|
bobby177
shroom shroom



Registered: 06/08/08
Posts: 215
Last seen: 14 years, 7 months
|
Remaining silent limitations
#10226256 - 04/24/09 01:38 PM (15 years, 28 days ago) |
|
|
I have been wondering for a while: If you are not being placed under arrest or charged with any crime, do you still have the right to remain silent & not speak to the police?
Example: If you are walking down the street and a police officer comes up and states that he would like to ask you a few questions, would it be alright for you to say, "I have nothing to say, I must get going. Have a good day officer."
or
If you get pulled over and the cop asks you something like, "What have you been doing tonight?", would it be alright to say, "I do not wish to discuss that, I have nothing to say."
|
milkman
DeliveringWorldWide



Registered: 07/04/07
Posts: 2,108
Loc: tha FLA
Last seen: 6 months, 16 days
|
Re: Remaining silent limitations [Re: bobby177]
#10226378 - 04/24/09 02:03 PM (15 years, 28 days ago) |
|
|
good question, my knowledge is limited but i do have a pocket bill of rights, and constitution. I am pretty sure your 5th amendment right applies whenever and where ever. don't quote me though.
|
johnm214



Registered: 05/31/07
Posts: 17,582
Loc: Americas
|
Re: Remaining silent limitations [Re: milkman]
#10226545 - 04/24/09 02:35 PM (15 years, 28 days ago) |
|
|
You have the right to not incriminate yourself under the fifth amendment. You also have the right to do what you want unless the law restrains you.
What that means is: you have the absolute right not to say anything that may subject you to criminal punishment in this country. The cops have no right to make you talk, so you don't have to say anything to them in any case. They can subpoena your or whatnot to compell you to talk, but that only goes to the limits of the fifth amendment right to not incriminate yourself.
So as to your question, yes, you do not have to talk to the police. This does not constitute a right to lie, though. You should just tell the cop you do not wish to be questioned.
Under the US constitution you don't presently have the right to refuse to identify yourself, however; which seems like bullshit to me, but this is the only limitation I'm aware of.
People get convicted on their statements to cops all the time. From simple traffic tickets where people make excuses to serious crimes where people "cooperate", it is the simplest and most damaging thing you can do to fuck yourself up- even if you are innocent.
|
bobby177
shroom shroom



Registered: 06/08/08
Posts: 215
Last seen: 14 years, 7 months
|
Re: Remaining silent limitations [Re: johnm214]
#10226601 - 04/24/09 02:43 PM (15 years, 28 days ago) |
|
|
Thanks for the replies.
What if the police are asking you questions relating to a crime, and they are treating you as a witness who had no involvement whatsoever?
Edited by bobby177 (04/24/09 02:44 PM)
|
milkman
DeliveringWorldWide



Registered: 07/04/07
Posts: 2,108
Loc: tha FLA
Last seen: 6 months, 16 days
|
Re: Remaining silent limitations [Re: milkman]
#10226841 - 04/24/09 03:14 PM (15 years, 28 days ago) |
|
|
the only way to FORCE a witness to testify is to subpoena them, tell them you dont wish to answer any questions Do realize though that some officers are evil, some may break the rules, try to be very respectful as to avoid any kind of situation like that.
Edited by milkman (04/24/09 03:15 PM)
|
johnm214



Registered: 05/31/07
Posts: 17,582
Loc: Americas
|
Re: Remaining silent limitations [Re: bobby177]
#10226945 - 04/24/09 03:33 PM (15 years, 28 days ago) |
|
|
Quote:
bobby177 said: Thanks for the replies.
What if the police are asking you questions relating to a crime, and they are treating you as a witness who had no involvement whatsoever?
It doesn't matter what they treat you as. Like I said, you have no obligation to talk to the police in america. Despite teh whiners in this forum, we're far more free than other countries with regards to many things, this is one of them.
They can treat you however you want but their is no power the police have to make you answer any question (besides arrest, but that's just to be a prick). Always ask for an attorney and say you don't wish to answer any questions.
|
suburbanned
Stranger

Registered: 02/20/08
Posts: 2,810
Last seen: 13 years, 9 months
|
Re: Remaining silent limitations [Re: johnm214]
#10230601 - 04/25/09 10:36 AM (15 years, 27 days ago) |
|
|
i thought that if you're just out on the street walking around unless you are being charged with a crime you are under no requirement to identify yourself to police
|
suburbanned
Stranger

Registered: 02/20/08
Posts: 2,810
Last seen: 13 years, 9 months
|
Re: Remaining silent limitations [Re: suburbanned]
#10230614 - 04/25/09 10:39 AM (15 years, 27 days ago) |
|
|
|
johnm214



Registered: 05/31/07
Posts: 17,582
Loc: Americas
|
Re: Remaining silent limitations [Re: suburbanned]
#10230797 - 04/25/09 11:36 AM (15 years, 27 days ago) |
|
|
Quote:
suburbantoker said: in fact here is a video for you:
http://www.videojug.com/expertanswer/police-questioning/do-i-have-to-identify-myself-to-the-police
That's not correct.
Their is no constitutional privledge against identifying yourself that is recognized at this point, so a state can require you to do so. Whether refusing to identify yourself per se justifies arrest or detention is up to the state, but as the video notes, cops are dicks.
It is possible that in some cases where the identity of the person establishes their guilt such may be invalid, but at that point your fucked anyways, cuz they will arrest you, it will be ruled that the arrest will be illegal, and the very fact that you succeeded on showing that your identity alone incriminated you will likely lead suppose a situation where even once the arrest is ruled illegal your still getting convicted of something.
Possibilities aside, their is no privledge againt stop and identifying laws that is recognized at this time that I'm aware of.
http://caselaw.lp.findlaw.com/cgi-bin/getcase.pl?court=US&navby=case&vol=000&invol=03-5554
|
Alan Rockefeller
Mycologist


Registered: 03/10/07
Posts: 48,392
Last seen: 2 days, 23 hours
|
Re: Remaining silent limitations [Re: suburbanned]
#10234630 - 04/26/09 01:59 AM (15 years, 27 days ago) |
|
|
The list of states that require you to show your ID is here:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stop_and_Identify_statutes#States_with_.E2.80.9Cstop-and-identify.E2.80.9D_statutes
I am in one of the states that you don't have to show ID, but I expect doing so would lead you to being detained for about 12-24 hours.
Not showing the cops your ID might be a fun exercise if you aren't in your home town and don't have anything illegal on you, but I wouldn't try it otherwise.
Its always best to show them ID to get them off your back quickly.
Here is some discussion of the issue from http://www.flexyourrights.org/frequently_asked_questions
7. When do I have to show ID?
This is a tricky issue. As a general principle, citizens who are minding their own business are not obligated to "show their papers" to police. In fact, there is no law requiring citizens to carry identification of any kind.
Nonetheless, carrying an ID is generally required when you're driving a vehicle or a passenger on a commercial airline. These requirements have been upheld on the premise that individuals who prefer not to carry ID can choose not to drive or fly.
From here, ID laws only get more complicated. In Hiibel v. Sixth Judicial District Court of Nevada, the Supreme Court upheld state laws requiring citizens to disclose their identity to police when officers have reasonable suspicion to believe criminal activity may be taking place. Commonly known as "stop-and-identify" statutes, these laws permit police to arrest criminal suspects who refuse to identify themselves.
As of 2008, 24 states had stop-and-identify lawst. Regardless of your state's law, keep in mind that police can never compel you to identify yourself without reasonable suspicion to believe you're involved in criminal activity.
But how can you tell if an officer asking you to identify yourself has reasonable suspicion? Remember, police need reasonable suspicion to detain you. One way to tell if they have reasonable suspicion is to determine if you're free to go. You could do this by saying "Excuse me officer. Are you detaining me, or am I free to go?" If the officer says you’re free to go, leave immediately and refrain from answering any additional questions.
If you're detained, you'll have to decide whether withholding your identity is worth the possibility of arrest or a prolonged detention. In cases of mistaken identity, revealing who you are might help to resolve the situation quickly. On the other hand, if you're on parole in California, for example, revealing your identity could lead to a legal search. Knowing your state's laws can help you make the best choice.
Keep in mind that the officer's decision to detain you will not always hold up in court. Reasonable suspicion is a vague evidentiary standard, which lends itself to mistakes on the officer's part. If you're searched or arrested following an officer's ID request, always contact an attorney to discuss the incident and explore your legal options.
|
johnm214



