http://www.popehat.com/2013/11/07/what-is-the-quantum-of-proof-necessary-for-police-to-rape-and-torture-you-in-new-mexico/
    To summarize, the “reason to believe their suspect had done this before” was nothing more than an unnamed officer saying that the suspect had a history in that direction. Imagine if someone said Massad has a history of being a mule and the cop taking that word and giving you several examinations, enemas, x-rays and colonoscopy to boot. It’s no more than hear-say. It can’t and should not hold up in court. This is just beyond the pale.

  6. I don’t care if they saw him stick it up his a$& they had no right to do those procedure. They should have put him in a cell and waited for it to come out. IMHO the police is out of control. I respect you but I think your wrong about this.

  7. Mas, I think you’re giving the cops too much credit.

    They clearly overstepped the bounds of the Warrant. And the evidence is clear, they found NO drugs. So, hard as they tried, the ends didn’t justify the means.

  8. You left out the part about the warrant not being valid in Hidalgo County and that it had actually expired hours before the colonoscopy was performed. I like and admire you Mr Ayoob, but you’re off the reservation on this one.

  12. Aside from the Popehat cross-examination…another issue many people have breaks down to values: is it worth doing all that to someone over a quantity of drugs small enough to be smuggled in such a fashion?

    Is that a good use of law enforcement time and resources, compared to other things they could be doing to serve their constituents?

    Some will say yes while others will say no, regardless of whether the dog’s certification was expired or not, or whether the K-9 officer’s report corroborated or contradicted the arresting officer’s testimony.

  13. I’m with SelimT. There’s no evidence beyond the bald assertion in the affidavit to support this alleged history of hiding drugs in his rectum.

    The affidavit is already defective because the probable cause was based on an uncertified, under trained PET, not a certified search dog. (Without current training and certification, that’s all the dog is.) It’s not a huge leap to infer that if an officer is willing to sign a defective affidavit, that there are multiple untruths to the perjury.

  14. I was going to link to the pertinent Popehat article, too, but apparently two others already beat me to it.

    It’s a long post, as Mr. White’s posts frequently are, but it’s detailed and informative. I suggest people read through it in its entirety.

  15. While inclined to suspect that the Deming, N.M. police may have been a little over-zealous in their efforts I am willing to wait until all the facts come out in court before making a decision.

    I will readily admit to a bias not in favor of Deming, N.M. and it’s officers however.

    Vince

  16. I think a great deal of people (including myself) have a problem with this because of how far they went in the search. After both x-rays and a single enema did not turn up anything, they should have either gone to the colonoscopy or let the guy go. I happen to believe they should have let him go. In my opinion, they overstepped the boundary between a search of his person and torture.

  17. Okay, I have to ask — does it really matter if he had done this before?

    Does their case stand up to the requirements of the law based on what was seen and known in this traffic stop?

    I really don’t want to think that “Hey there goes X, he’s ran drugs before” is a good reason stop and search someone; especially to the degree this went.

  18. Mas,
    My nephew the deputy/SWAT member thinks you’re a hell of a guy.
    Don’t think much of cops or SWAT teams. Like him though.
    I would like to hear Jefferson’s or Madison’s opinion on 7 anal probes on an innocent man. Just love how you POS use a traffic stop for any and all abuse.

  19. Oh boy, Mas, not only are you a firearms expert, you are also a comedian! I can’t stop laughing!

    I certainly don’t know much about this area, but I would think once one doctor has done one search wearing latex gloves, that would be the end of the matter. Who needs all of those tests? The drugs are either in that place or they are not. Yuck.

  20. You are getting closer and closer to your “Metcalf Moment”, so stop and think.

    There is a wedge being driven in between the Police and the Taxpayers. Humor isn’t going to stop a historical trend.

    Either reform the police, or the concept will die in the next 20 years. After a lot of good people on both sides of the wedge die as well.

  21. Doesn’t matter how much history there is. The warrant was invalid in the county they took him to. Then it even expired before the colonoscopy. I agree to getting both sides but a medical procedure under anesthesia without consent, arrest or a valid warrant is unethical at best and illegal at worst. I wouldn’t flush this case so quickly; something is very wrong.

