Posted on 07/25/2011 9:38:36 AM PDT by reaganaut
- A mystery man arrested on minor charges more than three weeks ago remains behind bars in Utah while law enforcement officials try to determine his true identity, which he refuses to reveal.
"This is really a strange case," said Lt. Dennis Harris with the Utah County Sheriff's Office. "He just doesn't want to be found."
The unidentified man, who has graying hair, a light beard and is believed to be in his 60's, was arrested on July 1 for trespassing in a parking garage.
He was booked into jail on three misdemeanor charges and has thwarted any chance of release, with or without bail, by refusing to identify himself.
(Excerpt) Read more at news.yahoo.com ...
Iding yourself is not considered to be a 5th amendment issue.
So indict “John Doe” on that and make with the bloomin’ trial already.
mugshot bump, post 45
How is stating your name, an infraction of the 5th amendment? He is holding himself hostage, he merely has state his name. Pretty simple stuff.
He could identify himself as Barak Obama. Heck, it worked for the other guy!
So indict “John Doe” on the refusal to identify and trespassing or whatever they allegedly caught him doing, and make with a trial already. It’s up to the government to show evidence of being guilty of anything else. Not up to “John Doe” to prove innocence of anything else.
“John Doe” will not suffice?
Casey Anthony in disguise?
Dad??????
Why not? That is what they are holding him for not IDing himself. 4th says he can keep quite and 5th says he cannnot he forced.
77-7-15. Authority of peace officer to stop and question suspect -- Grounds. A peace officer may stop any person in a public place when he has a reasonable suspicion to believe he has committed or is in the act of committing or is attempting to commit a public offense and may demand his name, address and an explanation of his actions.
There is no stipulation stating "unless the person just doesn't feel like it".
See 131.
I suggest you read those bills again. You CAN NOT be forced to Witness against yourself, and you cannot be given cruel or unusual punishment. This man is threatened with neither. He will very likely be free to go; as soon as he identifies himself.
Utah is one of the states that has adopted a Stop and identify statutes.
If you don't like the law; work to change the law. I live in Utah, and somehow I'm able to go through life producing my ID when requested. Somehow, I manage to stay out of jail, somehow I manage to hold a job, somehow I manage to pay my bills, raise my family and obey the law. The officers are simply enforcing the laws, as they are written.
And so he allegedly broke the law, once. Put “John Doe” on trial for it, once and get the force farce over.
Your reasoning is faulty see post 131. He can’t be held for not giving his name.
The law is not being carried out according to due process. No court is threatening him with contempt and generally even courts give up when they sense their attempt to coerce will not work.
Sorry, post 103, not 131.
He will very likely be free to go; as soon as he identifies himself.
- - - - -
He should go free even if he doesn’t identify himself.
Sure, he can; he is currently being held. You see, Utah is one of 15 states that have a adopted the Stop and identify statutes
In 13 states (Alabama, Delaware, Illinois, Kansas, Louisiana, Missouri, Nebraska, New Hampshire, New York, North Dakota, Rhode Island, Utah, Wisconsin), police “may demand” identifying information;
In states whose “stop and identify laws” do not directly impose penalties, a lawful arrest must be for violation of some other law, such as one to the effect of “resisting, obstructing, or delaying a peace officer”. For example, the Nevada “stop and identify” law challenged in Hiibel did not impose a penalty on a person who refused to comply, but the Justice Court of Union Township, Nevada, determined that Hiibel’s refusal to identify himself[24] constituted a violation of Nevada’s “obstructing” law.[25] A similar conclusion regarding the interaction between Utah’s “stop and identify” and “obstructing” laws was reached in Oliver v. Woods (10th Cir. 2000). and finally
Whether an arrested person must identify herself may depend on the jurisdiction in which the arrest occurs. If a person is under arrest and police wish to question her, they are required to inform the person of her Fifth-Amendment right to remain silent by giving a Miranda warning. However, Miranda does not apply to biographical data necessary to complete booking.
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.