Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Can the police retaliate against a citizen for refusing to answer police questions?
The Washington Post ^ | April 19th, 2017 | By Orin Kerr

Posted on 04/20/2017 12:00:22 PM PDT by Mariner

click here to read article


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-4041-53 next last
The fifth circuit says the cops can arrest and charge you for interfering if you refuse to answer their questions.

And they can be quite rough about it.

1 posted on 04/20/2017 12:00:22 PM PDT by Mariner
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: Mariner

Counting on courts to limit abuses by law enforcement is a lesson in futility. That ship sailed a long time ago.


2 posted on 04/20/2017 12:03:11 PM PDT by gdani
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Mariner

I don’t know exactly but I heard about a year ago that the law changed and if you refuse to answer questions you need to explicitly cite the Fifth Amendment of the US Constitution.


3 posted on 04/20/2017 12:03:35 PM PDT by gaijin
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Mariner
Can the police retaliate against a citizen for refusing to answer police questions?

In downtown Portland, Maine yes they can, but in rural Maine, NO!

4 posted on 04/20/2017 12:05:23 PM PDT by The_Republic_Of_Maine (politicians beware)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Mariner

Officer: where are you going?
Perp: south
Officer: where are you coming from
Perp: duh...north


5 posted on 04/20/2017 12:07:12 PM PDT by South Dakota (We need a real independent investigation of Bill/Hillary and Obama's actions)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Mariner

““[a]n individual’s Fifth Amendment right against self-incrimination is implicated only during a custodial interrogation.” Murray v. Earle, 405 F.3d 278, 286 (5th Cir. 2005)””

Yup, but still keep your mouth shut if you are in or out of custody or what you may believe or not believe to be ‘custodial interrogation.’

If things get dicey the only word you say is “Lawyer.”


6 posted on 04/20/2017 12:08:08 PM PDT by Timpanagos1
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: South Dakota

I will handle it like this Alexander guy did and force the arrest and charges.

As a matter of principle.


7 posted on 04/20/2017 12:09:05 PM PDT by Mariner (War Criminal #18)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: gaijin

“I don’t know exactly but I heard about a year ago that the law changed and if you refuse to answer questions you need to explicitly cite the Fifth Amendment of the US Constitution.”

That is not the question and the 5th Amendment only applies to you if you are in custody.


8 posted on 04/20/2017 12:09:20 PM PDT by Timpanagos1
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: South Dakota

Officer: “Do have any ID?”

Redneck who is being pulled over: “’Bout what?”


9 posted on 04/20/2017 12:10:11 PM PDT by Disambiguator (Keepin' it analog.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: Timpanagos1

Cops and prosecutors routinely use statements made BEFORE arrest/Miranda in criminal cases.


10 posted on 04/20/2017 12:10:31 PM PDT by Mariner (War Criminal #18)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: Mariner

And it’s against the law to lie to cops.


11 posted on 04/20/2017 12:11:46 PM PDT by Mariner (War Criminal #18)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: Timpanagos1

Nah. Refusing to answer is refusing to cooperate. That’s gets you cuffed until they find out what is going on.


12 posted on 04/20/2017 12:12:15 PM PDT by AppyPappy (Don't mistake your dorm political discussions with the desires of the nation)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: Mariner

This will be an interesting opinion to read, and I will have to read it in its entirety. My current understanding of the law is that:

1) The police must have a legitimate reason, at least “reasonable suspicion” for any stop of an individual;

2) If there is are legitimate reasons for the stop, the person is required to provide identification. Identity has long been held to NOT be covered by the 5th Amendment self-incrimination clause;

3) Refusal to provide identity in many states a crime, typically a misdemeanor, and the person is likely to be arrested for it;

4) The person stopped is under no obligation to provide any further information other than identity, and can refuse to answer;

5) Whether the refusal to answer gives rise to further suspicions that would extend a stop and give probable cause for full seizure and search is much more open-ended and very much dependent on the facts justifying the stop and the questions asked.

Having said that, I will read the opinion and see if it really does break any new ground.


13 posted on 04/20/2017 12:12:44 PM PDT by henkster (Orwell, Rand and Huxley would not be proud of our society, but they'd have no trouble recognizing it)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: gdani

“That ship sailed a long time ago.”

It was worse years ago.

.


14 posted on 04/20/2017 12:12:53 PM PDT by Mears
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Mariner

Being charged with obstruction of justice, one could axe the judge that very question.


15 posted on 04/20/2017 12:13:47 PM PDT by exnavy (God save the republic.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Mariner

Yes they can. Any other questions?


16 posted on 04/20/2017 12:14:44 PM PDT by FreedomNotSafety
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Timpanagos1

Not so. The 5th Amendment privilege against self-incrimination applies at all times. It is only when you are in custody that the police are required to tell you about it under Miranda v. Arizona.


17 posted on 04/20/2017 12:14:56 PM PDT by henkster (Orwell, Rand and Huxley would not be proud of our society, but they'd have no trouble recognizing it)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: AppyPappy

“Refusing to answer is refusing to cooperate.”

That is the current interpretation of the law. But if that logic is extended:

Small domestic violence case across the street. Cops knock on your door to find out if you saw or heard anything. They see you looking at them through the window but you refuse to answer the door (because you know why they are there and you are friends with both parties).

Do the cops then decide you are interfering, kick down your door and arrest you?


18 posted on 04/20/2017 12:16:48 PM PDT by Mariner (War Criminal #18)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: Disambiguator

officdr “Have you been drinkin”?

Redneck: Points to beer label he stuck to his forehead “No sir, honest- look (Points to beer label he stuck to his forehead), See? I’m on the patch.”


19 posted on 04/20/2017 12:18:46 PM PDT by Bob434
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: FreedomNotSafety

“Any other questions?”

Are you a cop? If so, how would the chief view such behavior from his officers? How would the community that employs you and the chief view it?


20 posted on 04/20/2017 12:20:33 PM PDT by Mariner (War Criminal #18)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-4041-53 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson