United States News
See other United States News Articles
Title: Florida Man Jailed 41 Days Over 92 Grams of...Laundry Detergent
Source:
Reason
URL Source: https://reason.com/blog/2019/01/30/ ... n-jailed-41-days-over-92-grams
Published: Jan 30, 2019
Author: Joe Setyon
Post Date: 2019-02-04 06:42:45 by Deckard
Keywords: None
Views: 8449
Comments: 92
A Florida man spent 41 days behind bars after police found a powdery white substance in his van last month. Spoiler alert: It wasn't drugs. Matthew Crull, 28, of Port St. Lucie, was sitting in his newly purchased van on December 5 when Martin County Sheriff's Office deputies arrived at the KFC parking lot where he had fallen asleep. Someone had reported the vehicle as suspicious, so police were investigating. When deputies searched his van, they found marijuana, a beer in the cup holder, and a bag with 92 grams of a white powder in it. Deputy Steven O'Leary claimed to have conducted a field drug test on the powder, and said it tested positive for heroin. "I just looked at him baffled and confused because I had no idea as to where 92 grams of heroin came from inside my van," Crull told WPTV later. "I really freaked out," he added to WBPF. "I started panicking and didn't really know what to think." Crull was right to be surprised. He says the alleged heroin was actually laundry detergent. But the truth wouldn't come out until much later. After his arrest, Crull was jailed for 41 days and charged with trafficking heroin. Due to the severity of the charges, there was no way he could afford bond. "It made the situation very real. [The judge] raised my bond to $100k to half a million dollars, so there was really no way I was getting out of jail," he told WPEC. Crull admits that he's been in trouble with the law before, but nothing this serious. "In the past, when I have gone to jail, it's been something where I knew I wasn't going to be there forever. It's a lot different than going to jail and the charge of trafficking of heroin carries a penalty of 25 years in prison," he explained to WPTV. Crull was eventually released, though not before he spent Christmas and New Year's behind bars, after the sheriff's office tested the "heroin" again and discovered the truth. The trafficking charge was dropped, as was the count of marijuana possession. This sort of story is more common than you might think. Reason has previously written about police misidentifying cotton candy and donut glaze for meth. In another case, North Carolina police bragged about a massive fentanyl bust, only to learn later that they had confiscated 13 pounds of sugar. The culprit in each of these cases were field test kits that provided false positives. Washington Post journalist (and former Reason staffer) Radley Balko even has a handy list of some of the things misidentified as drugs by field tests. Crull's case, meanwhile, may have been part of a larger scandal that had nothing to do with malfunctioning field drug tests. The arresting deputy, O'Leary, has been fired after the sheriff's office discovered other discrepancies. In three recent narcotics arrests, O'Leary claimed field tests had revealed drugs. Further crime lab testing revealed that wasn't true. O'Leary, who had been a Martin County sheriff's deputy since February 2018, had made about 80 drug arrests before being terminated. All of those are now under review, and 11 people, including Crull, have already been freed. "It would have been a travesty to risk leaving anyone in jail," Sheriff William Snyder said at a press conference Monday, explaining that some of those released did have drugs in their possession, just not as much as O'Leary had initially claimed. "It's better that 100 guilty people go free than one innocent person goes to jail," Snyder added. "Our goal is always justice, and there was more than enough reasonable doubt on our part on all those arrests that we would not have left anyone in jail one more minute." Spoiler alert: It wasn't heroin.
Post Comment Private Reply Ignore Thread
Top • Page Up • Full Thread • Page Down • Bottom/Latest
#1. To: Deckard (#0)
And how did he explain having 92 grams of laundry detergent in an unmarked bag? Was he planning his own version of the Tide Pod challenge? So the drug test showed a false positive. Change the testing procedure and move on. But certainly he bears some responsibility for what happened.
I'm guessing you've never done any laundry at a laundromat. But certainly he bears some responsibility for what happened. For having laundry detergent in an "unauthorized" container? New low for you paulsen.
Government is in the last resort the employment of armed men, of policemen, gendarmes, soldiers, prison guards, and hangmen. I guess he can explain that to the judge, right? ....as though it's any of a judge's business. Field test kits can be woefully inaccurate, and people innocent of any drug crimes have been compelled to take plea deals out of fear and uncertainty after they've returned false positive results, because A) their public defenders encourage them to, B) they are unaware that field kits will return false positives on many substances, C) because the punishment for NOT taking a plea are so much worse than is the punishment after a trial conviction and D) because sitting in jail for 6-12 weeks awaiting trial can be enormously damaging to anyone with familial responsibilities (job &/or child care) not to mention one's own psychological well-being (people without any criminal records will be far more distressed and likely to take a plea out of desperation and fear than those with criminal experience). States should be obligated to prove all such cases and not simply accept plea deals. If that creates a backlog on the legal system, then it would simply force the states to rearrange their priorities, which would reflect the will of the people.
Very reasonable.
The final decider of the “plea deal” is the defendant. They are asked numerous times, prior to the plea, and just before the court will ACCEPT A PLEA, if they are entering a plea upon their own decision. That’s “reasonable” standard.
I'm the infidel... Allah warned you about. كافر المسلح
You can buy presumptive test kits on line. Even little people like Dicktard can. I defy you to buy any brand of test kit, test ANY laundry detergent of your choice, test those substances as the test kit outlines on the instructions... and see if the laundry detergent gives off the colors needed to show a positive test. I’ve tested thousands of substances with presumptive test kits. ALL substances (besides marijuana) that test POSITIVE are sent to the mother fucking crime LAB. Not once have I ever received a lab report indicating ID and weight, that indicated it wasn’t A FUCKING SCHEDULED NARCOTIC. Not one of you fucking Paultards have 1% of the experience I have, testing substances. Kindly stop trying to sound like you have a fucking clue.
I'm the infidel... Allah warned you about. كافر المسلح
I have, but more than 92 grams worth. I also had fabric softener, a pocketful of quarters, coat hangers and a basket of laundry. Were those items also in his car?
That's the system.
HAAAAAA Remember, you’re trying to educate an AGENDA dickTARD. He doesn’t give a shit that the “laundry detergent was packaged in little zip lock baggies... in “8-ball” amounts. lol
I'm the infidel... Allah warned you about. كافر المسلح
No liar, it was in one bag. It never ceases to amaze me the lengths you and paulsen will go to with your cop-sucking.
Government is in the last resort the employment of armed men, of policemen, gendarmes, soldiers, prison guards, and hangmen. Our back-of-pack dose suggestions for front loaders (1.5 tablespoons or 25 grams) and top loaders (3 tablespoons or 50 grams) are based on a 5kg machine, which is industry standard for small to medium sized machines. Naturally, larger machines require proportionally more powder, so try 2 tablespoons or approximately 30 grams for front loaders and 3.5 tablespoons or 60 grams for top loaders. Other variants such as how dirty your clothes are, how hard your water is, and how full the water level is will also impact your wash, so this is only a guide. Remember though, as our washing powders are a very concentrated product without unnecessary fillers, we would always recommend using a lesser amount and gradually increasing the dose as required. awareenvironmental.com.au...ch-laundry-detergent-use/ We contacted P&G’s customer service for verification, starting with the English-speaking number. At first, the representative said the … measurements were correct. But when we pressed further, a supervisor came on and told us we should actually use 1/5 cup for a medium load. Next we called a Spanish-speaking representative, who added to the confusion by instructing us to use the scoop included with the product. When we explained that there was no scoop, the rep agreed to send us one in the mail. With this scoop, we were able to measure the proper amount of detergent–about 40 grams for a medium load–less than 1/4 cup. That’s nearly half as much detergent as what a consumer will likely use following the current ArielUSA instructions. https://consumerist.com/2011/09/22/how-much-of-pgs-ariel-laundry-detergent-should-you-really-use/ 92 grams is enough for at least one load of laundry, not that it matters. He could have a ton of laundry detergent in bags and it would still be 100% legal.
The legality of it isn't the issue. How does he explain having 92 grams of laundry detergent in an unmarked bag? And with no explanation, why wouldn't the cop be suspicious? In my opinion, he brought this on himself.
Your logic makes no sense at all. So what he was carrying laundry detergent in an unmarked bag. How about going after those carrying laundry detergent in marked bags but really have heroin or coke in them and never get detected at all.
I have, but more than 92 grams worth. I also had fabric softener, a pocketful of quarters, coat hangers and a basket of laundry. Were those items also in his car? You're right. STRING THE GUY UP!!!!
....as though it's any of a judge's business. Last I checked laundry detergent is a legal substance. Hell, you don't even need to show ID when you buy it, nor does it require bagging in public! Maybe you live somewhere where laundry detergent is a controlled substance?
Thanks for making it clear this was only *your* opinion.
