Withholding Identity From a Law Officer: Your Right or Not?

Associated Press ^ | March 23, 2004 | Gina Holland

[Centurion2000]

Here it would have been Obstructing Official Business. Or Domestic Violence or Disorderly Conduct, Persisting. Whatever I felt like at the moment.

Do you have any idea how much of a fascist you sound like right now? Cops should not be able to lock people up and charge them jsut because 'they feel like it'.

Your comment is disgusting in its lack of regards for citizens' rights.

[Cap'n Crunch]

Thank you. Tell Dad I said "hey." 30 plus years??? God Bless him, I hope to be fishing in about 5 more.

[TankerKC]

I guess I don't know you well enough to know that your comment was tongue-in-cheek. It seems that other folks keyed in on the comment too. Perhaps it fit too neatly into my stereotype of cops. I say this having limited personal experience with cops “on the job”…I just don’t do much to get into trouble. ;) I have had a few traffic violations and dealt with some big egos. I also have three sisters and a brother that are cops…three of the four know of only one way to get things done—their way!

[KneelBeforeZod]

if the SCOTUS says no right to force ID, the bad part is all the illegals and jihadist that will now be free to do as they wish.

I'm guessing we'll getting something like "you dont have to ID yourself, but you can get arrested til we figure out who you are"...even though that is basically what happened here.

[green iguana]

instead of fact distorters like green iguana!

If I'm distorting facts, it is unintentional. After just looking at them, you are correct, the court documents do claim a male hitting a female. The male and female in the case claim otherwise.

I also just looked at the large version of the tape. The court documents also state that the female was a passenger (again, contradicted by Hiibel and his daughter.) In the tape Hiible says "You've got a driver" (or something to that effect) and gestures towards the truck. From the very beginning of the tape (when the officer first pulls up) it appears his daughter is in the driver's seat.

I don't have an agenda beyond hoping for a reversal of the continuing erosion of our rights. I'm not sure what your agenda is, but you seem very hostile towards this case.

[Cap'n Crunch]

see post 95

[A2J]

As a former police officer, I always believed (and still do) that unless you're placing someone under arrest, they can tell you that their name is "Moota Pahoota" and there's nothing that a cop can do about it.

If after being arrested the person refuses to give his/her name, their booked as "John" or "Jane Doe," fingerprinted and must provide documentation as to their identity before they can be released on bond.

Finished business.

[Cap'n Crunch]

see post 101

[Doctor Stochastic]

Whatever I felt like at the moment.

That is becoming the public perception of the police. They do what they "feel like at the moment" rather than whether a law is being violated. The more this goes on, the less the public believes that police are there for protection than for harassment.

[A2J]

Something has changed in the training that manifests itself in the LEO being a A-hole.

Actually, you're seeing the manifestation of a lack of training in the area of service or being a servant of the people. This type of training is absent from academies.

[Cap'n Crunch]

Yes, see, I've refused to give my 'proper name' (by throwing out a goofy comment such as 'whatever I feel like at the moment')

And some of the people here fell for it, hook, line and sinker and "arrested me" (by labeling me a fascist Nazi) just like the cop in this story.

Ah, I love this game.... some folks here would make great cops... hahahahahahahahahahahahahaha...

[American_Centurion]

I guess you're right to some extent, although the government has more information on me than they do on most convicts in prison. So I tend to classify myself in the "they already know everything about me" category.

Re: thumb print, if the saying "there's a sucker born every minute" wasn't true, the crime rate would be much lower.

[7MMmag]

What disturbs me most about this case, is that it misleads us as to what a more "real" underlying problem is.
It is not wether or not we need to verbally identify ourselves to L.E.O.'s (I say we should), but should we be forced to provide a driver's license upon demand (when not driving!)?

I say hell no. I've been through this...
And no, I won't submit to any search, either, just for general purposes---like the constitution.
I need some stronger indication of actual need to look, beyond the typical fishing expedition.

I had a local cop say, after I had declined his request to
search my vehicle, "I smell marijuana", which p.o.'d me enough to reply loudly and forcefully 'We both know that's BULL$SHIT!!!"
Fortunately enough for me, he backed off right away.
But I did end up on a "list" for some years, and went through quite a few stops, and an unlawful arrest (complete with recieving a snoot full of pepper spray, for the later "crime" of not showing I.D---while on foot!!!

I take great pleasure in taking my legally hunted deer into said PD to have the tages validated...
A couple of times, reaching into the dressed carcass, pulling out the heart (what was left of it) telling them, "'ya see what a .308 (or 7 Mag!) will do to a heart?" heheheh..."and oh yeah, and I got that one "on the run"".

Nowadays, they leave me pretty much alone.
At least they didn't try to plant drugs on me, or in my vehicle, just because they CAN.
I did warn one of 'em..."if you do that, you do realize what will happen don't you?"

[Cap'n Crunch]

I'm going to plead my case to the Supreme Court...

[Cap'n Crunch]

Don't get me wrong, I believe our rights are being eroded more and more every year. And it seems it doesn't seem to matter if it's a republican or a democrat that is taking our rights.

Anymore we're just 'wage slaves.' That's how I see it anyhow.

[eno_]

I don't think it's the training because cops have to eat alot more crap today then we did say 10 years ago.

That's because people like me: White, middle-aged, prosperous, who used to be law-n-order hardliners now see cops as corrupt, obsessed with revenue enhancement, and almost totally useless against real crime.

With my short hair and polite manners the prosector would never see me coming on the jury. But I'd hang the jury if needed to slap down cops like this. And at town meeting, I always vote to cut the PD before almost anything else (well, maybe those school "advisors" first).

Police who embrace the "click it or ticket" way of life deserve nothing better than to be spat on.

[Wolfie]

I don't either. But the SC will rule for the cops. Guaranteed.

[Cap'n Crunch]

Geez, none of those cops have seen what a bullet can do to a heart? They really screw up babies hearts. Shotgun in the mouth really ruins your day too.

I think people run over by trains are my favorite. Right up there with decomposing maggot filled bodies. Gotta love when they explode.

There's rotten cops, no doubt. But all of us will pay for our deeds when we stand before Almighty God. That's what I believe anyway.

[A2J]

How can one be guilty of resisting arrest if they aren't also convicted of another crime?

Easy.

The charge of resisting arrest is not dependent upon the primary charge; it stands alone.

For example, a man is arrested for domestic abuse and resisting arrest after refusing to identify himself or scuffling with police.

Later, in trial he is found innocent of domestic abuse but is found guilty for resisting police. The acquittal does not mean that there wasn't probable cause for the arrest, just that the evidence AT THE TRIAL didn't support a conviction. The resisting charge is looked at singularly and, because there's sufficient evidence, the man is convicted.

Case closed, pay your fine or do your time. Legit.