Advertisement
All my clients have my card. Usually more than one. I instruct them to fully cooperate with police as it regards providing the required documentation such as license insurance and registration.
After that unless it's about the weather they are not to speak to police about anything.
And it's printed on the back of the card which they are instructed to hand to the officer who asks why they have clammed up.
Talking to cops is the single most dangerous thing you can do short of changing lanes without looking.
[6/15/09 – 11:55 am] In this morning’s Supreme Court decision in State v. Baum, the Justices held that third party defendants may not litigate a violation of a co-defendant’s right to remain silent, even when the purported violation results in the discovery of incriminating evidence against the third party. In Baum, the police effected a motor vehicle stop and closely questioned the operator of the motor vehicle at the scene over a prolonged period of time. During the course of the questioning, the driver made admissions that resulted in the recovery of illegal drugs inside the vehicle. A co defendant, a passenger in the vehicle, filed a motion to suppress and argued that the police obtained the information related to the drugs illegally by violating the driver’s Miranda rights. However, the Supreme Court rejected this argument and ruled that both federally and in New Jersey, the Fifth Amendment privilege is purely personal with the defendant that makes the incriminating statement and does not extend to protect third parties. Simply put, such third party defendants do not have standing to raise and litigate the Miranda violation.
After that unless it's about the weather they are not to speak to police about anything.
And it's printed on the back of the card which they are instructed to hand to the officer who asks why they have clammed up.
Talking to cops is the single most dangerous thing you can do short of changing lanes without looking.
[6/15/09 – 11:55 am] In this morning’s Supreme Court decision in State v. Baum, the Justices held that third party defendants may not litigate a violation of a co-defendant’s right to remain silent, even when the purported violation results in the discovery of incriminating evidence against the third party. In Baum, the police effected a motor vehicle stop and closely questioned the operator of the motor vehicle at the scene over a prolonged period of time. During the course of the questioning, the driver made admissions that resulted in the recovery of illegal drugs inside the vehicle. A co defendant, a passenger in the vehicle, filed a motion to suppress and argued that the police obtained the information related to the drugs illegally by violating the driver’s Miranda rights. However, the Supreme Court rejected this argument and ruled that both federally and in New Jersey, the Fifth Amendment privilege is purely personal with the defendant that makes the incriminating statement and does not extend to protect third parties. Simply put, such third party defendants do not have standing to raise and litigate the Miranda violation.
posted by:
|
Advertisement
Advertisement
-
Re: Why oh why do people speak to the police?
Mon, June 15, 2009 - 4:01 PMbecause people, generally don't know the law or their rights.
And the society, in order to protect rights generally, has to make some very stupid decisions as far as individual cases are concerned.
It's sad and annoying, but necessary.
And, by the way, thanks for your work in protecting the public.
I live immediately behind a police station. And it definitely gives peace of mind. And folks in law enforcement don't get enough credit.
It is no small thing to daily go out there, risking your life, not knowing what lunatic might be behind the next door....so, you know, some of us get it...that it is very serious work and we do appreciate it.
-
-
Re: Why oh why do people speak to the police?
Tue, June 16, 2009 - 8:56 AM*********It is no small thing to daily go out there, risking your life, not knowing what lunatic might be behind the next door....so, you know, some of us get it...that it is very serious work and we do appreciate it. ***********
That is pure propaganda spread by the police themselves.
While it's true that in some neighborhoods and every once in a blue moon on a rural highway there are shots fired at the cops the simple fact is that it is the exceptionally rare circumstance that cops get assaulted attacked or shot at.
Mostly it's a damn lie.
You have a substantially better chance being attacked and murdered in your own home than any given police officer has of being shot on duty. Your chances of being attacked and murdered go up exponentially when you venture out of your home.
I just know that some folks will have a hard time with those assertions:
Here is a CENTURY of police deaths:
"A summary of the top ten leading causes of law enforcement fatalities during the past century follows (does not include 1999 figures):
1. Firearms (6,846 or 49%)
2. Automobile Accidents (2,090 or 15%)
3. Motorcycle Accidents (1,022 or 7%)
4. Struck by Vehicle (955 or 7%)
5. Job-related Illness (588 or 4%)
6. Aircraft Accidents (311 or 2%)
7. Stabbings (197 or 1%)
8. Fall (147 or 1%)
9. Drowning (142 or 1%)
10. Beaten (134 or 1%)
Roughly 61% of the officers killed this past century were feloniously assaulted by criminals, and 39% died in accidental circumstances (e.g., automobile accidents, aircraft accidents, shooting accidents, etc.). However, during each of the past five years (including 1999) that trend has reversed itself with more accidental deaths than felonious. Roughly 5% of the officers who died over the past 100 years were killed taking law enforcement action while in an off duty capacity."
Source: www.nleomf.org/TheMemoria...crifice.htm
In 2008:
" Based on preliminary data, the groups found that 140 law enforcement officers were killed in 2008 -- 86 of them accidentally and 54 intentionally.
Just the year before, the group found 181 deaths -- 108 of them accidental and 73 intentional.
"Fewer officers were killed by gunfire in 2008 than in any year since 1956," the report says. "Preliminary data indicate 41 officers died in firearms-related incidents this year, compared with 68 in 2007, a reduction of 40 percent.""
Source: www.cnn.com/2008/CRIME/1...wn/index.html
However a look at some raw numbers may help dispel the lie that claims that the Police are risking it all for you:
Year ---------- Total homicides
1980 . . . . . . 23,040
1985 . . . . . . 18,976
1990 . . . . . . 23,438
1993 . . . . . . 24,526
1994 . . . . . . 23,326
1995 . . . . . . 21,606
1996 . . . . . . 19,645
1997 . . . . . . 18,208
1998 . . . . . . 16,974
1999 . . . . . . 15,522
2000 . . . . . . 15,586
2001 . . . . . . 16,037
2002 . . . . . . 16,204
2003 . . . . . . 16,582
2004 . . . . . . 16,137
2005 . . . . . . 16,692
Source = United States Census: www.census.gov/compendia/...09s0301.pdf
That's more people murdered in any given year than police deaths in all history.
I think that in any given year more people are murdered than all causes of deaths for cops in a whole century.
-
-
Re: Why oh why do people speak to the police?
Wed, June 17, 2009 - 7:35 AMstatistically true...but just walking out that door, knowing that there is some real danger...well, it is a serious act of nobility...
and no one should ever forget that.
-
-