Offering any defense based on what might be normal amounts of detergent to use is immaterial. The guy spent 41 days in jail in spite of not having any drugs in his car. I'm sure misterwhite would end 41 days in jail being completely understanding about the confusion and apologize to the police officers and prosecution for wasting their time because he had one of hundreds of types of white powdery substances in a bag that he made the unforgivable sin of not labeling. Indeed, a tour of MW's home would prove that MW *never, ever, ever* puts anything into a bottle or bag without expressly labeling it's contents for police eyes to see, JUST IN CASE, there's a raid on his house. He really plays it safe, that MW guy! I was at a lunar eclipse event last month. There was some spiced wine left over, so I poured it into an UNMARKED container and capped it to take home. My god, I had no idea what I opened myself up to!
Apparently, this isn't the only time "officer" O'Leary has pulled this little stunt Crull's case, meanwhile, may have been part of a larger scandal that had nothing to do with malfunctioning field drug tests. The arresting deputy, O'Leary, has been fired after the sheriff's office discovered other discrepancies. In three recent narcotics arrests, O'Leary claimed field tests had revealed drugs. Further crime lab testing revealed that wasn't true. O'Leary, who had been a Martin County sheriff's deputy since February 2018, had made about 80 drug arrests before being terminated. All of those are now under review, and 11 people, including Crull, have already been freed. So let's recap - you have a criminal cop, lying and falsifying evidence in numerous drug cases, possibly as many as 80 and was subsequently fired for his actions, and still the cop groupies will claim he's a good cop and the bust was all good and legal
Government is in the last resort the employment of armed men, of policemen, gendarmes, soldiers, prison guards, and hangmen. I opened a can of soup and poured it into a Tupperware container to take to work - I feel like a criminal.
Government is in the last resort the employment of armed men, of policemen, gendarmes, soldiers, prison guards, and hangmen. That is a really stupid opinion. Thanks for confirming again.
I disagree. Then the corrupt people just over charge. Then the person has a huge potential time or fine hanging over their head. Then they out of fear not right or wrong cop a plea to a lesser charge. There should be no such thing as a plea bargain. If someone committed a crime charge them with what they did. Not something else lesser. It is complete bullshit and probably truly unconstitutional.
Negative. Every states criminal laws are written by folk who your PEERS ELECT, with certain wording. The police MUST make sure ALL the elements of that crime have been met by the defendant. Upon arrest, every defendant has the legal right for a PRE-LIM or GRAND JURY hearing, specifically for determining if there is PROBABLE CAUSE TO BELIEVE ALL elements of the crime had been conducted by the defendant. So... the only bitch you could have is how and what laws are written. And if you don’t like that, RE- ELECT A NEW POLITICIAN. We have, hands down the best criminal justice system of any place on this planet. Why do you let the drug lovers to even get you to bite? lol
I'm the infidel... Allah warned you about. كافر المسلح
If you are gonna say this, PROVE IT. Find one case of over-charge where an American was charged with a crime, HIGHER than the case had criminal elements for. Post the investigation reports, statements, evidence reports & photos, oral admissions (if any)... and ALL THE SECTIONS OF THE LAW THAT COVER THAT TYPE OF CRIME. EXAMPLE: Find me a case where a person was charged outside the written section for the purpose to “over charge”. 221.10 Criminal possession of marihuana in the fifth degree. A person is guilty of criminal possession of marihuana in the fifth degree when he knowingly and unlawfully possesses: 1. marihuana in a public place, as defined in section 240.00 of this chapter, and such marihuana is burning or open to public view; or 2. one or more preparations, compounds, mixtures or substances containing marihuana and the preparations, compounds, mixtures or substances are of an aggregate weight of more than twenty- five grams. Criminal possession of marihuana in the fifth degree is a class B misdemeanor. Find me a case where some pothead was charged & convicted of 221.10 (2) while having 25 grams of weed OR LESS. If it’s such a fucking epidemic, it should be easy to find a DOCUMENTED case, and post your PROOF of your absurd allegations.
I'm the infidel... Allah warned you about. كافر المسلح
I couldn't explain why I had 92 grams of laundry detergent in a baggie in my car. Could you? Wait. I could use a good laugh. Put yourself in this guy's situation and tell me why you had 92 grams of laundry detergent in a baggie.
So if you were this guy, how would you explain the 92 grams of laundry detergent in a plain baggie? If you won't (or can't) then don't criticize the cops for being suspicious.
