TexasCHLforum.com

sjfcontrol wrote:

ScooterSissy wrote:

sjfcontrol wrote:If I had been in that intersection (and it had been in Texas), they would have found a loaded gun actually on my person. Would THAT have been enough evidence to arrest ME for the bank robbery, too?

Did they find the money? Or just the guns?

Its also curious that "... it wasn’t until the final car was searched that police apprehended the suspect." That's statistically unlikely. Out of 20 cars, there is only a 5% chance that the one they're looking for would be in the very last one. 95% chance that it would have been one of the other ones searched first. (Assuming an even distribution of probability for each vehicle.)

Notice the wording. They didn't say he was in the last car at the light. They said he was in the final car searched. Statistically, I find it almost a certainty that he would be in the last car searched (if it's there). Once they found him, why would they continue searching?

I disagree. I did notice the wording. It was the final car where they found him. It was the search of the final car -- not the final search of a car.
You're free to disagree, but that is the way I believe it reads, and was intended. Besides, it would be stupid to report that they found him in the last car that was searched. Of course they did, unless they continued the search after finding him.

sjfcontrol wrote:If I had been in that intersection (and it had been in Texas), they would have found a loaded gun actually on my person. Would THAT have been enough evidence to arrest ME for the bank robbery, too?

Did they find the money? Or just the guns?

Its also curious that "... it wasn’t until the final car was searched that police apprehended the suspect." That's statistically unlikely. Out of 20 cars, there is only a 5% chance that the one they're looking for would be in the very last one. 95% chance that it would have been one of the other ones searched first. (Assuming an even distribution of probability for each vehicle.)