Shut up and get a lawyer!

https://www.thegatewaypundit.com/20...anda-rights-threatening-fifth-amendment/

I miss Geroge.

It’s best to know your rights and not depend on law enforcement to explain them to you.

Also stupid to try to sue the guy for not reminding you to STFU

I never understood the law to begin with.

Nice

I may be short-sighted, but I never understood it, either.

You haven’t been read your rights, anyway. You’ve been mildly informed of a few of your rights.

Unless I'm missing something, that article is a hack job. Miranda is only required if a person is in custody (under arrest) and is being questioned. It is not required just because someone is being questioned about a crime.

You would know better than I would, but I thought the same thing.

The article is garbage, but when Miranda is required is a bit more nuanced. The person does not need to be formally under arrest. If they reasonably believe they are not free to leave, Miranda applies.

Regardless, this decision will have almost no real world impact. Statements made without Miranda are still not admissible in a criminal proceeding, which is really the relevant part.

Statements without Miranda are admitted every day in criminal proceedings. If it's not a custodial interrogation, Miranda is not required. The defendant can argue that they thought they were in custody if they want, but they don't always win that in suppression.

Can't argue with that. Just trying to make the point that "custodial" isn't always clear cut when the officer doesn't whip out the cuffs and say, "you're under arrest."

It's usually very clear on the side of the road or in the interview room. It's when lawyers get ahold of it when it becomes muddy.

I've seen me send a lot of criminals to prison, based largely on a voluntary statement that I acquired, without Miranda being provided. As long as they left without being arrested or weren't brought to my office without being asked to voluntarily go there, there was never an issue. Every one was successfully entered into evidence in either State District Court or Federal Court.

You gentlemen are both absolutely right, and it sounds like you had few issues because you understand the law. There are also defense attorneys with long lists of statements they got thrown out because less well educated officers crossed the line, or didn't know where it was.

Read part of the brief last night.

From what I could comprehend

Guy gives up info that is used in court against him
Judge still finds him innocent
He sues the cop for not reading him his Miranda rights

Basically what I took from brief was Miranda still stands in same capacity, it reaffirms voluntary info doesn’t require Miranda, and you cant sue LEO for not restating your Miranda rights

Disclaimer I’m not a lawyer but that’s way I read it it

The guy was found not guilty. Take the win and go fishing. He was looking for payback.

Here was the assertion by the defendant. He claimed he was coerced.

https://www.law.cornell.edu/supct/cert/21-499

He should've let the thing go when he was found not guilty. It's better to get out of the courts as soon as possible because going for the cop for the Miranda thing is not a great idea. I think most people in the USA know "Miranda" and are aware of their rights. Even if he was right, it's a stupid thing to do.
I love my lawyer because he always looks for the easiest way to solve the problem. I don't like spending too much time in court because there are more things to do. I'm glad I found the https://bsmlaw.com.au/wollongong-lawyers/ law firm because they're the best fit for me.

WTF are you doing to need a lawyer all the time?

75% of this dude's posts so far are sales pitches for out-of-town businesses...

* Lawyer - Australia - https://[THF]/forum/ubbthreads.php/topics/8641294/re-shut-up-and-get-a-lawyer#Post8641294 (looking at their site they don't even practice in the US, but they wave the Pride flag)
* Moving company - New Jersey - https://[THF]/forum/ubbthreads.php/topics/8621612/re-moving-two-gun-safes#Post8621612 (last time I moved I hired professional movers who almost killed themselves moving my safe, the biz he linked is not a safe moving company)
* Critter gitter - Tulsa - https://[THF]/forum/ubbthreads.php/topics/8239363/re-racoon-bait#Post8239363 (bumped a 2.5 year old thread, oh well)

Not a single link he has provided has been in Texas.

* URLs are intentionally broken to not link to the BS.

LOL, either bot or foreigner.

Not all statements...

If you don't know your rights, by now.....
Your too stupid to exercise'em anyway....
If you do, for some reason get arrested...
Never, ever, ever, ever talk to a cop.
Not even general conversation.. NOT ONE WORD !!!!!
STFU.... is the most important thing you can do...

Worst advice ever. I put a bunch of people in jail and filed cases on them, because they refused to speak with me and wouldn't provide me with a reasonable explanation for what took place. If they had just talked with me, they would have saved themselves several thousand dollars and everything that goes along with being arrested.

Bull... You can file a case, on a ham sandwich.
Bogus arrest.. You cannot legally arrest somebody, for exercising their 5th amendment rights..
And my advice, came straight from the judge. When I took my courses on criminal
justice in college...

My advice is from actually investigating crimes for 25 years, not from some class I took. Arrests are based on probable cause and typically have zero to do with the 5th Amendment. If you are accused of a crime by another person, and provide a reasonable explanation for what took place, many times the case is unfounded. If you decide to become Perry Mason and never speak with the investigator then guess what, there's only one story and it's not yours. The investigator issues the warrant and files the case because "The defendant failed to provide a reasonable explanation for what took place". The quoted part is required in a supplement report by the DA's office on many types of cases.

He is gone. One of those last IPs was Moldova. He needs to get over to Ukraine and kill some Russians.

Trapper, I appreciate your service to the community....
But perhaps, a few classes on Constitutional Law, may have been enlightening..

“I had the right to remain silent, but I didn’t have the ability”
-Tater Salad

I've had thousands of hours of training in constitutional law.

I had this type of scenario play out several times as a burglary detective:

A home is burglarized where several firearms are stolen. 30 days later, a guy with no criminal history goes into a pawn shop and sells one of the firearms taken in the burglary. I find it because I had access to all pawn shop files statewide. I contact the guy who sold it and tell him that he sold a stolen gun and it's confirmed by serial number and video at the pawn shop. The guy has watched too much TV apparently and tells me he won't talk with me and wants an attorney. I have no choice but to write a warrant for burglary of a habitation for the guy and when I file the case with the DA's Office, they accept it because "The defendant failed to provide a reasonable explanation for him being in possession of the stolen property". That is the term the DA's Office wants to see in the warrant and the report. 2-3 months later officers stop a car and find some heroin addict in possession of several of the firearms taken in burglary. I interrogate him and he confesses to committing the burglary by himself and provides information about the crime that only the actor would know. I show him a picture of the first guy and the heroin addict tells me he sold one of the guns to him at a gun show. I pull the video from the gun show and sure enough there is the heroin addict selling him the gun. I tell the DA's Office to dismiss the case against the first guy which they do. Unfortunately for the first guy, he's out 1500 bucks for a bondsman and 5000 bucks for his attorney already. If Mr. too smart for his own good had just told be what happened in the first place, I would have pulled the gun show video and exonerated him without ever arresting him.

I didn’t read this entire thread, but unless I missed It (very possible) was the guy in custody at the time of the questioning? Was he arrested right then or later?

Miranda is very misinterpreted by the general public. There are many circumstances when it’s not required and your statements can be used against you regardless of Miranda.

Lmao at Sailor. Wtf is he talking about? If a suspect refuses to speak he can’t be arrested? Smdh. If PC is there for the arrest, your admission isn’t necessary.

Without going into LE history, purpose, and methods, which will lead some in here to possibly be very offended, much like commenting on the oil industry, this is the all around best advice you can follow.

Whether you believe it or not, the common idea about LE is that they simply want to arrest and incarcerate people. Guilt or innocence really is not the prime directive. In today’s world a lawyer is the best option simply because you cannot trust the justice system. Hence the reason for much of the hate you see today for LE.

Let the triggering begin.

I find that to be the common idea about LE among liberals, those who dislike any kind of “authority”, or those who are criminals (but just can’t admit It). Is It true? Absolutely not. I have no interest in putting an innocent person in jail and never have.

That is an absolute belief among LE as to how they see those who perceive them negatively. You are making a statement, which lets say you are 100% correct, it is not getting the result you say you desire. Yet, the actions of LE get the reaction you say is wrong in millions of people. Millions. LE has historically refused to listen to any negative comments and simply made the statement you made above. That rigidity has helped create what we see today towards LE. And we continue to see the statement you made by LE. Again, we know how often LE gets it wrong and innocent people spend years locked up. If one does, the system is flawed. “Better a hundred guilty go free, than one innocent not.”

You may not, but the system has incarcerated numerous innocent people. This fact is irrefutable.

Am I wrong?

PS. Since you made a blanket statement regarding “liberals,” I will make a blanket statement about me. Not one person on this forum is more conservative than me. My statement is as valid as yours. With that rule, an actual
Exchange of ideas is limited. Debate is unlikely. Negative attacks usually follow here on THF.

Total hypothetical here, but it kinda applies:

You get pulled over for a moving violation and the officer asks if you’ve had anything to drink tonight? You are honest and tell them you had a glass of wine with dinner. The officer then asks you to get out of the truck and starts to conduct a field sobriety test on you. They say they would like for you to stand on one foot, close your eyes and touch the tip of your nose… etc. How would you guys handle it?

I’m also curious how you LEO’s handle this situation, and do you encounter it often when someone refuses to take a field test? Or do most people just comply with your request?

I can only speak for myself and the people I encounter on the street. I’m not trying to debate. I’m telling you for a fact, the people I encounter on the street that believe that are one of the above I mentioned. Not random people on a forum. Not millions of people across the US. The people I encounter in my town that say the things you said.

In that scenario, anything you do besides sit in your car is only giving them evidence.

I understand. No problem at all. May your “town” forever remain as is and protected.

Look up NHTSA SFSTs. Those are the standardized tests one would be asked to perform.

Refusal has happened to me many times.

Most of the time It goes like this:

i observe a moving violation. I initiate a traffic stop. The driver swerves, takes forever, etc pulling over. I walk up and smell alcohol, see bloodshot eyes, slurred speech. I ask them to step out. They do and they stumble out of the vehicle. Once out of the vehicle I still smell alcoholic beverage coming off there person. See all the signs you all know are signs of intoxication.
I ask if they’ll perform SFSTs. They refuse. Perfectly their right.
I still have probable cause to arrest and get a SW for a blood sample based off everything I observed. They go to jail.

OR

No bad driving behavior. A little smell of alcohol but not overwhelming. Handling themselves well, etc. Ask to perform SFSTs and they refuse. In the few times this has happened I did not have enough pc to arrest. However, I personally didn’t feel comfortable with them driving since I didn’t know if they were on the way up or what. In 100% of those cases, I asked if they would call a ride and the person never had a problem doing so.

ALSO

Many many times, I have administered SFSTs and found a person not to be intoxicated. They were allowed to leave without any problem.

You’re not wrong. If you’re drunk, it’ll show. But supreme court ruled a long time ago that police can have you step out of your vehicle on a traffic stop. I would advise against refusing that part of the encounter.

If anyone has any more questions feel free to pm me. I’m not checking this thread any more. One of the problems with an LEO trying to educate or inform people, especially on a forum, is that It doesn’t matter how honest and correct the LEO is being, a lot of people will never believe It because they either think they know more, or have a bias against LEO that makes them think it’s all subterfuge or something just to arrest innocent people.

This description above does not get us where we are in America.

Obviously, LE on THF are the exception and always respond as the two here now do, without reproach. LE in America in general is under serious attack. A just, fair, and acceptable compromise needs to be revived. Otherwise the “liberals” will continue to erode LE. We see that daily.

I think we see the real issue. The issue that has gotten America where we are regarding LE. Just like the “liberals,” when you declare your side the only acceptable side. Anarchy results.
Ostrich approach never works. But fair enough.

I don't think the LEOs on here are the exception at all. The vast majority of my encounters have made me think the officers are stand up guys. Folks just get bent out of shape when good cops doing the right thing results in a good ol boy getting a DUI or going to jail.

This is usually sound advice. The argument seems to be over apples and oranges. Sailor said, "If you do, for some reason get arrested..." before he said never talk to a cop.

ntxtrapper's advice seems to be that an explanation sometimes avoids an arrest. This is probably sound advice in a lot of cases as well.

If you are already under arrest, shut up and let your attorney do the talking. It is, after all, too late to avoid an arrest once you are placed under arrest. And keep in mind that if you choose to talk to a LEO, you are not on a level playing field. If you lie to him, it's a crime. If he lies to you, he's just doing his job trying to trip up a suspect.

Ok I lied, and I’m back lol. Fitting based on my next question about citizens and police lying. Lol

BigRon, It is not a crime to lie to the police. I literally get lied to every day.

There is a crime for fail to ID, which an element of is lying specifically about your name, residence, or date of birth when detained/under arrest. That’s It. You can lie to the police about anything else you want.

I agree with everything else you said though. If you’re already under arrest, probably best to be quiet.

Am I hearing you correct. All this we see in our country with the war on LE is the result of “good old boys getting arrested for a DUI? That has led to LE being ambushed. Set up and killed on a daily basis. That LE are “stand up guys” who have to arrest some good old boys. Which leads to what we see on the news daily across the country?

If you could be potentially a suspect in a crime, don’t talk to the police until you speak with your good attorney, then follow their advice.

And of course be cooperative and provide ID.

“I don’t want to make any statements until I consult with my attorney” whether you are under arrest or not.

Is there anything wrong with that? Just curious.

Not at all.

Quite the contrary statements, Lol.

If you are unsure you may say the wrong thing, don't answer questions.

Not really. It’s two different places. Voluntary statement of admission got someone convicted and sent to prison.
Refusing to speak with him, although their right, (with other factors and evidence) got cases filed and them arrested and put in jail. Maybe later they weren’t ultimately convicted. Maybe they were.

My wife is a detective. A good example is this case she recently worked. I don’t know the details but basically a female came in and made a report of physical assault against her bf or ex bf. She was bruised up, etc. Signs of injury without question. My wife tried for a few weeks to set up an interview with the guy. He refused to cooperate. Totally his right. But what is she supposed to do? Just drop the case? For all she knows, the guy was out of the country during the assault and had a perfectly good alibi. But he refused to cooperate. So the case is filed, a warrant is issued, he goes to jail, and now has the headache that all that comes with. He may or may not be convicted later. That’s how the Justice system works.
Remember the burden of proof is not on the police, just probable cause.

All ntx is saying is that had this guy simply said yeah that couldn’t have been me, I was in Mexico (or whatever) that could save a big hassle.

No, I think most people on this forum who dislike police do it for that reason, not the general public.

I think the general backlash against police is because criminals got angry that police shoot criminals. Throw in the occasional mistaken bad shoot and a very rare vindictive POS who wants to show a suspect how tough he is, and there are a lot of things to point out as being wrong. People are angry with cops, which puts cops on edge that they will be attacked. For someone who carries a gun, that feeling can have bad results real quick. Police are in the position of making split second decisions about who gets to live or die. Make the wrong call and their life is over, one way or the other. They deserve our respect and gratitude.

Well, I'll be danged.... Somebody, finally gets it. !!!