So if you were this guy, how would you explain the 92 grams of laundry detergent in a plain baggie? Why does it even matter? The point is, it was laundry detergent, not heroin. The arresting deputy, O'Leary, has been fired after the sheriff's office discovered other discrepancies. In three recent narcotics arrests, O'Leary claimed field tests had revealed drugs. Further crime lab testing revealed that wasn't true. O'Leary, who had been a Martin County sheriff's deputy since February 2018, had made about 80 drug arrests before being terminated. All of those are now under review, and 11 people, including Crull, have already been freed. This badged "hero" has been pulling the same scam for at least a year apparently, as many as 80 times in fact. As a self admitted drug warrior, it seems to me that you should be condemning O'Leary's lies (and probable perjury in court) and falsifying evidence. Yet you continue to ignore his criminal actions.
Government is in the last resort the employment of armed men, of policemen, gendarmes, soldiers, prison guards, and hangmen. It just goes to show that when you do put a substance into an unmarked bag or bottle, not only should you label it, you should also weigh it so you know exactly how much, in grams, is there.
You dont have to explain it it's not a crime. I've been to the laundry mat before and saw detergent in a big zip loc bag. Not a crime. I saw some white powder 9n some bags at Walmart. What knows maybe they're smuggling coke. The cops need to start some investigations and arrest someone until they find out it's powdered sugar. You. An be really dumb sometimes. More often then you should be.
I agree. My point is, why risk 42 days in lock-up? Had he not been carrying it around, he could have avoided all the hassle. Ergo, he's partly to blame. Unless he has a good reason to be carrying around 92 grams of laundry detergent in an unmarked baggie. You come up with one yet? Uh-huh. Just as I thought.
And unless you want to take the chance of being thrown in jail, you might want to have a believable reason for doing so. Believable reason: You're headed to the laundromat and you also have dirty laundry in the back seat, fabric softener on the floor, and a pocketful of quarters. Not a believable reason: Falling asleep in the KFC parking lot with a beer in the cup holder and marijuana and a white substance in the van and no explanation for any of it.
Take my advice. When you find you've dug yourself into a hole.... stop digging. I suppose your car, if you have one, is right now, completely free of any traces of anything related to anything you've done more than a day ago.
Hey. Why don't you let him explain the laundry detergent? I already asked you (in post #24) to explain it and you refused.
92 gram bags? Unmarked?
As I said... stop digging. He doesn't have to explain squat. If some cop starts asking all kinds of questions about everything in my car, I'll tell him to take a hike. If he arrests me over laundry detergent, then he and/or the department is on hook for damages. It's as simple as that. But you just refuse to get it. I suppose another load of BS from you will be forthcoming.
Perform that same test in court, under oath, and if it doesn't come up positive, give the "hero" deputy's house to his victim. His car too, if it isn't a piece of shit. If the "hero" deputy objects, do it anyway, plus shoot his dog.
August 1st, 2014 “• Matthew Ryan Crull, 23, of 1552 S.E. Crown Street, Port St. Lucie, was arrested on an active warrant for burglary of a conveyance.” JUST ONE OF HIS PRIORS. You fuckers defend a burglar. lol A stand up guy. He must be innocent.
I'm the infidel... Allah warned you about. كافر المسلح
Like he could. Look. My point was that if he's going to carry around 92 grams of laundry detergent in an unmarked baggie -- and refuse to explain it -- then he's going to jail if it tests positive. F**k him.
As though an explanation would have kept him from going to jail?
What would that explanation be?
It could have been a faulty test kit. You blame the cop for that? Retest it in a lab and if the original test was a false positive, drop the charge. I believe that's the procedure.
As per Grand Island, all explanations are lies unless they are a confession of guilt.
Comments (42 - 92) not displayed.
Top • Page Up • Full Thread • Page Down • Bottom/LatestFlorida Man Jailed 41 Days Over 92 Grams of...Laundry Detergent
#2. To: misterwhite (#1)
And how did he explain having 92 grams of laundry detergent in an unmarked bag?
The essential feature of government is the enforcement of its decrees by beating, killing, and imprisoning.
Those who are asking for more government interference are asking ultimately for more compulsion and less freedom.
#3. To: misterwhite (#1)
And how did he explain having 92 grams of laundry detergent in an unmarked bag? Was he planning his own version of the Tide Pod challenge?
#4. To: Pinguinite (#3)
States should be obligated to prove all such cases and not simply accept plea deals. If that creates a backlog on the legal system, then it would simply force the states to rearrange their priorities, which would reflect the will of the people.
#5. To: A K A Stone (#4)
(Edited)
#6. To: Pinguinite (#3)
(Edited)
Field test kits can be woefully inaccurate
#7. To: Deckard (#2)
I'm guessing you've never done any laundry at a laundromat.
#8. To: Pinguinite (#3)
I guess he can explain that to the judge, right?
#9. To: misterwhite (#7)
I have, but more than 92 grams worth
#10. To: GrandIsland (#9)
...the “laundry detergent was packaged in little zip lock baggies... in “8-ball” amounts.
The essential feature of government is the enforcement of its decrees by beating, killing, and imprisoning.
Those who are asking for more government interference are asking ultimately for more compulsion and less freedom.
#11. To: GrandIsland, misterwhite, Pinguinite, Deckard (#9)
(Edited)
How much laundry detergent should I use?
Here’s a quick quiz: If you use Procter & Gamble’s Ariel USA laundry detergent, should you use 1/2 cup, 1/4 cup or 1/5 cup of detergent for a medium-size load of laundry? 
#12. To: hondo68 (#11)
He could have a ton of laundry detergent in bags and it would still be 100% legal.
#13. To: misterwhite (#12)
In my opinion, he brought this on himself.
#14. To: misterwhite (#7)
#15. To: misterwhite (#8)
That's the system.
#16. To: misterwhite (#12)
In my opinion, he brought this on himself.
#17. To: hondo68 (#11)
#18. To: Pinguinite, hondo68, misterwhite, GrandIsland (#17)
Offering any defense based on what might be normal amounts of detergent to use is immaterial. The guy spent 41 days in jail in spite of not having any drugs in his car.
The essential feature of government is the enforcement of its decrees by beating, killing, and imprisoning.
Those who are asking for more government interference are asking ultimately for more compulsion and less freedom.
#19. To: Pinguinite, hondo68 (#17)
There was some spiced wine left over, so I poured it into an UNMARKED container and capped it to take home.
The essential feature of government is the enforcement of its decrees by beating, killing, and imprisoning.
Those who are asking for more government interference are asking ultimately for more compulsion and less freedom.
#20. To: misterwhite (#12)
In my opinion, he brought this on himself.
#21. To: GrandIsland (#5)
That’s “reasonable” standard.
#22. To: A K A Stone (#21)
Then the corrupt people just over charge.
#23. To: A K A Stone (#21)
(Edited)
Then the corrupt people just over charge.
#24. To: Pinguinite (#17)
#25. To: A K A Stone (#20)
In my opinion, he brought this on himself.
That is a really stupid opinion.
#26. To: misterwhite, A K A Stone (#25)
The essential feature of government is the enforcement of its decrees by beating, killing, and imprisoning.
Those who are asking for more government interference are asking ultimately for more compulsion and less freedom.
#27. To: misterwhite (#24)
Put yourself in this guy's situation and tell me why you had 92 grams of laundry detergent in a baggie.
#28. To: misterwhite (#25)
#29. To: A K A Stone (#28)
You dont have to explain it it's not a crime.
#30. To: Pinguinite (#27)
It just goes to show that when you do put a substance into an unmarked bag or bottle, not only should you label it, you should also weigh it so you know exactly how much, in grams, is there.
#31. To: misterwhite (#30)
#32. To: Pinguinite (#31)
#33. To: A K A Stone (#28)
I saw some white powder in some bags at Walmart.
#34. To: misterwhite (#32)
Hey. Why don't you let him explain the laundry detergent? I already asked you (in post #24) to explain it and you refused.
#35. To: Deckard, misterwhite (#0)
Deputy Steven O'Leary claimed to have conducted a field drug test on the powder, and said it tested positive for heroin.
#36. To: Deckard (#0)
(Edited)
#37. To: Pinguinite (#34)
He doesn't have to explain squat.
#38. To: misterwhite (#37)
Look. My point was that if he's going to carry around 92 grams of laundry detergent in an unmarked baggie -- and refuse to explain it -- then he's going to jail if it tests positive.
#39. To: Pinguinite (#38)
As though an explanation would have kept him from going to jail?
#40. To: Hank Rearden (#35)
Perform that same test in court, under oath, and if it doesn't come up positive, give the "hero" deputy's house to his victim.
#41. To: misterwhite (#39)
What would that explanation be?
.
.
.
[Home] [Headlines] [Latest Articles] [Latest Comments] [Post] [Mail] [Sign-in] [Setup] [Help] [Register]