Tisbury police are charging 21-year-old Vineyard Haven man with drug charges after a
Tisbury Police are charging a 21-year-old Vineyard Haven man with drug charges after a motor vehicle stop.
At 9:45 pm last Thursday, Officer Andrew Silvia pulled over a vehicle driven by Lucas Pinheiro, 21, of Vineyard Haven, police said. Pinheiro was stopped for operating a motor vehicle with a suspended license, police said.
During a vehicle inventory, police say they found 4.5 ounces of marijuana and a couple of prescription pills thought to be Adderall. Due to the size of the seizure, Pinheiro was also charged with possession of a Class D drug with intent to distribute, and possession of a Class E drug. Police also seized $500 in cash.
Officer Charlie Duquette was also involved in the investigation.
Pinheiro’s car was towed, and he was taken into custody.
Pretty light looking 4.5 ounces. I like how they spread it out to look bigger.
How dare you, B4JawsIV, suggest the fine upstanding officers of the Tisbury Police, our law enforcement professionals, the “thin blue line” between chaos, anarchy and general danger prevailing upon the good citizens of Tisbury, would have such nefarious intentions to manipulate evidence in a light more favorable to them.
In the future, I suggest you refer to their sworn oath to find out their guiding principles.
Oh wait, hold on,…. were we talking about the Tisbury Police? Never mind, you are probably right.
I call it good police work. You have one big bag , alot of small bags, and plenty of cash. I call that pretty good evidence he was selling pot. We legallized it and these guys mess it up by selling it.
Very interesting that the Times would refuse to publish my comment questing WHAT citizen-surveillance technologies are being used by the police, HOW MUCH they cost, and WHO paid for them.
This guy got PULLED OVER for ‘suspended license’. Simple question: Are the Tisbury police using AUTOMATIC LICENSE PLATE READERS, or did they run this car’s plate on a hunch, or did they use OTHER MEANS, like skimming his celphone data with a ‘Stingray’ IMSI?
They wouldn’t do THAT, right? Warrantless searches? Oh, no, not ‘our’ ‘finest’.
Boy, those sure are some INTERESTING ‘communications towers’ popping up on this island. I wonder what’s on them. Say… Are the Fed ‘sea cops’ still filling in at the County’s ’emergency communications center? How nice of them. Has the Sheriff garnered any more support for ‘improved communications technologies’? Does the Sheriff’s office cooperate with any Fed ‘task force’ operations? Why isn’t the Times asking these simple questions? Might limiting the local cops’ ability to conduct warrantless searches result in fewer arrests, less ink, fewer ad pages? God forbid there be any room in my mailbox for stuff I WANT & ASKED FOR.
Cops are running a game on you, folks. They do not, & cannot, provide safety & security. Their purpose is to GENERATE REVENUE for the corporate entity you think is your town. And they will trample all over your rights to do it.
You know why your previous comment wasn’t printed and it had nothing to do with questioning the police tactics, but nice try.
keep ’em honest, George.
Objecting to police making this arrest makes you sound like another island enabler of drug and alcohol abuse.
Good point. Why so much concern about drugs? Why not as much about alcohol?
A little unclear here – Did the cops lay the glass pipe out that they seized from the bad, bad man?
Because it looks pretty similar to the pipes available for legal purchase from several island businesses.
Will the police be providing pics of cocktail shakers for the next DUI story?
How does a stop for suspended license justify a vehicle search? I can understand the need for a tow truck but that doesn’t seem to justify a search either.
The arrest on a criminal charge, which driving with a suspended license is, provides police probable cause to search the vehicle without a warrant.
Yes, but how did they arrive at ‘suspended license’ by watching him drive down the road? Either your grammar is wrong or the police are shadier than the suspect. They could’ve at least said he was pulled over for routine traffic violation and saw paraphernalia in the console. Something is not right here.
andy– republican legislators have been chipping away at civil liberties for decades. The police have plate scanning capabilities. You drive by them, the computer reads the plate– all info about the vehicle, the owner of the vehicle , current warrants and previous arrest records come up– It was not the aclu that proposed changes to laws that allow that. This is straight up information– perhaps if you were not watching so many baseball games over the years, you would know about this. What is not right here, is that the common working person has allowed the surveillance state free access to our information.
The Police have Mobile Data Terminals in their cruisers.
They run the license plate or have prior knowledge the registered owner has a suspended drivers license. They pull the car over and confirm who is operating the vehicle. If it’s the suspended driver they confirm the suspension via dispatch. It’s a preferred arrest.
Arresting someone and towing their vehicle means a vehicle inventory must be conducted. The marijuana would have been discovered regardless (inevitable discovery).
Also there are other legal ways for the Police to be able to search a vehicle.
Rather than focusing on the fact it is Only 4.5 ounces of weed, let’s not pretend there wasn’t a motor vehicle accident just hours prior where a young juvenile was severely injured and the responsible operator was presumably impaired.
You obviously do not know the current vineyard system and should do some research before commenting.
Please explain the “current vineyard system”
You should request the police report and do the research for yourself. Most of the people who comment in regards to police matters on the island do zero research.
For now, ignore this driver’s suspended license. Let’s consider that motor vehicle accident just hours prior where a young juvenile was severely injured and the responsible operator was presumably impaired. How does that contribute to justifying a warrant-less search? Did the police release the presumably impaired driver so he might have another go at it?
Another go at what?
There are many ways to search a vehicle without a warrant. All of this information is accessible via google.
Both vehicles involved w the accident which is unrelated to Lucas Pinheiro’s car stop we’re towed. So at the minimum an inventory has to be conducted of the vehicles contents. Anything illegal discovered is an inevitable discovery. There also could’ve been contraband in plain view. There is also a search for evidence relevant to the crime. Also admissions of wrong doing, the motor vehicle doctrine. Etc.
You used the accident as one of the justifications for a vehicle search. Nope, just nope.
Once had my car towed (result of an accident of nature) and I was present. Officers did not search my car.
Police tend to state whether contraband was in plain view, doing this quickly dispels question whether it was an unjustified search.
Maybe a search for evidence relevant “to the crime” except the stop was for a suspended license; that requires quite a leap to get to motor vehicle doctrine.
The concern is you’re arguing for police be allowed to conduct searches of cars without a warrant or permission, that whim will suffice.
I did not use the vehicle accident as justification for the police to search the vehicle.
I referenced a serious motor vehicle accident hours prior where drugs may have been involved.
Hours later the police get marijuana off the street. That’s where the accident reference ends. These are two completely unrelated incidents.
No the police cannot search a vehicle just because it has been involved in an accident. If the accident is OUI the vehicle driven by the person arrested will be searched for:
1.) Evidence of the crime(s)
2.) A Motor Vehicle Inventory or search incident to arrest.
Now let’s fast forward to the SUSPENDED operator.
He gets arrested for driving after SUSPENSION. The police will conduct a motor vehicle inventory before the vehicle gets towed. So the owner cannot come back and say the police or tow operator have stolen anything from the vehicle. Drugs or contraband is found during the inventory. That’s good all day due to an inevitable discovery via motor vehicle inventory. I hope that clears some things up.
You’re allowed to request any police report at any police station. That may help clear up some of your questions. Some information will be redacted for privacy purposes. Most departments don’t charge either.
In certain scenarios or incidents you one hundred percent DO NOT need permission or a warrant to search a motor vehicle.
An example of where you would need permission:
*police stop car for speeding*
No other infractions or reason to believe something further is going on. The police cannot just search the car. They would have to request consent. Which can be denied or granted. If there isn’t any other reason to try and apply for a warrant, the police won’t search the car.
The scenario here was the the car was towed. In that case, police take an inventory. While doing the inventory, they allegedly found marijuana and cash.
Quote: “let’s not pretend there wasn’t a motor vehicle accident just hours prior where a young juvenile was severely injured and the responsible operator was presumably impaired.”
If you’re going to refuse to own what you submit, why should anything you submit be given respect?
Yes. I am not refusing anything. I am stating that the accident may have had drugs involved.
People water down Marijuana because it is legal for the most part. However Marijuana can impair drivers. That is the relation and the reason for the “quote”
The incidents have nothing to do with eachother.
Then do not include the incident.
I could accept driving with a suspended license a criminal offense if it were court ordered. Random person X doesn’t pay their renewal fee because the the notice was delivered to the wrong address.
That happened to me the end of 2018. Lucky for me, I’d made the effort to meet logical unintended recipients of mail and packages. The neighbor (a mile away) contacted me, I retrieved the notice.
How does that justify a vehicle search? How does that justify a law that justifies a vehicle search? Better guess is police wanted greater scope in performing warrant-less searches. Congrats, all.
Probable cause is being stretched to the breaking point in this country. The cops are not your friends and they are not looking out for your best interest. The answer to any cops question is no. Can I ___? no. is it ok if I ___? No. We are fast becoming a surveillance society and cases like this demonstrate how it’s happening. Defend your rights. No one else will
Islanduh– in the early 70’s I had a red white and blue van complete with stars and stripes, American flag and hippie girls in the passenger seat. I got stopped about 5 times a week, and had some sort of search done every time. They would often say that they knew someone who was fixing a van up, and wanted to see what mine looked like– they would comment on how easily the drawers opened, and all the neat little places I had to put stuff. They rarely had a reason to stop me. I was always polite, as were they. They were doing their job, and I was being a hippie.. I would suggest voting for representatives who will keep the government in check. It’ not good for anyone to be anything but co- operative with law enforcement. They put their lives on the line with every traffic stop, and will risk their lives to come to your aid.. They are our friends. And they should be treated with respect.
I once related to an officer the time I witnessed a driver hit a little girl on her bicycle.
“(expletive). You saw it happen?”
Police have the agony of meeting the public when bad things happen.
While they generally don’t see an accident happen, they have to deal with the results.
They ARE human.
Islanduh: Face it, they don’t get it. That a law exists does not justify the rightness of that law.
Comments are closed.