Thursday, November 1, 2012

Foley Monster Represents Two Drug Sniffing Dogs at the Supreme Court

I, Foley Monster, have finally arrived at the moment all lawyers, both dogs and bipeds, have dreamed of. I, along with my young apprentice Pocket, am going to argue a case before the Supreme Court of the United States of America.

My clients are two fine dogs, one, a chocolate Labrador retriever named Franky the other a German shepard named Aldo.  They are two hard working police dogs from Florida.  Their job is to sniff out drugs: heroin, cocaine, smack, horse, kibble and jits, the ecstasy train, Blue Buffalo Crystal Meth, and they are the best in the state.  But, unfortunately, their reputations are being called into question by the humans in the Florida Supreme Court (you remember them from the 2000 Presidential election case “I Don’t Know What We Should Do vs. I Don’t Know What Do You Think We Should Do) ruled that Franky’s and Aldo’s identification of drugs belonging to two backwater rubes violated the constitutional ban on unreasonable search and seizures.

I plan to argue that the case should be thrown out of court because it is impossible for dogs to be unreasonable, we are very reasonable, we live in the moment.  To unreasonably search is to plan and we don’t plan, we react.  Dogs who work with the police have learned to use their sniffers to serve man.  Dogs can’t fake sniffing.

What the defense lawyers ask is if it is legal for a dog to sniff outside a house without a warrant.  Let me tell you, as the world’s foremost dog attorney, even if you spend all day licking a judge’s mouth there isn’t a human judge who is going to give a dog a warrant.  Furthermore we can’t control what we sniff, or ignore what we sniff when we sniff it.  We are as unable to go after what we sniff then a judge is to pass a dollar and not put it in his pocket.

What the real issue is, I believe, is that humans, who serve us by feeding us and then cleaning our waste product, know we are the higher race, and have relied on our genetic laziness to hold down important jobs.  But now, some of the more enthusiastic of our species have decided that they too can work (in the important field of law enforcement) and do it better than the humans.  These dogs are also planning to enter the fields of airport security, and any other job where sniff is required.  Afraid that these enthusiastic go getters will spread their desire to be self supporting to other dogs, as will dogs who are now attorneys, the Man means to squash our self-suffiencey before it spreads.

Such a fear is baseless because, while we like to serve humans, and use things we enjoy like sniffing and hunting to help them, we are far too lazy to work full time.  It is a fear that I plan to alleviate at the hearing.  But no one should find fault when we try to use our limited energy to help maintain laws more serious than pooper scooper or leash laws.

I must take issue with a former Justice, David Souter, who said in opposition to a 2005 ruling that recognized our rights to sniff for justice that there is no such thing as an “infallible dog that never errs.”  What a douchebag.  

One of my clients, Frank, was brought to the front door of a house, where he smelled marijuana, sat down to tell his handler that there were drugs in the home, and the house was raided.  My opposing counsel states that Frank violated his client’s rights to privacy, but, hey, Frank wasn’t just walking by the house, stopped, smelled, pointed and said “jah accuse.”  How could Frank be at fault?   A human brought him to the house, and there must have been a reason the officer brought him to the house, so Frank was perfectly in his rights to point out what he sniffed.

Aldo’s case is similar.  Aldo’s human partner pulled a man over who had expired plates and an open beer container.  Aldo’s partner had his pet pal do a sniff test of the car and he, like Frankie, smelled the drugs and sat.  The officer found himself a Heisenberg.  The car was filled with ingredients to make methamphetamine.  The defense is claiming that Aldo did not have enough training to be a certified drug sniffer.  But hey, he found the drugs didn’t he?  You can’t watch a dog catch a 100 frisbees in a row and question if he is a good frisbee catcher.  And poor Aldo didn’t have the kibbles to get training.  Unlike me, who became a lawyer over the Internet, no one has figured out how to produce a smell test on the web, so there is no online training.  My argument for Aldo is “Badges?  He don’t need no stinking badges.”

At last I get to explain the superior dog’s point of view to the most superior judges in the land.  And maybe someday a President will have the testicular fortitude to appoint a dog to the Supreme Court.

3 comments:

  1. Great points you raise there my learned friend. Good luck with your arguments. Go go go.Have a fabulous Friday.
    Best wishes Molly

    ReplyDelete
  2. You are a fine lawyer with common sense. We can't believe our founding fathers wanted to be sure to protect drug dealers.

    Go sniffer dogs!!

    ReplyDelete