  22. MA are you trying to pull a Metcalf? I think you’re on the wrong side of this. If they die in custody how much trouble will the cops be? Doubt that a druggie dying in custody will get anybody in real trouble. Hey they can SWAT a 106YO and only get a slap on the wrist.

  24. Mas,

    Wait now. from the story posted:

    1. Eckert’s abdominal area was X-rayed; no narcotics were found.

    2. Doctors then performed an exam of Eckert’s anus with their fingers; no narcotics were found.

    3. Doctors performed a second exam of Eckert’s anus with their fingers; no narcotics were found.

    4. Doctors penetrated Eckert’s anus to insert an enema. Eckert was forced to defecate in front of doctors and police officers. Eckert watched as doctors searched his stool. No narcotics were found.

    5. Doctors penetrated Eckert’s anus to insert an enema a second time. Eckert was forced to defecate in front of doctors and police officers. Eckert watched as doctors searched his stool. No narcotics were found.

    6. Doctors penetrated Eckert’s anus to insert an enema a third time. Eckert was forced to defecate in front of doctors and police officers. Eckert watched as doctors searched his stool. No narcotics were found.

    7. Doctors then X-rayed Eckert again; no narcotics were found.

    8. Doctors prepared Eckert for surgery, sedated him, and then performed a colonoscopy where a scope with a camera was inserted into Eckert’s anus, rectum, colon and large intestines. No narcotics were found.

    Sorry, but step 5 seems like the MAX I think this should have gone.

    Can you cite cases where those increasingly infiltrating measures would produce a result where the previous had failed?

    I also have read that he has been billed for the sedation and colonoscopy.

    I am not “quick” to blame the cops on this, but the fact that this could happen without either an attorney present, or without someone having the sense to say, “ok, that’s enough, this guy is clean” earlier just is mind boggling.

    What I don’t like about this is that it was “by the book.” IMO, we need a new book in that case. Not with you on this one, Mas.

  25. Sorry, Mas. This one won’t fly. No matter how much lipstick you try to slap on it, it’s still a very, very nasty pig.

  26. Nice apologetics for the police. I’m a former cop. If I thought I had probable cause for a butt-probe, I would have requested a telephone warrant if time was of the essence. The police and medical “professionals” were taking the law into their own hands, so to speak. The police abused the Fourth Amendment.

    Even if a suspect has committed a crime before, there still needs to be probable cause that the suspect committed the new crime.

  27. But us no buts on this one. The War on Drugs has literally gone too far. And the hospital billing him for the procedure; I thought the ACA was supposed to cover check-ups?

  28. The “War on Drugs” is a failure by any standard you want to use…legal, humanitarian, moral. It’s helped move us down the road to police state (sorry, Mas), criminalized America, and given us SWAT teams in every department, whether needed or not. I can’t read the founder’s minds but I would suspect the’re spinning in their graves at the likes of New Mexico.

  29. What a load of crap no pun intended! The guy gets stopped for a traffic stop and ends up having a forced medical procedure done to him, just what country are we in? I hope this guy not only sues their arses off but they strip these jerks of their badges they certainly have no business holding a position of authority over the general public. Ayoob I’ve been following your articles for years and I have to say you just went down a big notch in the credibility department. instead of trying to stretch the thin blue line past the limits of where it should go you should stop trying to cover for a blatant infringement of someone’s constitutional rights…

  31. I hope the practitioners have their i’s doted and t’s crossed. My mother had a similar procedure performed (for colon problems, not drugs) and the RN was successfully prosecuted for assault and lost their license to practice. Three enemas cause severe electrolyte imbalance (you absorb through the colon as well as eliminate). I’m not convinced the police didn’t have good reason for the warrant but the medical practice sounds wrong. We’ll see, in time.

  32. My concerns are these:
    1. Warrant not valid where search performed?

    2. Excessive intrusion:
    A. Fluoroscope, fine
    B. Initial Digital search OK.
    Without anything to validate the possible presence of contraband, the subsequent searches were excessive.

    And the medical personnel should be accountable, am sure after step 2. they had a reasonable knowledge the search was fruitless…

  33. I just read an article where after police booked one guy they found a revolver with a 4 inch barrel hidden in his rectum. I have friends and family that work in corrections and they have seen a lot of things stuck where the sun don’t shine. The case of the revolver was the deepest concealment I’ve ever heard of. Bet it would have been a pain in the irsh to draw.

  34. While I generally respect most of what you have to say in your blog posts, I’m afraid you’ve got your head up your Mas on this one. Your knee-jerk support of law enforcement in this case discredits both yourself and other reasonable officers.
    This case is illustrative of how the “War on Drugs” has eroded our civil liberties to the point where police can medically torture a man to determine if he is packing narcotic contraband. To couch your argument in terms of concern for the suspect’s safety is ridiculous. What other medical tests and interventions will these goons be ordering for the “well being” of their prisoners. Digital rectal examinations, enemas, and colonoscopies are painful, humiliating, and do carry the risk of injury to the patient. The next time you go in for your cancer screening colonoscopy perhaps you’d like to have one without the sedative and anaesthetic? As an emergency medicine PA I work with the local police and sheriffs every day on a variety of patients, but I would never agree to perform such excessive, invasive and potentially dangerous tests based upon some officers hunch that the man he stopped for a traffic violation may be in possession of illegal drugs.

  35. The report I read said he was first taken to the Deming hospital who refused to do the search on ethical grounds. He was then taken out of the county (where the search warrant was not valid. The same article said the warrant was good ’til 10pm and records indicate he was prepped for surgery at 1am.
    Could you speak to the validity of the warrant time wise and geographically? Do warrants typically carry such tight restraints. I know cops can only look where it says they can and for what it says but not sure about the timing and the anus kind of follows along.

  36. Some folks need to read the original blog post. My concern was the life of the suspect; finding evidence for arrest is, in that situation, a lower priority in my view. David, you say you’re a Physician’s Assistant. If you had reasonable belief that your patient had something inside him that could be a “ticking time bomb” in terms of potential threat to life, are you telling us you wouldn’t do your damndest to get it out of there before it went off?

  37. ya know, I was never keen on a lot of your articles before this.

    This one just seals it. I KNOW I don’t like your stuff now. Even as a supposed gun expert, I struggled. Cover yourself anyway you want, there’s no way this should have gone to the level it did.

    Coming both as a firearms instructor AND a retired MP.

  38. The antis say that I have “ticking time bombs” in my gun safe, they just want to protect me by removing them. As in this case, that’s a pretext.

    The initial stop was almost certainly a pretext–the officer recognized a known druggie and found a reason to stop him. The “clenched” posture claim was a pretext. The X-ray and first digital exam may have been legitimate if the probable cause was legitimate, the first enema pretty questionable under most circumstances.

    The rest was revenge, and should not be tolerated.

  40. Yes, Mas, I’ve been a Physician Assistant for 28 years, most of which has been spent working in primary care and emergency medicine.

    The indication to perform medical testing is largely based upon your findings from history and physical examinations which are benign and non-invasive. This man’s history was not suggestive of him carrying a “ticking time bomb” in his rectum. He denied having anything there and that alone if fully documented by both the police and medical examiners would suffice to indemnify them from malpractice should he indeed have lied and subsequently suffered harm.

    I might have considered ordering an xray (which has radiation risks to be considered) but would certainly not have subsequently performed the repeated invasive procedures this man was subjected to.

    This patient DID NOT CONSENT to the subsequent forced digital rectal examinations, enemas, xrays, drugging, and colonoscopy. Where I practice medicine this would meet the definition of assault.

    The unreasonableness of these escalating procedures and the physical pain and psychic trauma incurred by the patient would meet the definition of malpractice. This certainly does not meet the standard of care even in correctional medicine environments.

    The “medical providers” in this case should be charged with assault, civil suits should be prosecuted against them and the hospital, and they should lose their medical licenses.

    Your presentation of a hypothetical worst case scenario “bomb” is the classical exigent circumstances justification which has been frequently been used by the State to justify torture.

    In medical practice our credo is “First Do No Harm”. This man was tortured. The medical staff in this case were the perpetrators of his torture at the instigation of the representatives of the State.

    Shame on you for your disingenuous argument and support of these thugs.

  41. Not disengenuous at all, sir. In both your world and mine, saving life is a prime directive.

    David, taking a suspect’s word for something is far from a certain indemnification for police, if they have reason to believe he’s lying and serious harm, or death, results.

    I do indeed see it as an exigent circumstance situation.

    You said that you yourself would consider exploring via xray. I will agree that the following chain of events in this case was highly unusual. I cannot imagine physicians continuing as they did unless their initial examination, coupled with the totality of the circumstances, indicated a possibility of something harmful being present, beyond finger reach.

    Can you?

    Unlike some here, I’m not prepared to make accusations until I’ve heard both sides of the story. However, believing that the police and the warrant-issuing authority turned into the Gestapo, and the medical community did an imitation of Dr. Mengele — over a small scale drug bust — requires a great stretch of imagination.

    I’ll continue to withhold judgment until the involved cops and docs alike have been heard from in detail.

  42. Mas… i see your point here my friend! One, most druggies wont amit to anything up the butt or down the throat.. And the health issues involed if they should bust! Drug’s that is!! But with that being said.. i feel maybe they went alittle to far in the search! As long as it wasint a witch hunt for evidence, and more concern for life? I see their point! Becuse they are resposable for his well being after the arrest! And finally can anyone say… REPEAT OFFENDER!!!?? Good day sir.

  43. Mas, consider stepping back and looking at the bigger picture. You cannot justify anything in the name of an individuals safety. At some point you are your own keeper. This a human being and I assume a citizen of the U.S. If this is ok under the law we might need to scrap the whole system.

    If he had a “ticking time bomb” up there, then he put it there. I have a ticking time bomb of plaque in my arteries, others have lungs full of tar from smoking. And we all did it to ourselves.

    Remember, this can happen to anyone now. That means you and the people you care about. Based on a hunch, and a butt sniffing dog.

    The “safety” is not always worth the loss of liberty and dignity. There must be limits. Now matter what “the cops and the docs” have to say.

    Otherwise Mas, keep up the good work. I enjoy your articles and sense of humor.

  44. “if they have reason to believe he’s lying and serious harm, or death, results.”

    Wait, are you saying that the police were doing the victim A FAVOUR? Or who else was it whose life was at at risk of “serious harm / death”?

  45. I have tried to stay out of this conversation, but find myself unable after the attacks on Mas.
    The “War on Drugs” is a nasty business. Law enforcement finds it necessary to deal with some unsavory characters. The criminal history of this “victim” would indicate that he had, at some point, agreed to be a confidential informant, i.e; numerous drug related arrests followed by the state dropping charges. Can anybody say D.E.A. ?
    If this scenario is correct, it could easily be surmised that he had failed to live up to his end of the bargain and it was decided to quit playing games.
    Discounting this scenario, he was obviously well known as an actor in the local drug problem. Does this warrant his treatment in of itself? Maybe, maybe not. Without the insight of the arresting officers, we can’t know.
    If, in fact, the scenario that Mas presented ( fear of a drug package rupturing in his rectum ), this incident was no longer the execution of a search warrant, it had become an attempt to save his life. At that point the expiration of the warrant or the jurisdictional location of the hospital is mute. Had a drug package actually ruptured en-route to the out of jurisdiction hospital and the ” victim” had died, what would the liability be for the “ethical” hospital?
    My point? I don’t know any of those involved this incident. I do know that the victim is probably not someone I would include in my circle of friends or want to have as a neighbor. I would hope that the officers involved had no malice in their hearts and were trying to do the right thing for their community and the man they had in custody.
    @ David— I am so glad for you that you have never, in your 28 year medical career, made a mistake that caused pain or unnecessary financial
    loss to any of your patients. If this is the case, my hat comes off for you. Some years ago, my wife was experiencing extreme abdominal pain. After being referred by our family doctor to an internist, and after extensive tests, we were advised her gall bladder had to come out. After removing, in the surgeons on words, a perfectly healthy gall bladder, the team of doctors went from a 2 inch incision to opening her up from her sternum to below her navel, basically going on a hunt for the cause of her pain. They found nothing, leaving her badly scarred both physically and mentally. Weeks later, still on a quest to find the cause of her pain, it was discovered that she had badly infected ovaries and after this surgery the problem was solved. The first doctors never apologized and I still paid $10,000 + for their misdiagnosis and unnecessary surgery. Several attorneys (they have informants inside hospitals, usually P.A.’s and nurses) approached me about lawsuits. I advised them that I thought the doctors had acted in good faith on the information they had received from their extensive tests and we held no malice toward them. Maybe I should have held them to the same standards you have presented since we all know that those in the medical professions tend to be over-rated, egotistical trolls in it for the money, ordering unnecessary tests and over-charging for unneeded procedures, without compassion for those they purport to serve, and love inflicting pain.
    Mas,—- I’m fairly new to your blog, and I respect your expertise, knowledge and insight. Having said that, it has been my observation about 1/3 of your respondents would do to ride the river with, 1/3 would last about 3 seconds in a fight, but would show up for the fight wanting to learn, and the rest would sit on the side-line criticizing those in the fight. Keep your head up, you fit in the first category.

  46. Jeez, Mas. I can’t believe you’re still sticking to your guns when no reasonable person can justify what was done. Those “officers of the law” wildly exceeded their remit and should be quickly stripped of their badges and guns. You, sir, should admit that you got this one wrong.

  47. P.S— For what it’s worth, I probably would have let him go after the initial search at the scene.
    As a rookie, I questioned an “old head” as to his seeming lack of enthusiasm for the job. His response, “son, they have never fired a cop for being lazy, but they will fire you in a heartbeat if you do to much, thinking your doing the right thing, and some one complains”.
    People get what they deserve in police protection. They complain that officers are paid too much because they are lazy, then complain when they can’t find a combination of Rambo, Mother Theresa, and Albert Einstein for what they are willing to pay.
    Are their cops out there that don’t deserve the trust we put in them? Absolutely!
    Should we distrust every cop we encounter because of them? Absolutely not. Statistics show you’re far more likely to be treated with respect and dignity, by a well trained, well screened American, trying to do a tough job to the best of his ability. Work with him the same as you would your doctor, mechanic, or pastor.
    By the way, medical malpractice is the third leading cause of death in America, right behind cancer and heart disease. Police malpractice comes nowhere close.
    Now I think I’ll go down to that bluff by the river and clean my rifle……….

  48. @Dennis said “If, in fact, the scenario that Mas presented ( fear of a drug package rupturing in his rectum ), this incident was no longer the execution of a search warrant, it had become an attempt to save his life.”
    Jeez – that’s about as pathetic an excuse for out-of-control law enforcement as I’ve heard lately.

    C’mon, folks. The reality is that these so-called “officers of the law” went way beyond anything reasonable. For reasons best known only to Mas (and a couple of his defenders), Mas refuses to acknowledge that some folks who wear the badge have spun out of control.

    The idea that the officers put this guy through all that they did because they were only interested in saving his life is laughable. Bottom line, the whole “War on Drugs” is pathetic and should go the way of Prohibition. We could empty out half our prisons and the feds and the states could save huge amounts of money.

    Instead, we have a system where someone is taken into custody for a minor traffic infraction and forced through some horrors that we used to think only happened in the Russian Gulag.

    Everyone who defends this, including you Mas, should be ashamed. There’s nothing that can be said to justify what took place.

  50. I have been reading your articles since the early 70’s and use you as a source in my many discussions on the 2nd amendment and police related matters. In this case you are 100% wrong. I understand the need to back up brother officers but when good officers protect dirty ones it gives all police a bad reputation. These cops lied, had an uncertified dog, and went way beyond any limits of common sense or legal authority.

Newer Comments »