Posted on 11/29/2007 6:38:28 AM PST by Sopater
How many times have we seen it? Someone is pulled over for a traffic violation, or maybe just a routine traffic stop, and the next thing you know his or her car is being searched. Nevertheless, most of the time, it is with the consent of the of the person being stopped. Why are you consenting to a search when there is no probable cause for one? The answer is simple, people are not aware of their rights.
The Constitution and the protections that it guarantees can be a bit daunting to "just regular ole' folks," but the gist of it goes something like this:
·Police may initiate a conversation with any citizen for any reason, however they may not detain you without "reasonable suspicion" that you are engaged in criminal activity. When you are stopped, you should ask the officer, "Why am I being stopped?" If the officer does not indicate that you are suspected of a specific crime, then this is a casual stop and you should be allowed to terminate the encounter at any time, but if the officer indicates that you are suspected of criminal activity, you are being detained.
·If a police officer asks your permission to search, you are under no obligation to consent. The only reason he is asking you is may be he does not have enough evidence to search without your consent. If you consent to a search request, you give up your Fourth Amendment protection against unreasonable searches and seizures, Scheneckloth v. Bustamonte, 412 U.S., 93 S. Ct. 2041, 36 L.Ed.2d 854 (1973).
Generally, if a person consents to a warrantless search, the search automatically becomes reasonable and therefore legal. Consequently, whatever an officer finds during such a search generally can be used to convict the person.
Do not expect a police officer to tell you about your right not to consent. Generally, police officers are not required by law to inform you of your rights before asking you to consent to a search. If, for any reason you don't want the officer digging through your belongings, after you have consented to the search, you should tell himthat you don't want him searching through your private things and If the officer still proceeds to searchand finds illegal contraband, generally your attorney can argue that the contraband was discovered through an illegal search and that evidence could be thrown out of court, this is not always the case though.
You have the right to terminate an encounter with a police officer unless you are being detained under police custody or have been arrested. The general rule is that you don't have to answer any questions that the police ask you. This rule comes from the Fifth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution, which protects you against self-incrimination. If you cannot tell if you are allowed to leave, ask the officer, "Am I free to go?"
I hope that this article informs people of their basic rights as far being stopped and the protections that are afforded to us by the Constitution. The goal of this article was to generally inform about the laws of consent and search, this article in not way is meant to be specific, for a more specific break down, I would advise to look at your state statutes, becaue they sometimes provide for more protection than the constitution does.
You are a wise man
Cops do nothing but harass people and show up after the fact.
Get a weapon and learn how to use it. If all law abiding people did that we would need very few cops.
I’m afraid you’re right.
My comments have nothing to do with hating law enforcement or the officers that enforce the laws; my comments have to do with the probabilities as they exist today. I and my family have long and well relied upon our local constabulary to maintain our safe neighborhood and they’ve done a magnificient job. However, there is a trade off. We know better than to be out and on the streets after 11:00 p.m. And if you’re dumb enough to be out there after 2:00 p.m., (when the bars close), you are truly asking for trouble. It’s as simple as that.
“Druggies or jihaddis” (your terms), have just as much constitutional rights as you do.
If you are a Navy veteran, you swore to uphold the Constitution of the United States.
I’m stunned that you do not know what rights are protected.
I saw a case like that in the Army once. A sergeant being interviewed by CID (criminal investigation) as a witness said a little too much and found himself up on his own unrelated charges.
Thanks for the reply Ace; yea, some cops just aren’t our friends, some are o.k., some are as dumb as a stump and a few are just down right mean. They are mostly just a reflection of the society in general I guess.
“Problem is, they can keep you hanging around infinitum until they get a warrant. So, if you’ve got nothing to hide. why not? There’s a very thin line between “principle of the thing” and just plain foolishness.”
Do you really think they’ll be able to get a warrant? In most cases, as stated before, they’re fishing.
And, there is NOT a thin line between principle and foolishness. It is foolishness to assume that there is. Our rights, as granted us by God are priceless. Don’t lose them by not standing up for them. Men have shed their blood preserving them. The least we can do is embrace them.
Funny how searches are only “unreasonable” when they snare the guilty. Refusing a search affords instantaneous probable cause for the warrant, provided the stop is legal. Airport searches are not unreasonable because of public safety issues; the same argument can be made for the detection of illegal weapons and contraband on our motorways. An innocent civilian has nothing to fear and his/her personal safety is enhanced by the process (which I don’t believe is as pandemic as the article implies). By the by, how is iPods for votes an apt comparison?
If you're hauling dope, don't do just under the speed limit and obey all traffic rules. That's one of the profiles they used to use (still use?) in Florida to catch drug runners.
Don't drive recklessly, but don't drive too carefully I guess.
“Refusing a search affords instantaneous probable cause for the warrant, provided the stop is legal.”
Exercising a Constitutional right is considered “probable cause”?
The only place you don’t have that rite is within 25 miles of the Mexican border.
“Any officer can claim probable cause” is a true statement, but it means zilch in court unless he can articulate to a judge what his PC was. Simply telling a judge “I had PC so I searched” is not going to cut it. Granted, there are stupid judges out there who would go along with that, just as there are stupid judges who make up new rules after the fact or ignore the laws and court rules, and do what they want.
It seems to be among the “well if you have nothing to hide” crowd.
Unfortunatly that does not protect you.
Police do use the uniform’s intimidation to scare you.
DUI/DWI taskforce officers routinely PREFILL out their police report forms so if you are being stopped for a drunk driving arrest, your arrest is GENERALLY a foregone conclusion. Police still use the Horizontal Gaze Nystagmus despite it being excludable as evidence, to justify an arrest.
At some point it is just best to refuse EVERYTHING. No roadside exercises (they are not “tests”) and refuse breaths because a one year administrative refusal is easier and cheeper to fight than a jury trial.
You are using too broad a brush. There is massive corruption and criminal activity in my town's police force that is protected under the fear that racism will be cried should it be corrected. This corruption is affecting the general public trust of the police here. There's 40+ chapters about it written here by NYT best selling author Jerry Bledsoe.
The local conservative press is doing all it can to bring about change but the local Democrat power structure thinks the status quo is better and wants to sweep the issues under the carpet.
Back in the 90’s my wife and I took a vacation on the east coast, part of which was renting a very nice vacation home in the Marthas Vineyard area. What I did notice about a noticeable percentage of the police ( State Troopers?) was that they seemed to prefer black fatigues and black web gear along with combat boots and shaved heads. Very heavy into the SWAT look as a fashion statement as well as heavy on the intimidation.
Please relay what this “payed incentives” are,(cash, etc)how it’s disbursed, how much per arrest, etc. I have never heard of such a thing, and find it most curious.
If you knew how many cops were killed each year after being shot or stabbed after a simple traffic stop, maybe you would be a little more understanding if a cop asks you if he can take a look inside your vehicle.
You do what you want to, but as for me, if a police officer asks me to search my vehicle, I will say “Of course officer, and thank you for your service.”
And Jihadists quite arguably do not have all the Constitutional rights that you, me or even druggies enjoy.
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.