Damn, I wonder what a chili dog would’ve got her?

A Georgia woman is suing after she served jail time for a drug charge due to a roadside drug test falsely labeling a bag of blue cotton candy as methamphetamine.

WMAZ reports Dasha Fincher spent almost four months in jail for meth trafficking and possession of meth with intent to distribute charges.

And then there’s this from last year:

ORLANDO, Fla. — A man arrested in Florida after police mistook doughnut glaze in his car for meth has received a $37,500 settlement.

Daniel Rushing told the Orlando Sentinel that he received a check last week from the city of Orlando.

This entry was posted in Drugs, To Protect and Serve, WiscoDave, WTF?. Bookmark the permalink.

7 Responses to Damn, I wonder what a chili dog would’ve got her?

  1. Towser says:

    The cop shoulda been fired on the spot. I mean, come on! Any cop who can’t recognize DOUGHNUT GLAZE when he sees it…

  2. Aesop says:

    So, apparently, the test kits are so precise that anything registers as meth.
    Clever ploy.
    Stop suing the cops; sue the test kit maker for gazillions. I’d give it to anyone with a legit complaint for being thusly injured.
    Getting a check from the agency doesn’t erase your criminal record.

    And those field test kits should be thrown out of court until such time as they can demonstrate no false positives.

    Next you’ll be telling us drug-sniffing Talking Police Dogs can be taught to alert at the handler’s impetus.

    • Mike_C says:

      Doughnut man Daniel Rushing apparently HAS filed suit against the kit manufacturer. But it doesn’t necessarily follow that the manufacturer is to blame if an idiot in the field uses it incorrectly. (Yes, I get that there may be some liability if they made the kit unnecessarily confusing, but there is also the possibility that a cop either deliberately mis-uses it, or flat out lies about what they did.)

      Here is a photo of the meth dealers’ worst nightmare, Cpl. Shelby Riggs-Hopkins. Says somewhere that Shelby Many Names received a written reprimand. But the photo shows her with sergeant’s insignia on the helmet behind her. So was she promoted (despite the dreaded entry into her — GASP — permanent record), or was the photo sloppily taken in front of someone else’s gear.


      • arc says:

        Little hip pocket kits rarely detect anything correctly. They are nothing but contract bait, money bait. A bag of chips, a chocolate bar, anything in the vicinity will easily blow in and contaminate such kits.

        During training in NBC/CBRN, we got chemical agent testing kits, whatever they were called. Every one of them either failed to display anything or said there was a blister agent in the air. They were so clunky and flimsy that some people broke theirs. Taxpayers should get a refund on that junk and whoever signed off on the contract should have their finances investigated for kickbacks.

        The only ones that work alright are the five panel party drug bottles. Those usually, as in most of the time, as in not every time, are accurate. As with any piss test though, if you ate poppy seeds, or other chemical substances, it may false positive.

    • Gordon says:

      The woman in Georgia is suing the company as well as the deputies:


      She spent three months in jail because she couldn’t swing the one million dollar bail that was set on her.

      Looking at a picture of her I don’t think she looks like a meth head. Maybe too many pizzas due to the munchies after a doobie, but not meth.

      BTW- the sheriff at the time of the arrest was recently appointed a U.S. Marshall by Trump.

  3. B says:

    It should be the cops PERSONALLY that get the liability….and have to pay the settlement…out of their own pocket.

    Not the taxpayers.

    • Aesop says:

      Explain in this case, please:

      If you use the kit correctly, but it’s flawed, and delivers a false positive,
      a) HTF is Officer Friendly supposed to know that from the get-go, and
      b) how is that anything the cop on the beat should pay for?

      What you are proposing is the equivalent of shooting drivers in the head for tires that blowout.

      There are things and times the individual officers should have qualified immunity revoked. Unless it can be demonstrated that the officers in either case tampered with the kit to deliberately produce the false positives, neither of these incidents qualifies for that treatment.

      Ream them for the deliberate screw ups that they do commit, but let’s don’t lose our minds and try to blame them for everything that happens, including gravity.

      You want to fire the sumbitch who bought the kits without independent testing of their accuracy, and I’m with you.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *