Hypothetical situation -- those with law enforcement exp please read

................................can be closed.

 

this is so confusing to understand can you be more specific and explain it without jumping from idea to idea

 

Let me know if i'm confused

I like names better so
A-Ashley
B- Bob
C- Chris

Chris is fat and gets pain killers. Chris gives pain killers to Bob and Bob sells them to Ashley. Ashley is always buying from Bob. Bob always tells Ashley when and where to sell the drugs and he chose a spot where there was a camera. One day Bob tells Ashley to check back on Friday for more drugs. Strangely that Friday Ashley has police barging into her room. Even though the police found nothing they still charged her for buying and strangely enough they have pretty exact estimate of to how much was bought based on shitty camera.

Bob and Chris got away, free of charge. Did Bob and Chris rat her out? If not then maybe Chris could've gotten away with it, but Bob?!

It couldn't have been planned or else they would've attacked them right after they saw the trade go down so they 100% have evidence right?

Ashley says she heard the police say "...and have the CIs send over their reports, thanks"? (a CI being Cofidential informant) so it further validates Chris and Bob might be scumbags

Not sure about:
----(In the United States) can informants ALWAYS use substances or ----must all substance use be pre-approved by their directing agency? "

Can charges be dropped on Ashley since police found nothing?

 

if there is proof of purchase (i.e: the video) and two informants ratting her out charges won't be dropped. you could fight it in court too but it sounds unlikely.

 

On mobile, will reply later. In short though yes the name substitute was done well. Not "via shitty camera" though. Bobs room is close enough to campus property to be videod, well, the hallway in front of his room. They literally presented a list you purchased x amount for y dollars at this time. For 3 weeks. I don't even see why the cops would set up such an informant arrest, the informant is a full time student and was the only person selling to the convicted..aren't these things all about informant anonymity?

 

^ Realized I typed pretty much everything I had to say.

The point of the thread is to come to the same conclusion..B and C are bad apples..there's no other way the trade could have been compromised. The fact that B and C weren't reprimanded at all yet they received a list with time of and amount of purchase..Must be police.

 

They can't bust into her house without some reason to believe that they would find anything (i.e. the video) meaning they've probably had the video since before they busted into Ashley's house. And even if they didn't find anything, depending on the contents of the video, she could still be in some trouble. It honestly entirely depends on the specific contents of the video, and if they can find anything to back it up (i.e. any evidence that Ashley has abused these drugs or purchased them in the past other than the video). I'm not too sure on what kind of trouble you can get in for attempting to buy narcotics if they have no evidence of you actually doing so, but i'm sure there's some sort of punishment.