The legal precedent of 'probable cause' has always been shaky. It's just impossible to prove whether the officer actually saw something, smelled something, or heard something without solid evidence. Even if a guy had a brick of cocaine sitting in the passenger seat, who's to say that the driver can't claim that it was stowed under the seat and the cop opened the door without probable cause? If the police officer doesn't have a video tape showing the brick of cocaine in the passenger seat, can a court prove without a shadow of a doubt that the police officer had a valid reason to open the guy's door and confiscate his cocaine?
Of course, sometimes the police officers do shoot video before making the arrest. There was some case of a guy who robbed a bank or a store or something and fell asleep next to his loot when he got it home. While he was sleeping, he accidentally buttdialed the police with the phone in his back pocket. Then, when the police showed up, they found the guy next to his loot and took a picture before waking him up and arresting him.
