NOTE: All timestamps are in the future because WE are in the future. The care takers of Midnight Ridazz.com reserves the right to remove, edit, move or delete anything for any reason. None of the opinions expressed on these boards represent the Midnight Ridazz nor can anyone purport to speak on behalf of Midnight Ridazz.
Thread started by ideasculptor at 06.15.08 - 9:34 pm
OK, this is a bit long, but absolutely fascinating. At the very least, the apparent ingestion of 8 espressos by the speaker ensures that it is very dense with information. If you watch it to the end, I can guarantee you'll learn things you didn't know already unless you are a lawyer.
Great videos Sam. I hope alot of people take the time to watch them and learn.
I wish I had the reference but what I had from this legal agency was a little card telling you what to do if you're detained. The officer does have a right to detain you, but you are also obligated to give your name, address and one other thing. I forgot what it is. Anyways you're required to give very little info.
I think the last one on the three things above was to tell where you are going, but not sure.
So the next time I get pulled over again by the Arcadia police for riding my bike to work and they detain me for 30 minutes asking me who I am, where I am going, am I married, where do I live, why do I have spoke cards in my wheels, why do I not wear a helmet, what company I work at, why am I riding in this neighborhood, what time do I have to be at work, have I been arrested before, and I can't remember what other crap they asked me...
Instead, I can just give them my Identification and sit and wait until they call in for my info and they will say, "We're just checking to see if you are a missing person or not." And when they are done and give me back my ID, I can continue to not say anything else and go on my way to work again. Correct? What else am I required to say instead of all that obnoxious line of questions and get on with my life?
In California, you are never obligated to disclose to police your identity, or where you're going, or anything else. Period.
In some states, there are laws giving police the right to arrest people already suspected of wrongdoing who refuse to identify themselves. The Supremes upheld these state laws in 2004, but California doesn't have such a law.
If you weren't actually violating any laws, yes. In fact, you probably could have left at any time. The thing is, the police are not required to tell you whether you are free to leave unless you ask! So they take advantage of this by just asking you a bunch of questions until (they hope) you fuck up and confess to something, or get nervous and provide them with probable cause in the form of "furtive behavior."
Anyway, next time they pull that shit, the first thing out of your mouth should be "Am I free to leave?" If you are, they have to say so. Then just leave.
The long and short of it is that they can't detain you without reasonable suspicion that you've committed an infraction or crime. But most people don't know that, and the police take advantage of it.
Oh yeah, that was another thing on that card. It said to ask if I'm being charged with something and what is that charge. If they don't have anything, then you ask if you're free to go.
I always thought we, the public are required to do a few things, like name rank and serial number.
So what are we required to do and please start providing references if possible?
If you're driving a motor vehicle, you are required to provide police with your license to operate that vehicle (but not, say, a passport) if asked. In any other situation, in the state of California, you do not have to tell the police anything.
I can't provide references to a law that doesn't exist (i.e., a law that would require citizens not already suspected of crimes to identify themselves to law enforcement on demand). But the Supreme Court decision I was talking about--the one that upheld the laws in some states that require persons to identify themselves to police when "reasonable suspicion" already exists--was Hiibel vs. Sixth Judicial District Court of Nevada.
I was told that police can detain you for 48 hours. For not doing anything. Just if they wanted to. That is how it was explained to me. Is this true?
No. The police can detain you at the scene for as long as it takes to actively investigate you for a crime that they have reason to suspect you of committing. If they choose to turn that detention into an arrest, they have a "reasonable" amount of time in which to charge you or let you go. The 48 hours is a rule of thumb, and it pertains more to the length of time that must go by before you or your lawyer can legally challenge their authority to hold you (that's the good old right of habeas corpus that the Bush Administration tried so hard for seven years to destroy).
Dear Percival,
Let's use an example, let's say there is a large mob of cyclists standing in the middle of the road, say in a tunnel or something, waiting in a line to do an activity, say, race bicycles, and a police car drives up, and before it is even stopped, the passenger officer has lept from the car and is running up to people within inches of their faces and screaming at them to provide identification.
