• Quick note - the problem with Youtube videos not embedding on the forum appears to have been fixed, thanks to ZiprHead. If you do still see problems let me know.

If a cop asks for your name...

Seems like this has been the law for some time.

Does it count as cooperation if you tattoo your name on your bum and make the cop read it?
 
And if you tell him your name, but then he demands ID? If you're not carrying ID?

How can he prove that you haven't told him your name, if you give a fake one?

What happens if you're not carrying ID, and he suspects you of giving a fake name, when if you haven't? Does he arrest you and risk being sued for wrongful arrest?
 
Phil Carter at the
Intel Dump

...
But, the Court did hand down an extremely important Constitutional criminal procedure decision in Hiibel v. Sixth Judicial Dist. Court of Nev., Humboldt Cty., No. 03-5554. The case centered on the question of whether a police officer can ask for a person's identification during a "Terry stop". Those types of encounters, whichi require only a reasonable suspicion by the police officer (and not the higher standard of probable cause), were approved by the Court in Terry v. Ohio. Here's a brief excerpt from the holding of Terry:

"We merely hold today that where a police officer observes unusual conduct which leads him reasonably to conclude in light of his experience that criminal activity may be afoot and that the persons with whom he is dealing may be armed and presently dangerous, where in the course of investigating this behavior he identifies himself as a policeman and makes reasonable inquiries, and where nothing in the initial stages of the encounter serves to dispel his reasonable fear for his own or others' safety, he is entitled for the protection of himself and others in the area to conduct a carefully limited search of the outer clothing of such persons in an attempt to discover weapons which might be used to assault him."
Today, the Supreme Court extended the Terry stop to include "stop and ID" in addition to "stop and frisk". The case arose out of a Nevada cattle rancher's misdemeanor conviction, but it's easy to see the applicability of this case in other contexts. Justice Anthony M. Kennedy, writing for the Court's majority, said these "stop and ID" searches violated neither the 4th nor the 5th Amendment rights of the defendant in this case. Here are some excerpts from the majority opinion.
...
Presumably, this case might authorize the police to now use "stop and ID" tactics to conduct large-scale gang sweeps in places like South L.A.'s Nickerson Gardens housing complex. Also, police might use this power in the course of normal "order maintenance" activities (as opposed to "law enforcement" activities), such as walking the beat, in order to gather police intelligence and reduce street crime. There may be implications for the terrorism arena as well.
Click to expand...

I don't really have anything to add. Maybe our resident lawyers will be able to help us understand the potential implications of this ruling (including the important "ass tattoo" question that this brings up) .
 
Grammatron said:


That's a very handy card for people who have not seen way too many Law & Order episodes :)
Click to expand...

I use to make it available to my employees, who kept getting stopped while 'Walking While Ethnic'.
 
Bottle or the Gun said:
It protects your rights while labeling you a smart-ass.

Bust Card
Click to expand...

The card says not to consent to be searched, and not to consent to have your car or house searched. Is there a good reason to refuse to be searched in general, or does it boil down to how much privacy you want?


You don’t have to consent to any search of yourself, your car or your house. If you DO consent to a search, it can affect your rights later in court.
Click to expand...

In what way does letting the cops search my car, for instance, affect my rights later in court?

MattJ
 
aerocontrols said:


The card says not to consent to be searched, and not to consent to have your car or house searched. Is there a good reason to refuse to be searched in general, or does it boil down to how much privacy you want?

In what way does letting the cops search my car, for instance, affect my rights later in court?

MattJ
Click to expand...

This is purely from watching too much TV so probably false but if you refuse to consent to every search and your lawyer finds a reason for the search to be illegal anything they find will probably be thrown out.
 
Jay Z ( a popular rapper for you non-hip know nothings) has a new song "99 Problems". Theres a great verse about being stopped by the cops and what your rights are. You realize this song will be more responsible for educating 1000's of youngsters than any ACLU campaine.


Why woudl you consent to a car search. Your given the cops the OK to tear up your ride.
 
Grammatron said:


This is purely from watching too much TV so probably false but if you refuse to consent to every search and your lawyer finds a reason for the search to be illegal anything they find will probably be thrown out.
Click to expand...

I'm actually thinking more along the lines of 'what if there's nothing to find' as would be the case with me.

The card seems to take the position that you should refuse to consent whether whether there is something to find or not. I'm trying to figure out why.

MattJ
 
aerocontrols said:


I'm actually thinking more along the lines of 'what if there's nothing to find' as would be the case with me.

The card seems to take the position that you should refuse to consent whether whether there is something to find or not. I'm trying to figure out why.

MattJ
Click to expand...

Well if there is nothing to find I suppose you have nothing to lose by agreeing. The ACLU comes from the position I agree with that it's not of anyone's, include police's, business of what you do or do not have in your house, room, car, person.
 
Tmy said:
Why woudl you consent to a car search. Your given the cops the OK to tear up your ride.
Click to expand...


In one case, I consented to the search because my activity was quite suspicious and when 8 police cars swoop in on you I figure it's best to be cooperative so you can go home and not go down to the station for further questions.

In another case I cooperated because the cops had me on a speeding violation and I figured if I consented to the search I wouldn't get a ticket.

In neither case did the cops 'tear up my ride'.

MattJ
 
Justice Anthony M. Kennedy, writing for the majority, said that that it violated neither.

``Obtaining a suspect's name in the course of a Terry stop serves important government interests,'' Kennedy wrote.
Click to expand...
I hope that's not a common way of determining a person's right to refuse something?
 
aerocontrols said:


I'm actually thinking more along the lines of 'what if there's nothing to find' as would be the case with me.

The card seems to take the position that you should refuse to consent whether whether there is something to find or not. I'm trying to figure out why.

MattJ
Click to expand...

How much do you make in a year? None of my business right. Same thing here.


What do you get out of either situation?? OK you have nothing to hide Does that mean you want to be handcuffed standing on teh side of the road while people drive buy. After the police tear up your car and pull everything out of its place, you then get to put the crap back together. JOY!!!

If you do have sonthing to hide them your hanging yourslef by ok-ing to a search.
 
Tmy said:
Jay Z ( a popular rapper for you non-hip know nothings) has a new song "99 Problems". Theres a great verse about being stopped by the cops and what your rights are. You realize this song will be more responsible for educating 1000's of youngsters than any ACLU campaine.


Why woudl you consent to a car search. Your given the cops the OK to tear up your ride.
Click to expand...

Nothing says education like..."If you havin girl problems I feel bad for you son I got 99 problems, but a b*tch ain't one."

Oh wait, do you mean the other lines? :)

"Son do you know why I'm stoppin you for?"
Cause I'm young and I'm black and my hat's real low
Or do I look like a mindreader sir? I don't know
Am I under arrest or should I guess some mo'?
"Well you was doin fifty-five in the fifty-four;
license and registration and step out of the car -
are you carryin a weapon on you? I know a lot of you are"
I ain't steppin out of ◊◊◊◊, all my papers legit
"Well do you mind if I look around the car a little bit?"
Well my glove compartment is locked, so is the trunk in the back
And I know my rights, so you gon' need a warrant for that
 
Grammatron said:


Well if there is nothing to find I suppose you have nothing to lose by agreeing. The ACLU comes from the position I agree with that it's not of anyone's, include police's, business of what you do or do not have in your house, room, car, person.
Click to expand...


Do you really think so? So why should we even let police ask?

MattJ
 
aerocontrols said:



In one case, I consented to the search because my activity was quite suspicious and when 8 police cars swoop in on you I figure it's best to be cooperative so you can go home and not go down to the station for further questions.

In another case I cooperated because the cops had me on a speeding violation and I figured if I consented to the search I wouldn't get a ticket.

In neither case did the cops 'tear up my ride'.

MattJ
Click to expand...

Are you a black guy? Sure you can gamble that being cool will get you out of trouble, its up top you to decide.

My buddy once ok-ed a search. They tore up his carpets and foudn a joint. Now the car was like 15 yrs old and the thing couldve been therefor years. He had no idea, but he was on the hook for it.

Moral to the story: You may not know that you have somthing to hide.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom