Page 14 of 18 FirstFirst ... 41213141516 ... LastLast
Results 131 to 140 of 174

Thread: Supreme Court: Suspects must invoke right to remain silent in interrogations

  1. #131
    Professor
    Groucho's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    Pocono Mountains, PA
    Last Seen
    05-24-11 @ 03:37 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Liberal
    Posts
    1,363

    Re: Supreme Court Narrows Miranda Rights, Keeps Michigan Convict in Prison

    Quote Originally Posted by Caine View Post
    Its a true story, but there is no link because it was a lowly misdemeanor DWI charge I dealt with. I was not yet certified on Intox and thus had to have another officer be the "chemical analysis". He had ran like 12 tests that night and just failed to fill in a box mark next to the section about the Preventive Maintenance having been completed on the instrument. However, the officer DID fill in the information showing that the instrument had preventive maintenance done within the time period required by statute. The DA even offered to pull the maintenance record off the DHHS public website where the maintenance records of all instruments in the state of viewable by the public at no cost, proving that the information on the box was accurate. The judge dismissed the results of the intox test, and even though she agreed my field sobriety tests showed I had probable cause, she could not convict due to the fact that the tests were peformed on a slight uphill area (like I can literally move mountains at will) thus she had 'reasonable doubt" as to the full impairment of the individual.
    Well, I wasn't there and don't know what the laws are like where you are, but that would have something to do with it. If the local laws require certain procedures to be followed and they weren't, then that's not a "loophole."

    That's something I debate a lot with people -- if the law says "X must be done" and X is not done, then how is that a loophole? We're just saying that everyone has to obey the law, even the police and DAs. If there were no consequences then there would be no reason for police to follow the rules. I think it works well as a "checks and balances" against potential abuse. Yes, sometimes the guilty may go free, but the other option -- police can do whatever they want -- is worse.

    I had a case one time where an officer pulled over my client for having tinted windows. That's a $25 fine. My client was a black kid driving an expensive car (his Dad's, who was a businessman). The officer called for backup, made my client get out of the car, and then after giving him a ticket, did not let him know he could go but instead, while police lights are flashing and the kid (who had never been arrested before) was surrounded by police with guns, asked the kid "Oh, do you mind if I check your windows?" The kid, feeling as if he had no choice said yes and then the officer went into the car, took the keys, and searched the entire car, finding marijuana locked in the trunk.

    Now come on. Yes, the kid was technically guilty, but do we want to allow police to do this sort of thing in America?

    So yes, his charges were dropped. Some people would call that a "technicality" but since the Constitution requires probable cause before a search, I'd say it supports the law, not defeats it.

    (There are, of course, always examples where this can go too far, just like there are examples where it can go too far in the other direction)

  2. #132
    Sage

    Mason66's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Last Seen
    Today @ 12:39 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    19,444

    Re: Supreme Court Narrows Miranda Rights, Keeps Michigan Convict in Prison

    Quote Originally Posted by Groucho View Post
    Well, I wasn't there and don't know what the laws are like where you are, but that would have something to do with it. If the local laws require certain procedures to be followed and they weren't, then that's not a "loophole."

    That's something I debate a lot with people -- if the law says "X must be done" and X is not done, then how is that a loophole? We're just saying that everyone has to obey the law, even the police and DAs. If there were no consequences then there would be no reason for police to follow the rules. I think it works well as a "checks and balances" against potential abuse. Yes, sometimes the guilty may go free, but the other option -- police can do whatever they want -- is worse.

    I had a case one time where an officer pulled over my client for having tinted windows. That's a $25 fine. My client was a black kid driving an expensive car (his Dad's, who was a businessman). The officer called for backup, made my client get out of the car, and then after giving him a ticket, did not let him know he could go but instead, while police lights are flashing and the kid (who had never been arrested before) was surrounded by police with guns, asked the kid "Oh, do you mind if I check your windows?" The kid, feeling as if he had no choice said yes and then the officer went into the car, took the keys, and searched the entire car, finding marijuana locked in the trunk.

    Now come on. Yes, the kid was technically guilty, but do we want to allow police to do this sort of thing in America?

    So yes, his charges were dropped. Some people would call that a "technicality" but since the Constitution requires probable cause before a search, I'd say it supports the law, not defeats it.

    (There are, of course, always examples where this can go too far, just like there are examples where it can go too far in the other direction)
    On one of the channels here are old episodes of COPS.

    I see that on there all the time.

    They stop the car for a license plate lamp out, which are not needed anymore, and they get the people out of the vehicle, search them and find something.

    The attitude of the cops is you have to do everything they say without question and they can do what they want.

    I am not saying people should be driving around with drugs on them but what probable cause did the officer have to search the individual for a license plate lamp out?

  3. #133
    Professor
    Groucho's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    Pocono Mountains, PA
    Last Seen
    05-24-11 @ 03:37 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Liberal
    Posts
    1,363

    Re: Supreme Court Narrows Miranda Rights, Keeps Michigan Convict in Prison

    Quote Originally Posted by Mason66 View Post
    On one of the channels here are old episodes of COPS.

    I see that on there all the time.

    They stop the car for a license plate lamp out, which are not needed anymore, and they get the people out of the vehicle, search them and find something.

    The attitude of the cops is you have to do everything they say without question and they can do what they want.

    I am not saying people should be driving around with drugs on them but what probable cause did the officer have to search the individual for a license plate lamp out?
    At the same time, my advice to everyone is this:

    DO WHAT THE COPS WANT.

    Let your lawyer argue about it afterwards.

    Be sure to say "I am not consenting to this search" but if they insist, don't give them a hard time, fight back, or otherwise make a scene, because that will only make it worse.

  4. #134
    pawn in the game of life
    pragmatic's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Last Seen
    10-17-17 @ 05:33 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    1,984

    Re: Supreme Court Narrows Miranda Rights, Keeps Michigan Convict in Prison

    Quote Originally Posted by Groucho View Post
    At the same time, my advice to everyone is this:

    DO WHAT THE COPS WANT.

    Let your lawyer argue about it afterward.

    Be sure to say "I am not consenting to this search" but if they insist, don't give them a hard time, fight back, or otherwise make a scene, because that will only make it worse.




    .



    .

  5. #135
    Dungeon Master
    Somewhere in Babylon
    Jetboogieman's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    Somewhere in Babylon...
    Last Seen
    @
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    24,287
    Blog Entries
    1

    Re: Supreme Court Narrows Miranda Rights, Keeps Michigan Convict in Prison

    Love the video cole. I haven't seen that in years.

  6. #136
    Sage
    Caine's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Last Seen
    10-05-17 @ 01:21 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    23,336

    Re: Supreme Court Narrows Miranda Rights, Keeps Michigan Convict in Prison

    Quote Originally Posted by Mason66 View Post
    There are two kinds of people in the world as far as cops are concerned.

    Cops and suspects.
    Umm... No.

    And I can't stand it when some asshat tries to tell me, a cop, what I think so ... just no.
    "I condemn the ideology of White Supremacy and Nazism. They are thugs, criminals, and repugnant, and are against what I believe to be "The American Way" "
    Thus my obligatory condemnation of White supremacy will now be in every post, lest I be accused of supporting it because I didn't mention it specifically every time I post.

  7. #137
    Sage
    Caine's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Last Seen
    10-05-17 @ 01:21 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    23,336

    Re: Supreme Court Narrows Miranda Rights, Keeps Michigan Convict in Prison

    Quote Originally Posted by Groucho View Post
    Well, I wasn't there and don't know what the laws are like where you are, but that would have something to do with it. If the local laws require certain procedures to be followed and they weren't, then that's not a "loophole."

    That's something I debate a lot with people -- if the law says "X must be done" and X is not done, then how is that a loophole? We're just saying that everyone has to obey the law, even the police and DAs. If there were no consequences then there would be no reason for police to follow the rules. I think it works well as a "checks and balances" against potential abuse. Yes, sometimes the guilty may go free, but the other option -- police can do whatever they want -- is worse.

    I had a case one time where an officer pulled over my client for having tinted windows. That's a $25 fine. My client was a black kid driving an expensive car (his Dad's, who was a businessman). The officer called for backup, made my client get out of the car, and then after giving him a ticket, did not let him know he could go but instead, while police lights are flashing and the kid (who had never been arrested before) was surrounded by police with guns, asked the kid "Oh, do you mind if I check your windows?" The kid, feeling as if he had no choice said yes and then the officer went into the car, took the keys, and searched the entire car, finding marijuana locked in the trunk.

    Now come on. Yes, the kid was technically guilty, but do we want to allow police to do this sort of thing in America?

    So yes, his charges were dropped. Some people would call that a "technicality" but since the Constitution requires probable cause before a search, I'd say it supports the law, not defeats it.

    (There are, of course, always examples where this can go too far, just like there are examples where it can go too far in the other direction)
    Yes, that is a violation of his 4th amendment rights. The consent to search was limited to the windows.

    Thats alot different than a box without ink it in, and a judges refusal to accept the actual documentation that backed up the deputy's information on said line that failed to have a box checked.
    But like I said, it was a retard judge.
    "I condemn the ideology of White Supremacy and Nazism. They are thugs, criminals, and repugnant, and are against what I believe to be "The American Way" "
    Thus my obligatory condemnation of White supremacy will now be in every post, lest I be accused of supporting it because I didn't mention it specifically every time I post.

  8. #138
    Sage
    Caine's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Last Seen
    10-05-17 @ 01:21 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    23,336

    Re: Supreme Court Narrows Miranda Rights, Keeps Michigan Convict in Prison

    Quote Originally Posted by Mason66 View Post
    On one of the channels here are old episodes of COPS.

    I see that on there all the time.

    They stop the car for a license plate lamp out, which are not needed anymore, and they get the people out of the vehicle, search them and find something.

    The attitude of the cops is you have to do everything they say without question and they can do what they want.

    I am not saying people should be driving around with drugs on them but what probable cause did the officer have to search the individual for a license plate lamp out?
    LOL
    This post says all I need to know.

    License Plate Lights are not a federally regulated item. It varies from state. If its not required in your state, maybe it still was required in the state that the episode was being filmed in. As it is still required in NC.

    And wtih your attitude you've displayed, sorry If I fail to believe everything you say regarding this, its very standard for cop haters to either not listen enough to know what is being said, or intentionally misconstrue what is being said.
    "I condemn the ideology of White Supremacy and Nazism. They are thugs, criminals, and repugnant, and are against what I believe to be "The American Way" "
    Thus my obligatory condemnation of White supremacy will now be in every post, lest I be accused of supporting it because I didn't mention it specifically every time I post.

  9. #139
    Sage

    Mason66's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Last Seen
    Today @ 12:39 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    19,444

    Re: Supreme Court Narrows Miranda Rights, Keeps Michigan Convict in Prison

    Quote Originally Posted by Caine View Post
    LOL
    This post says all I need to know.

    License Plate Lights are not a federally regulated item. It varies from state. If its not required in your state, maybe it still was required in the state that the episode was being filmed in. As it is still required in NC.

    And wtih your attitude you've displayed, sorry If I fail to believe everything you say regarding this, its very standard for cop haters to either not listen enough to know what is being said, or intentionally misconstrue what is being said.
    My point about the license lamp not being needed is that plates are now reflectorized so the headlights of the patrol car light them up.

    If you think I misunderstood what happened onthe show, look at a couple of old episodes yourself. It is common practice to bootstrap a minor violation into a search of the vehicle and person.

    Yes cop hater. You have no idea what you are talking about.

  10. #140
    Sage
    Caine's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Last Seen
    10-05-17 @ 01:21 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    23,336

    Re: Supreme Court Narrows Miranda Rights, Keeps Michigan Convict in Prison

    Quote Originally Posted by Mason66 View Post
    My point about the license lamp not being needed is that plates are now reflectorized so the headlights of the patrol car light them up.
    So when a suspect leaves the scene of a crime via a vehicle on a dark street with no other vehicles arround, what illuminates the license plate then?

    Oh, thats right, the state law required tag light.


    If you think I misunderstood what happened onthe show, look at a couple of old episodes yourself. It is common practice to bootstrap a minor violation into a search of the vehicle and person.

    Yes cop hater. You have no idea what you are talking about.
    Asking for consent to search is not boot straping anything into anything.

    Some of the most heinous crimes have been solved via a consent search.
    "I condemn the ideology of White Supremacy and Nazism. They are thugs, criminals, and repugnant, and are against what I believe to be "The American Way" "
    Thus my obligatory condemnation of White supremacy will now be in every post, lest I be accused of supporting it because I didn't mention it specifically every time I post.

Page 14 of 18 FirstFirst ... 41213141516 ... LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •