Posted on 06/24/2002 8:00:24 AM PDT by riley1992
Cops seize driver's license from crime scene witnesses
By Jason Alley, Heritage Newspapers
LINCOLN PARK — Witness a crime or an accident in Lincoln Park and you risk having your driver’s license confiscated by police to ensure that you cooperate with them in their investigation. That’s what happened to 62-year-old Bud Butka on May 26 when he was visiting relatives and witnessed a deadly discharge of gunfire between two police officers who shot and killed a man who they said lunged at them with knives. After the shots were fired and police began their investigation, Butka went over to officers to tell them he had witnessed the shooting and could make an official statement if they needed him to. There were several witnesses milling around the area, so police took everyone’s driver’s licenses so they could be properly identified. After some time passed, Butka said, police told him that he could not have his license back until he came down to the police station the next day to file a report of what he saw. He said he told police that he needed his license back that night so he could drive home, but they refused to give it back, saying they needed to ensure his cooperation and keeping his license was how they would do it. Butka, who owns a restaurant in Wyandotte, said he sometimes needs his license for work-related reasons and could not understand why police were telling him to "break the law by driving around without a license. "They told me that if I was stopped or anything, just tell the police that your license is at the Lincoln Park Police Department," Butka said. He went down the next day with his attorney and got his license back, but said he’s not sure why he was treated like the criminal. "Cops have a tough job to do, but I’ll be damned if they have to treat us like that," Butka said. "They treated me like dirt. All they had to do is say they’re sorry." Lincoln Park police officials declined to comment, referring the matter to City Attorney Edward Zelenak, who defended the officers’ actions. "When you investigate a shooting done by police officers, you want to ensure you get all the witnesses to come forward and to give a statement," he said. "It is better to err on the side of caution." Zelenak said that Butka appeared "wishy-washy" with his statement at the crime scene "and appeared to be inebriated" and that’s why police took his license. Butka called the claim "a crock," saying he told police exactly what he saw. He also denied being drunk while doing so. "Plus, if they thought I was drunk, why would they not arrest me there. Instead they let me drive home," he said. It’s unknown how often police seize driver’s licenses, but Zelenak said doing so isn’t a common practice. "An officer acts on the scene of a crime in a manner he sees fit," Zelenak said. "I asked (police officials) and they said this isn’t standard procedure, but it is an option that officers have if they feel it’s necessary." He said he knows of other instances when it’s been done. "I know of police taking licenses at accident scenes when people are uncooperative," Zelenak said. "Everyone can argue on what is right and wrong, but that day, under those circumstances, the police just wanted the witnesses. (Butka) came back, cooperated and got his license back. He wasn’t deprived of his civil liberties or the right to drive." The executive director of the American Civil Liberties Union of Michigan disagrees, calling the police’s action "not a good idea." "The police shouldn’t be seizing any property at all without probable cause," Kary Moss said. "A witness has not committed any crime and should not be treated as if they had. They shouldn’t lose any of their property or their freedoms just because they don’t cooperate to the police’s satisfaction." Several Downriver police chiefs were called for this story and none said they had ever heard of licenses being taken away from witnesses. "I can’t speak for Lincoln Park, but we do not do that nor would we do that," Trenton police Chief Mark Meschke said. Allen Park police Chief Kenneth Dobson said he was shocked to hear of it going on, saying he doubts it’s legal. "I’m not aware of that being done anywhere and to be honest, I don’t believe it would be legal," he said. "I can’t think of any justification for keeping someone’s identification." Dobson said crime scenes sometimes are chaotic and police may take licenses from witnesses for an hour or so until their statements are taken, but never for much longer. "We may ask for IDs and we may hold on to them until everything calms down, but then we would return them right back," he said. "We certainly wouldn’t hold onto it (just) to ensure someone comes down to talk to us." Ralph Kinney, deputy chief of staff for the Wayne County Sheriff’s Department, said stripping people of their licenses is a serious matter that shouldn’t be taken lightly. He said he knows of people who work in immigration who aren’t even allowed to take licenses away from illegal aliens whom they arrest. "If they can’t remove licenses from people who are in the county illegally, I don’t see how you can take away a legal person’s license," Kinney said. Staff Writer Jason Alley can be contacted at
Free Fire Zone
That happened once, in a story that was widely commented upon last year on FR. As a rule, police departments don't turn away intelligent applicants.
I agree that police departments do accept a lot of less-than-intelligent applicants for a variety of reasons. To suggest that cops are generally "mindless," though, is off the mark. Try talking to some cops at your local NRA chapters or shooting ranges (or to some of the ones who post regularly to FR).
The New York State Police fall into the former category. They are either affirmative action types or were bullies in school that found a job were they could continue be bullies. The only thing missing is the SS arm band.
Gee, once they explain the officer's limits and responsibilities it sounds so reasonable.
However: "Zelenak said that Butka appeared "wishy-washy" with his statement at the crime scene "and appeared to be inebriated" and that’s why police took his license. Butka called the claim "a crock," saying he told police exactly what he saw. He also denied being drunk while doing so. "Plus, if they thought I was drunk, why would they not arrest me there. Instead they let me drive home," he said.
Ten bucks says the guy was wasted, and they didn't tell him to drive home. They may have even been explicitly telling him he couldn't drive. How many other witnesses at this busy crime scene had their licenses confiscated? Oh...
I search the net daily so that these problem children don't move onwards and upwards in their careers. Thank you for repeating this.
This guy is a complete idiot!
No police officer has any right to "take" anything from anyone unless it is clearly stolen or illegal goods. Proper procedure is to write down personal information and contact information of witnesses so they may be contacted during normal business hours. Following that, the officer should write down the outline of the statement the citizen wants to make.
Quite obviously, these police have a problem justifying what they did. Could be that they overreacted with deadly force and were having second thoughts. It is common for them to be in an agitated state afterwards. What is not acceptable is that they use the power of the badge to intimidate and harass witnesses.
Officers like this need to spend a little time in the cooler to think over their transgressions. Then, they should be fired and never again put in a position of honor or allowed to carry a badge or weapon.
Generally speaking, many police officers in this area can be thought of as "walking point in an urban gorilla war." That can be a nasty job that gets a little hectic sometimes. Which means, we should cut them a little slack from time to time.
But, allowing them to intimidate witnesses should never be the type of slack they deserve. And, especially not when it is they who are involved in an incident.
He'll make up what he Needs To later.
And embedded chips in licenses are the answer to this, right?
I doubt that. There's one basic problem that most cops have, not all of them, but most. That what I and others have called the "Cop Mentality". It is exhibited by calling all non-cops "civilians" in a derogatory tone, and also tending to demonstrate a Superiority Attitude. Kinda like your retort to Fred.
Cops aren't all Good Guys, no matter how much we want them to be, or how much they tout that they are. Don't forget, the FBI is in effect an Agency of Cops.
And my brother was a cop.
Vee haff vays of makingk you talk.
Like Officer Q. Martin(ELPD) who things the person rear-ended in a car wreck is at fault(I "backed into him") and Judge David Jordon for believing him....
I almost was in favor of strong measures until I read that the officer later the next day lied about the the witness appearing inebriated. No amount of shock during a shootout can justify that. These cops are out of control and need to know it, else they encourage even more abuse in the future.
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.