Registered: 05/31/07
Posts: 17,582
Loc: Americas
|
|
Quote:
In Hiibel v. Sixth Judicial District Court of Nevada, the Supreme Court upheld state laws requiring citizens to disclose their identity to police when officers have reasonable suspicion to believe criminal activity may be taking place.
... Regardless of your state's law, keep in mind that police can never compel you to identify yourself without reasonable suspicion to believe you're involved in criminal activity.
Keep in mind, however; that this protection is almost meaningless in this case for reasons I've touched on.
Reasonable suspicion is such a bullshit standard that it would appear a cop could easily make something up that flies.
This highlites one of the shitty issues in our court systems- they narrow their holdings so much they are meaningless.
In this case, rather than hold that identification statutes are illegal absent reasonable suspicion, the court simple said "well if an officer stops a suspect he has to have reasonable suspicion...".
This is besides the point since the statutes in question almost always provides that everyone must identify themselves.
But, as always, the court narrows their opinion unreasonably and refuses to hold the law unconcstitutional.
Hordes of legislatures and cops will read these laws and continue to think they can arrest for failure to identify, and it really won't matter because when they get to court and figure out that the statute really wasn't legal as written, the cop will just assure the judge that the suspect was twitchy and appeared very nervous, and after all, it was a "drug area" or "high crime area" or "there have been reports of vandalism in the area" or whatnot.
And because the ability of the citezins to fight back against the illegal conduct of this type is pretty much absent entirely, it will continue unabated. The guilty guy will be convicted and the innocent guy will be wrongly arrested, and what's he going to do about it? Nothing, he can't do anything about it.
It is really irritating how the court justifies these ridiculous situations. Nobody should ever be seized by law enforcement absent probable cause.
|
fastfred
Old Hand



Registered: 05/17/04
Posts: 6,899
Loc: Dark side of the moon
|
Re: Remaining silent limitations [Re: johnm214]
#10244393 - 04/27/09 05:44 PM (15 years, 25 days ago) |
|
|
You really need to identify yourself to police when they ask.
Legal bullshit aside they will say that there are some criminals at large and because you would not identify yourself they found reasonable suspicion that you might be one of them. Then they will detain you until they determine your identity.
Give them your name and address, nothing else. Sometimes you might find it easier to show them an ID, but usually I won't show it to them.
I've had a lot of standard lines for cops in the past. What I've found to be the easiest and best is to say...
"My name is XXX YYY, I live at 123 Anywhere street, City, State." My lawyer has advised me to NEVER make ANY statement to the police under ANY circumstances."
If they persist ask them "Are you detaining me or am I free to go?"
Anything further and just go back into the "My lawyer has advised..."
I've found that cops are conditioned to stop pestering you when you invoke the advice of a lawyer. They seem to know that it's pointless and they won't convince you to go against your lawyer's advice. There must be something in those cop classes that tells them not to tell a suspect to go against his lawyers advice or to shut up once a person invokes their right to a lawyer or has one. They also know that it's good advice.
Awhile back there was a link in a post to a nice video covering this topic in depth. The lawyer went into great detail to explain why you should NEVER make ANY statement to the police under ANY circumstances. Even innocent people telling the complete truth have been fucked over by making statements to the police.
Maybe someone can dig up that vid link and post it in this thread for the OP.
-FF
|
Alan Rockefeller
Mycologist


Registered: 03/10/07
Posts: 48,392
Last seen: 2 days, 23 hours
|
Re: Remaining silent limitations [Re: fastfred]
#10244471 - 04/27/09 05:59 PM (15 years, 25 days ago) |
|
|
Quote:
Then they will detain you until they determine your identity.
Not necessarily. I think they need to let you go in 48 hours if you have not been charged with a crime.
Quote:
There must be something in those cop classes that tells them not to tell a suspect to go against his lawyers advice or to shut up once a person invokes their right to a lawyer or has one. They also know that it's good advice.
Yes, thats because anything you say after you ask for a lawyer is inadmissable. You can ask for a lawyer and then confess and then they have to let you go. I guess Barak Obama is really pissed off about that and asked the supreme court to overturn it.
|
No Agenda
Stranger


Registered: 05/31/05
Posts: 938
Loc: Somewhere else
Last seen: 1 year, 6 months
|
Re: Remaining silent limitations [Re: fastfred]
#10245018 - 04/27/09 07:27 PM (15 years, 25 days ago) |
|
|
Quote:
fastfred said: You really need to identify yourself to police when they ask.
Give them your name and address, nothing else. Sometimes you might find it easier to show them an ID, but usually I won't show it to them.
That may not always be the best idea. It probably varies state to state but I know when I got my Oklahoma drivers license the form I signed said that it was a state law that you have to show your drivers license to a police officer at anytime that he asks for it. Regardless of the situation.
|
NineInchNails
Stranger

Registered: 03/01/09
Posts: 1,190
Last seen: 1 year, 4 months
|
|
Here is an EXCELLENT video called "Don't Talk To Cops" part 1 and 2. This is a must see. You have a very witty attorney speak for the first part then a very experienced cop with the opportunity to refute the attorney. The attorney is 100% accurate and the cop confirms it!
Part 1 approx 30 min: Part 2 approx 25 min:
Not identifying yourself is a BIG grey area. In some instances … if you’re walking down the street and a cop say, “hey, what’s your name”? You could remain silent, but you could become detained or even arrested in some cases. There are Supreme Court rulings that allow cops to question you and even temporarily hand cuff you while the conduct an immediate investigation to see if you are the individual that ‘fits the description’.
I’ve had that happen to me before and I did not give the cop my ID. I was just walking from a McDonalds back to my hotel room with a coworker. A cop pulled up and demanded our IDs “give me your identification”. I was just as cocky as he was. I said, “what is this the Gestapo … give me your papers”. He didn’t like that and called for backup. Once ‘she’ arrived she got in my face so I turned 180 degrees on her and showed her my back. The original cop persisted and my coworker gave in. I just stood there and refused. Finally I said, “I am not required to keep an ID on my person at all times … unless there’s a law that I am not aware of”. He told me that I WILL be arrested until my ID is determined and gave me one last chance. I gave him a friend’s name which checked out just fine and he then told me that the parking lot we were walking through had several vandalisms lately.
I don’t like it when a pig runs up and demands shit, but sometimes you have to swallow your pride and realize that there are some grey areas when it comes to the law. Pigs with take advantage and dick ya sometimes if you are obstinate.
Edited by NineInchNails (04/28/09 08:14 AM)
|
fastfred
Old Hand



Registered: 05/17/04
Posts: 6,899
Loc: Dark side of the moon
|
|
Thnaks for posting those vid links!!! EVERYONE should watch this BEFORE they end up talking to the cops.
Quote:
It probably varies state to state but I know when I got my Oklahoma drivers license the form I signed said that it was a state law that you have to show your drivers license to a police officer at anytime that he asks for it. Regardless of the situation.
There is no law that requires you to get a drivers license or any other form of ID. If you're not required to have it then obviously they can't require everyone to present it.
Generally you DO have to identify yourself. If you don't they will just haul you in, fingerprint you, etc. until they are satisfied they know who you are. If you hold out they will present you to a judge. Guess what his first question will be...
Anyways, watch the vids. If you get anything from this thread it should be to identify yourself and then manke no statement WHATSOEVER.
-FF
|
Seuss
Error: divide byzero



Registered: 04/27/01
Posts: 23,480
Loc: Caribbean
Last seen: 3 months, 8 days
|
Re: Remaining silent limitations [Re: fastfred]
#10247790 - 04/28/09 06:14 AM (15 years, 24 days ago) |
|
|
> If you get anything from this thread it should be to identify yourself and then manke no statement WHATSOEVER.
I agree. Although I think it is silly that people are required/expected to identify who they are to a cop, it is a minor annoyance and not worth the hassle it creates to refuse. A very polite, "I am such and such. I would like to continue on my way. Am I being detained or am I free to go?"
-------------------- Just another spore in the wind.
|
No Agenda
Stranger


Registered: 05/31/05
Posts: 938
Loc: Somewhere else
Last seen: 1 year, 6 months
|
Re: Remaining silent limitations [Re: fastfred]
#10250355 - 04/28/09 04:03 PM (15 years, 24 days ago) |
|
|
Quote:
fastfred said: Thnaks for posting those vid links!!! EVERYONE should watch this BEFORE they end up talking to the cops.
Quote:
It probably varies state to state but I know when I got my Oklahoma drivers license the form I signed said that it was a state law that you have to show your drivers license to a police officer at anytime that he asks for it. Regardless of the situation.
There is no law that requires you to get a drivers license or any other form of ID. If you're not required to have it then obviously they can't require everyone to present it.
-FF
Before I left Oklahoma there was a bill that would require everyone to have some form of state ID when they turn 16. I don't know if it got passed but they were working on it.
If you have your DL on you and you don't show it to them when asked for it in Oklahoma it is a crime that you can be charged with.
|
Stonehenge
Alt Center

Registered: 06/20/04
Posts: 14,850
Loc: S.E.
|
Re: Remaining silent limitations [Re: No Agenda]
#10308121 - 05/08/09 01:25 PM (15 years, 14 days ago) |
|
|
We are living in the police state and they are busy passing laws to take away all of our privacy. Soon, they will have cameras in all public places that will identify you and track you. They will be able to tell you where you were and what you were doing on any given day going back as far as when they put the system in place.
Obama loves this shit just like shrub did. Any of the worthless jerks from the R or D party are going to be the same.
-------------------- “A democracy cannot exist as a permanent form of government. It can only exist until the voters discover that they can vote themselves largesse from the public treasury. From that moment on, the majority always votes for the candidates promising the most benefits from the public treasury with the result that a democracy always collapses over loose fiscal policy, always followed by a dictatorship.” (attributed to Alexis de Tocqueville political philosopher Circa 1835) Trade list http://www.shroomery.org/forums/showflat.php/Number/18047755
|
Chespirito
Stranger


Registered: 02/13/09
Posts: 3,259
|
Re: Remaining silent limitations [Re: Seuss]
#10309387 - 05/08/09 06:00 PM (15 years, 14 days ago) |
|
|
Something that will stick with me for a while was when I was in Rome. My friends and I were merely walking around Rome when the police, (they have two types if I remember, these were the scarier looking of the two), came up to us and demanded to see our ID. We said we didn't speak Italian so they fumbled through some English and made us pull our passports out. They then made us sit down on a curb for several minutes while they discussed among themselves. One of their group proceeded to take our passports, and drive off somewhere on a motorcycle. We started to get antsy and protested but they made it very clear that we were not in any sort of control of the situation. Another 5-10 minutes went by, the person came back, gave us our passports and drove off with no explanation. We still have no idea what the deal was as we were just walking around trying to find a restaurant after leaving our hotel.
At the time I was still under the impression that the cops in the US had no right to do something similar, however it seems like they might have that right. Something very bothersome to me when people can't move freely around a country
|
79towncar
Stranger
Registered: 12/11/08
Posts: 310
Last seen: 11 years, 2 months
|
Re: Remaining silent limitations [Re: Chespirito]
#10313127 - 05/09/09 02:29 PM (15 years, 13 days ago) |
|
|
If ever a police officer asks you for ID definitely give them your ID. If they ask you questions about where your going and this and that don't say anything. Just say officer I am in a hurry and I need to be getting on my way. If they then tell you "well I have to ask you some questions" simply reply " at this time I need to be going if you have any questions to ask me you can speak with my attorney". Then ask "am I under arrest"? If they say no then say " well then I am going to be on my way". Then just leave, make sure you have your ID haha. If they try to stop you say "I'm sorry I am in a hurry, if I'm not under arrest and you just have questions to ask then please speak to my attorney". Make sure you actually have an attorney.. If they come to your house... You can either not answer the door (recommended). Or answer and say "I can't talk now I am very busy if you don't have a warrant please leave and any further questions can be asked to my attorney". The biggest thing of importance is that if the cops are sweating you about something DON'T SAY ANYTHING TO LOCK YOURSELF INTO A STORY. If you do your stuck with that story forever. Be polite and tell them you are in a hurry without a warrant please leave. If you are arrested and they are trying to get you to make a statement simply say " I prefer not to make a statement". Just tell them your name and that's all. Don't talk about where you were, what the weather has been like, where you grew up, just say nothing. Even if they are asking you questions over and over. You are not under obligation to speak with police anytime about anything just say nothing and stare at them like you are deaf. If they really need you to make a statement they will indict you. Even if you get indicted you can then just plead the 5Th haha. Hope I've been of some help Take it easy..
|
Stonehenge
Alt Center

Registered: 06/20/04
Posts: 14,850
Loc: S.E.
|
Re: Remaining silent limitations [Re: 79towncar]
#10313356 - 05/09/09 03:35 PM (15 years, 13 days ago) |
|
|
That's good advice in general but it's better to be a little bit more polite. If they say you are not under arrest, that does not mean you are free to go. Ask if you are being detained, that is a better question to ask. If they ask any questions like where are you going, what are you doing, etc, just say "that's personal" and shut up. Then ask if you are being detained until you get an answer and leave soon as you can.
Being a wisenheimer and saying your lawyer this and that might make them mad. It's better to answer simple questions and clam up soon as it sounds like they are trying to get something on you. For example, if they ask where are you going, you could say to the grocery store. No harm no foul and it sounds like you are being cooperative. If they ask what's in your trunk, glove box or so on, then obviously cooperating is not going to work. Then ask if you are being detained and say nothing further.
-------------------- “A democracy cannot exist as a permanent form of government. It can only exist until the voters discover that they can vote themselves largesse from the public treasury. From that moment on, the majority always votes for the candidates promising the most benefits from the public treasury with the result that a democracy always collapses over loose fiscal policy, always followed by a dictatorship.” (attributed to Alexis de Tocqueville political philosopher Circa 1835) Trade list http://www.shroomery.org/forums/showflat.php/Number/18047755
|
79towncar
Stranger
Registered: 12/11/08
Posts: 310
Last seen: 11 years, 2 months
|
Re: Remaining silent limitations [Re: Stonehenge]
#10314073 - 05/09/09 07:08 PM (15 years, 13 days ago) |
|
|
I understand what your saying but most of the times I got hauled in for crimes the last thing the police offered me was courtesy.. A bunch of times I was jogging and they would bust my balls everyday. I would just give them my lawyers cards and ignore them for the most part. I got hauled in for 48 hour holds almost a dozen times and the last thing I give the police in my state is respect. Of coarse if it's just a chance encounter you want to be polite. But if you answer a cops questions they don't stop.. "what do you need at the store, why are you taking this route, who else is going to be at the store, why are you going at this time"? I just say Look I'm in a hurry if I'm not under arrest I am leaving. Usually this ends up pissing them off and they all know me around here so they are gonna hold me anyway. If your under investigation it's better to lawyer up right off the bat.. Like you said tho a chance encounter then maybe politeness is good..
|
Smackshadow
It's Time for Wild Speculation


Registered: 09/27/05
Posts: 575
Last seen: 4 months, 6 days
|
Re: Remaining silent limitations [Re: 79towncar]
#10324930 - 05/11/09 11:21 PM (15 years, 11 days ago) |
|
|
First, this is not legal advice because I am not a lawyer.
However, it is my understanding that before you are detained (a reasonable person would not believe they had the right to leave) you can do pretty much what ever you want. At this point you have the right to remain silent, because you don't have to talk to them at all and have the right to leave. If they tell you that you cannot leave then you are detained and after you are detained you have the right to remain silent. I believe that they don't have to read you your rights until they arrest you, but you still have the right to exercise your rights if you are detained.
-------------------- The trouble with fighting for human freedom is that one spends most of one's time defending scoundrels. For it is against scoundrels that oppressive laws are first aimed, and oppression must be stopped at the beginning if it is to be stopped at all. ~H. L. Mencken~
|
79towncar
Stranger
Registered: 12/11/08
Posts: 310
Last seen: 11 years, 2 months
|
Re: Remaining silent limitations [Re: Smackshadow]
#10326031 - 05/12/09 07:25 AM (15 years, 10 days ago) |
|
|
SMACKSWADOW your right about your statement but if police are stopping you in the 1st place they probabily have reason.. Unless your speeding or for some other traffic violation. Chances are if your walking to take the trash cans in or taking a jog around the neighborhood a police officer isn't going to stop you. Unless of corse you were suspected in a crime, have a warrant, or are under investigation.. So if a police officer stops you while your doing something normal chances are they are probabily going to bust your balls.
|
Seuss
Error: divide byzero



Registered: 04/27/01
Posts: 23,480
Loc: Caribbean
Last seen: 3 months, 8 days
|
Re: Remaining silent limitations [Re: 79towncar]
#10326137 - 05/12/09 08:15 AM (15 years, 10 days ago) |
|
|
> Unless of corse you were suspected in a crime, have a warrant, or are under investigation..
.. or happen to be the wrong color, look different, etc.
-------------------- Just another spore in the wind.
|
fastfred
Old Hand



Registered: 05/17/04
Posts: 6,899
Loc: Dark side of the moon
|
Re: Remaining silent limitations [Re: Seuss]
#10327024 - 05/12/09 12:27 PM (15 years, 10 days ago) |
|
|
I know a guy that was harrassed quite a bit for awhile. He filed a complaint and then a lawsuit. Finally the PD offered a settlement... they flagged his plates and his file with some comment and he NEVER got stopped again.
Not sure what they put in there, but it was probably along the lines of "pending harrassment lawsuit against the PD." Any cop that sees that sure isn't going to want to be included in that lawsuit and they know the guys already been checked out many times and has no record.
-FF
|
|