In such a situation, how should one respond, if they are in fact not required to provide identification to a police officer?
...actually, my last answer was too glib. If you're not doing anything even the slightest bit illegal, feel free not to identify yourself. If you are doing something illegal, even if it's just loitering in the middle of the street, you still have the right not to identify yourself, but bear in mind that you may piss the cop off and get a ticket for whatever chickenshit law you're breaking.
You've introduced another interesting scenario. An assembly, a lawful gathering. In LA!
"Officer, we are legally gathered in a public place. It's our 1st Amendment right!"
The LAPD at that point must identify themselves, declare the assembly illegal, give you an exit instruction and give you a deadline for leaving.
By claiming your 1st Amendment right to assemble, the LAPD is now required by their own protocol to respond according to their internal policy on illegal assembly.
From The Police Commission MacArthur Park hearings:
The Dispersal Order:
Once a decision is made that an assembly is unlawful, law enforcement present at the scene must then announce to the crowd that the crowd must disperse. According to the LAPD Emergency Operations Guide, Volume 5, “Prior to dispersing an unlawful assembly, officers shall give the following Dispersal Order to those participating in the unlawful assembly. The Dispersal Order shall be read verbatim:”
"I am (rank and officer’s name), a police officer to the City of Los Angeles. I hereby declare this to be an unlawful assembly and, in the name of the people of the State of California, command all those assembled at (give specific location) to immediately disperse, which means to break up this assembly. If you do not do so, you may be arrested or subject to other police action.
Other police action may include the use of less lethal munitions, which could cause significant risk of serious injury to those who remain. Section 409 of the Penal Code prohibits remaining present at an unlawful assembly. If you remain in the area which was just described, regardless of your purpose in remaining, you will be in violation of Section 409. The following routes of dispersal are available: (give the most convenient route(s) of dispersal) You have __ minutes (give a reasonable amount of time – take into consideration the number of participants, location of the event and number of exit routes) to disperse."
A proper dispersal is necessary to ensure that all present are aware of the fact they are to leave the area; that they know what routes to take. Without such an order, any arrest for unlawful assembly will be legally insufficient.
Well, the Police do but their response is to tell you to ride away.
The typical Police action is the PD stopping a group of cyclists who are riding. If the cyclists say "1st Amendment - It's an assembly!" The PD response is to say "Ride thataway!"
If the PD declare an assembly illegal, they do not get to then start writing bullshit tickets for pedals, reflectors, headlights etc. and asking for ID, checking for warrants etc. They simply get to instruct the group to "Ride thataway!"
Everytime I watch movies like "Dawn of the Dead", or read/watch the book/movie "I Am Legend", I often wish things like that did occur in times like these.
If you're lucky and/or talented enough to ride out the hard shit, the "afterward" is a cakewalk.
And let's not go into detail about how I'll eat, or where I'll find ammo for the Mosin-Nagant.
Borfo: you must have done something to piss them off, or just look very very strange; i've ridden home with no lights wearing a bright neon pink skirt over my bike shorts at 3am and had cops pass me simply giving me a funny look. Living in Arcadia and riding a bike regularly even in the wee hours of the morning I've yet to be harassed by Arcadia PD.
Well I am so glad you have been more fortunate than me. Yes I must have been doing something or looking like some sort of miscreant that cause those cops to harass me for over 30 minutes for just safely riding my bike work. I need to clean up my act!
perhaps some kind of crime had happened with a suspect being on a bicycle...
that is certainly not out of the realm of possibility...
but would it be fair as someone detained to ask the police, the reason you were pulled over??
obviously, you don't want to start a "confrontation" with the police, as we know who wins that kind of thing...
but, should we ask before a line of questioning begins...or should we ask after we are deemed free to go, about the actual reason we are being stopped in the first place??
I did ask if I could go. The lady was a rookie and was being supervised by some other meat head and she said she had no good reason to hold me, she just wanted to know what was in my spokes...
-->
Ridazz Roulette!
I did ask if I could go. The lady was a rookie and was being supervised by some other meat head and she said she had no good reason to hold me, she just wanted to know what was in my spokes...