- Feature Articles
- CodeSOD
- Error'd
-
Forums
-
Other Articles
- Random Article
- Alex's Soapbox
- Announcements
- Best of…
- Best of Email
- Best of the Sidebar
- Bring Your Own Code
- Coded Smorgasbord
- Mandatory Fun Day
- Off Topic
- Representative Line
- News Roundup
- Editor's Soapbox
- Software on the Rocks
- Souvenir Potpourri
- Sponsor Post
- Tales from the Interview
- The Daily WTF: Live
- Virtudyne
Admin
just to add my $.02 in (and yes, that's "two cents", not "two dollars", for those who listened to the cell-phone incident)...
States differ in exactly what you have to answer, but most the time it's on the order of your name and your address. If an officer talks to you, he can ask and expect that information from you. Anything else is deniable without it being probable cause.
Obvious extensions to this are when you're doing some licensable activity...obviously if you're driving they can ask and expect a driver's license and registration. But if you're just standing on a beach, you have no legal requirement to show ids, etc. And I guess you could throw in there if you're on parole, you're at their mercy.
Admin
So they don't ask you why your calls stop suddenly after his death.
Admin
I always wondered -- if the police knock on your door, and you're taking a nap or something, or busy watching a movie on TV, or just don't feel like answering the door, do you HAVE to answer the door? Legally, I mean, not morally or "in the interests of justice".
Admin
That's some pretty terrible police work, too. You'd think the cops would smell something fishy when they saw such an inordinate amount of phone calls from one number. 15 phone calls in a day is a lot from one person. A psycho ex-girlfriend of mine would call me (a lot) when I didn't pick up the phone the first time, and even then it maxed out at around 8 calls.
Admin
I suppose if they have a warrant. Otherwise, probably not.
Admin
Maybe if you're just standing there and not moving an inch, otherwise there is always a suspicion that you're violating some crime or another. And if that's the case... our disaster of a Supreme Court (and I'm not taking republican or democrat sides, left or right sides, they're all bad) decided a few years ago that you are required to give your name (which presumably means that you must cough up ID) if the police has any suspicions.
http://supct.law.cornell.edu/supct/html/03-5554.ZO.html
Admin
A divorce lawyer could probably at least recommend a criminal defense lawyer, or know enough to tell you to shut up.
If you're being accused of murder, you get a lawyer. Find one in a phone book, call someone you trust to find one for you, do whatever it takes. It was irresponsible parenting to allow the cops to question the son without a lawyer present.
I'm sure you don't think you need a lawyer any time soon, but maybe your number comes up on a murdered person's cell phone.
Admin
<movie guy voice>Starring Lou Diamond Phillips as Steve, Tom Hanks as Big Willie, Strong Mad as the Bad Cop, Strong Bad as the Good Cop, and Niel Patrick Harris as the son.</movie guy voice>
phone rings in background numerous times heartbeat fades and wipes of cops breaking the door down to get into teh school, beating the crap out of NPH and drag him to the police car heartbeat <NPH says> But DAAAAD! I didn't do anything </NPH> heartbeat EXCEPT MURDER </Strong Mad> heartbeat <mgv>Don't look now... heartbeat it's no one... heartbeat on... heartbeat Caller ID </mgv> heartbeat fast fade in fade out of Big Willie getting shot with all the dramatics <mgv> Spoofed <mgv> spoofed drips with blood... and coke I think I'm gonna have to jump!</Strong Bad>
Admin
To touch on the earlier comment about why you would think the worse of your kid: I have 4 kids, 2 of which have been in jail for minor drug offenses (seperate incidents). It isn't a matter of always thinking the worse, it is a matter of FEARING the worse. Questions like, "did they do something" or "were they with someone who did something" naturally spring to mind.
With one son, he was honest with the officer, including handing over his "stash" when asked. The officer took him to the jail, but didn't arrest/process him and instead called us to come get him and he was only charged with a misdemeanor. The other son chose to play the part of the young smart-ass and even though he didn't have anything besides paraphernalia, ended up spending the weekend in jail. And getting charged with a felony (later pleaded down to misdemeanor).
I don't suggest that you should just do whatever the officer asks, but whatever you do should be done as calmly and respectfully as you can muster yourself to be. If the officer is a prick, it won't matter what you do. If the officer is not a prick, it can make a huge difference. It has been my experience that some officers interprete your attempt to lie/mislead them as an insult to their intelligence and the situation will generally go down hill from there.
Admin
I understand what you're saying, and certainly case law upholds the identification part. But identifying oneself is not the same as producing some document. The obvious proof of this is that you don't have to have a driver's license on you....except when you're driving (typically defined as being 1) behind the wheel of a moving vehicle, or 2) behind the wheel of a vehicle with a running motor). so there can be no expectation of giving an identifying document in the beach scenario.
Admin
You have it in a nut shell. Inocent people cooperate with the police, and think they can get it all straightened out in a couple of minutes. People who know the cops have something on them scream "Not without my lawyer" as soon as the cops ask to talk to them.
Admin
Letting the police talk to your underage son without a lawyer is incredibly stupid. Talking to the police without a lawyer at the police station is incredibly stupid. Police are trained in interrogation tactics, most of us are not trained in counter-interrogation tactics. How many people have signed confessions during long interrogations that they later have recanted? I would venture to guess at least a handful a year. My brother-in-law and sister were both police officers.
Admin
In that case TRWTF is that it is rule #1. Any programmer knows it should be rule #0.
Admin
AHAHAHAHAHAAHAH
Oh, I'm sorry. Were you serious about that? Let me know how that works out for you...
On a more serious note, that IS a good course of action to take. I just wouldn't hold my hopes up for anything substantive from the police departments.
This is a map of SWAT raids gone horribly wrong. In many of these cases, especially the smaller ones not on here, the police never admit wrongdoing. And that's when armed men with fully automatic machine guns burst into the wrong house in the middle of the night. If the police won't say "sorry" in those cases, I doubt they'd apologize for chasing a wrong lead like in Steve's case. But then, who knows. There are still plenty of honest cops out there. Map of SWAT raids gone wrong
Admin
"Power corrupts. Absolute power corrupts absolutely."
But it rocks absolutely, too.
Admin
The correct response to a search request is "I do not consent to any search at this time". Just keep repeating that sentence if they try to pressure you. Do not interfere physically in any way if they insist on searching anyway. If they search without warrant or consent, any decent lawyer should be able to get anything they might find thrown out of evidence.
The police count on the catch-22 response. You can watch practically any episode of cops to see someone with something to hide consenting to a search just because they don't know how to say no without looking guilty. Simple assertion of your rights is the only way to break out.
Admin
Thanks for posting the link. This stuff can't be exposed enough.
Admin
Always get a lawyer. I can speak from experience. Being a US Citizen gives you some very unique and special rights--the right to talk to a lawyer, the right to a trial by jury, etc... Don't give up your rights ever. The guy was innocent. The kid was innocent. Look what happened. The dad was dragged out of work and embarrassed, the son was pulled out of school. And what happens to the idiots that acted on bad information.
Seriously? I miss the good 'ol days when officers were held responsible for the warrants they served and the actions they took.
The two officers will probably never get in trouble for causing two citizens who are innocent until proven guilty a lot of trouble and heart-ache.
Admin
The quoted case alludes to another mitigating factor, that of the vehicle in proximity to the intoxicated man. In this case, police may be more justified in demanding identification on the presumption that this man may be about to commit a crime related to motor vehicle use (DUI/DWI). The defendant's error in this case was refusing to identify himself more than failure to provide identification (and being a drunken jerk to a cop; that's never a good idea).
Admin
You obviously haven't met my project manager
Admin
To anyone who may think the police would act professionally by issuing an apology, I refer you to the following case.
======================
On August 2, 1996, police storm the home of 62-year-old Salvator Hernandez on a drug raid. The raid is part of a broader raid that morning involving 47 police officers and federal agents.
Hernandez, who is nearly deaf, is making breakfast for himself and his friend, 54-year old Bortolo Pineda.
According to police, as they entered the home, Hernandez took the knife he was using to make breakfast and "lunged" at them with a "menacing" look on his face. According to Pineda, Hernandez didn't hear the police shouts, and had turned to get some sausage from the refrigerator. Police opened fire, and hit Hernandez in the chest five times, killing him.
Hernandez was a farmworker described by friends and his employer as a "good man," and a "good worker." He had no criminal record, and in fact had been a police officer in Mexico before coming to America. He was a grandfather of 21 and a great-grandfather of one. There were no drugs on his person or in his system.
Just days later, a grand jury would clear the raiding officers of all charges, ruling that they had reason to believe their lives were in danger.
Salem police pointedly refused to apologize for Hernandez's death.
Sources:
Cheryl Martinis, "Two Salem officers kill 63 year-old," The Oregonian, August 3, 1996.
Laura Trujillo, "Jury clears police in fatal shooting," The Oregonian, August 8, 1996.
Laura Trujillo, "Police in Salem decline to apologize," The Oregonian, August 9, 1996.
Laura Trujillo, "The Shooting of Salvador Hernandez," The Oregonian, Septebmer 1, 1996.
Admin
I would suspect the son would get major props with the cool kids for being dragged out by the police. That's major bad ass points!
Admin
You don't have to already have a lawyer that you associate with to request a lawyer / speak to a lawyer.
Admin
I'll tell you this much: I would not go with the cops in the first place unless I was under arrest.
Second, the moment they were questioning me like that, I would ask for a lawyer.
Third, I would not let my (theoretical) son be questioned alone.
There are lots of reasons for this, but primarily to protect myself from the police. I don't necessarily mistrust individual officers, but I mistrust the law enforcement system and its tendency to see the world as "us vs. them". Assumptions that people in such a system will make are suspect and potentially damaging to myself.
Admin
Admin
You could be totally innocent of doing anything unethical, yet still have violated some obscure, unjust law.
Admin
And then, coming next week...
The poor son gets kidnapped right outside school by homeland security and is charged with selling WMDs to Omar the terrorist...
Admin
I had a similar run in with the cops when I was in college. There was a hit and run in the parking lot, and when the cops found the offending vehicle parked in the same lot (yay for dumb criminals) they called in the wrong parking tag number. All the parking tags on my campus were 5 digits and a letter designating which lots you could park in, they called in 5555z (my tag number) instead of 5555x (the guilty party's tag number). Of course, it took almost an hour for us to figure this out because the pigs (not all cops are pigs, but these two were) were playing games instead of doing their job properly by verifying ownership of the car and tag.
In any case, the type of bullshit described in this WTF is exactly the kind of behavior the cops that questioned me had. Instead of actually verifying that the car in question was owned by me, they instead interrogated me and tried to get me to "confess" that it was my car and that I was guilty.
They tried the good cop/bad cop routine. They tried tripping me up by providing information in their questions (like the make of the vehicle) and then asking my later how I knew that info (they were also pissed that they utterly failed in this as I have a great memory and repeated their exact questions back to them). They also insulted me repeatedly with statements like "why don't you just be a man and confess so you can take your punishment and get on with your life" and other similar bullshit.
When they finally got around to actually trying to verify ownership of the car and tag after I didn't cave to their intimidation tactics, I found out their error and pointed it out to them. They then tried to make up some bullshit that the parking service had issued to identical tags (no, one had a z and the other a w). While it was fun to watch them squirm at their own idiocy and loss of face, I never did receive even an off hand apology. All I got was a "warning" that I was "still a suspect" because I "knew stuff I shouldn't have" (see bullshit games) and that I should expect possible further questioning.
In retrospect, I made two fundamental mistakes. First, I allowed them to interrogate me without representation. Second, I didn't file a complaint or harassment suit. It is because of this experience that the only thing I will ever say to a police officer ever again in that type of situation is "Unless I am under arrest, I will be on my way. If I am under arrest, I want to speak to a lawyer".
Admin
That's insufficient for probable cause. If it was, then nothing could ever prevent the police from searching anything. Is that the kind of world you want to live in?
The US Constitution has a 4th amendment for a reason, and case law bears it out.
Admin
Stop a minute and think about what you just wrote there.
Admin
Addendum (2008-03-12 21:24):
Wait for it...Admin
Admin
Back at my old job, we used to have a running joke about this sort of thing.
When the VP called and said "meet me at the airport, and bring your laptop", you knew you were done.
At the store level, they used to dial in during the day and remove the person's name from the e-mail. Whenever we would hear them dialing in, we would always look to see who the latest non-person was.
Admin
Um, let's see: $2,000 versus even a 0.1% chance that my son goes up for murder? Tough decision!
Admin
Admin
god bless iwish.
Admin
Does anyone else miss the bean bag chick?
Admin
You must be a lot richer than me. I have faith in the legal process to not convict an innocent man (especially a well behaved white suburban type kid whose father has a desk job). If my son is guilty, I would not want him to beat the rap anyways. If he is innocent, then a half hour of questioning would clear things up 99.99% of the time. Lawyer up, and if the lawyer is incompetent, God knows what the outcome would be. Maybe he accepts a manslaughter conviction with a suspended sentence, thinking that is the deal of a lifetime???
Admin
Now he's "in" with the wrong crowd, expect the next phone call to be for real.
Admin
Admin
Hmmmm.
There are corrupt police. But I believe most are honest. But they're are trained to hammer away at you. And if you give them any evidence, what they perceive as evidence, of a crime then they will pursue you.
Admin
I guess you just need to have a family friend as a criminal lawyer or lawyer (they know other lawyers). I got the number memorized, so never know when you might need to make a call.
Admin
Hmmmm.
Sure thing. Most cops I've known were honest. Honesty isn't at issue.
What is at issue is if you say or do anything that triggers the pursuit response. Because if the cops think you're guilty then your life will be a nightmare.
Admin
He should have said, "what is this concerning?" Then the officers would explain. Then he should say, "I believe you have the wrong person. That's not my phone number." The the officers would play asshole. Then Steve should have said, "You are mistaken, but I'm not willing to answer any more questions without my attorney present." And then he should have shut his yapper.
Anyone who doesn't understand this should read The Innocent Man by John Grisham. In it is a story of two people who are now serving life sentences for murders they obviously did not commit, because they made the terrible mistake of agreeing to police interrogation without attorneys.
Steve was already told that it was a homicide investigation, therefore serious. He's very very lucky it turned out that well, and he was a fool for handling it the way he did. These cops turned out to be reasonable, but that's only by chance. Others get attached to some idea of what they "know" happened and will make the facts fit.
Admin
Any lawyer is your best friend at that point. Well except the one prosecuting you.
Admin
No, of course not. But the best is:
"I'm very busy right now. What is this regarding?" "We'd like to talk to you about ..." "I'm not available to talk right now. The only time and place I can speak with you regarding that is next Monday at 10am, in my lawyer's office. He is at .... Thank you for stopping by."
All through a locked door.
Admin
Oh, could be a whole bunch of reasons. I'll list some.
Remember that guy the cops executed on the tube in London? Totally innocent, they shot him in the back of the head because they didn't like the way he looked or something? Should you trust yours?
Cops are there to make arrests. They start out with that goal. Everyone is a potential customer. Why would any rational person even want to participate in that?
Answering their questions is like a gamble where you stand to lose but not to win. The best-case outcome from talking with them is that they leave you alone. The worst-case is spending years in prison. The best case outcome isn't that great, is it? You can't gain anything, and you can lose everything. No rational person would take that offer.
In practice, it's easy to talk your way into trouble, and nearly impossible to talk your way out of it, regardless of the truth. No rational person would talk if that's the reality.
Really really dumb to answer any questions from cops when they have already told you it's a murder investigation. And I will give this parent the benefit of me thinking he's stupid, because to knowingly get your son alone with cops with no attorney is just as smart as having him spend the night with Michael Jackson and a bottle of Viagra. I mean that literally.
Admin
I had one really weird incident that almost got me put in the county jail. I wasn't innocent, but I wasn't as guilty as perceived at the time. I lucked out that my brother is an attorney and so within 45 minutes I had a decent law firm protecting my rights. Two days later the DA realized what had happened and dropped all charges.
Admin
Lot of trouble with the law? HAXING WHERE U SHOULDNT BE HAXING?!!!1
Admin
Is it just me, or does this seem intensely paranoid? I don't have, not have ever had any need for a lawyer. Having the number of one memorized means one of two things to me 1) you wear a raincoat everywhere you go or 2) you're dealing in some shadey business and you know it, so you're just waiting for the hammer to fall.