[crazydoggers]

It’s not profiling as the book was collected as evidence after being charged with a crime and with a search warrant (or at least probably cause must be established with other evidence). Profiling would be using information about such a book before crimes were committed or charged.

In addition, such evidence is important in establishing bail, as risk of fleeing is of primary concern.

[barbariangrunge]

Apply that to other situations though. Those sorts of books are ordinary. If you used that sort of profiling after the fact on everyone, you could make anyone look suspicious or untrustworthy

Witch hunters during the inquisition literally used to do this sort of thing to help condemn people

[Myllenum]

You are absolutely correct! Law enforcement should not in any circumstance be allowed to go through someone's library of books that are publicly available and then try to tie in one of those books with the fact that they've committed a crime. That is the problem, like many people in this feed they are totally oblivious of how much illegal control and power they are giving the authorities. Interestingly though, my gut tells me that they didn't even find that book that that book may have been planted as evidence against them. We live in a world where police are always getting busted on social media for lying in deception. We can no longer sit back and assume that they are doing the right thing behind closed doors. I don't believe for one minute that they found the book I think that was their way of adding a layer so that they could later charge the people. If we don't fight this type of stuff now, our lives As Americans in the future lives of the next generations literally will not even be worth living!!!

[scrubs]

Oh c'mon. That's just a bunch of vapid nonsense.

[bentley]

> In one of their bags packed for their flight, there was a book titled “Criminal Law Handbook: Know Your Rights, Survive The System,” the papers say.

You sensibly mention that this was not brought up until after the warranted search. But why is this title being mentioned now? Is the suggestion that someone who’s been charged with a crime should not attempt to read up on his rights—that doing so is a black mark suggesting flight risk? If the other book, on disappearing, is derogatory in itself, then why bring up this book too?

[LodeOfCode]

I'd guess that it speaks to the "knew charges were coming" bit to support that they were specifically fleeing the law and not disappearing to escape a bookie or an annoying family member or something