My personal experience with cops

reply to post by rcwj1975


Here it is.

criminal trespass and obstruction were your charges and what I am being told is you weren't in the best mental state...that being either a bit intoxicated or high...as for the store owner..from what i am being told, you and the owner had more than just a disagreement about the cost of the cigs..and you became "beligerant" inside the store.....i can find out more details but apparently you argued ALOT with the clerk/owner and he told you to leave...you didnt and continued to argue...and that led to the cops getting involved and you getting arrested...




I already admitted to arguing with the clerk. But I also bought two packs of cigarettes and left the store pissed. I am asking for that store tape to be used as evidence, no way my attitude was "beligerant". Also I was charged with publc intoxication but received no breathalyser even though I asked for it.

reply to post by Pajjikor


Just so you know as I mentioned in your U2U, a PBT is NOT required and most of the time NOT carried by officers outside the DUI units. The reason is an odor and behavior is all we need in GA to constitute Public Drunk or Pedestrian Under the Influence.

Plus the PBT is not admissible in court, only the Intoxilyzer 5000 results are...which you only get for DUI's.

reply to post by rcwj1975


I was drinking the night before, it was a mix of everclear and fruit punch mixed to the point you didn't even notice the alcohol. IF I was drinking that day, the mix of drink we had would have made it impossible for anyone to smell alcohol on my breath. let alone in the drink. Its a good mix at college parties for obvious reasons.

Originally posted by Pajjikor
Also I was charged with publc intoxication but received no breathalyser even though I asked for it.

At least down here, normal officers do not carry a breathalyzer, only what they call Six-Units. Six-Units are specially trained in DUI enforcement, and would not be called out to prove that you were acting publicly intoxicated, they can make that assessment without the use of a breathalyzer. You have to REALLY be acting up to get nailed for public intoxication, and I am sure that they have the tapes from the store, dash cams, and booking to back up their claims on that one.

Originally posted by Pajjikor

I was drinking the night before, it was a mix of everclear and fruit punch mixed to the point you didn't even notice the alcohol. IF I was drinking that day, the mix of drink we had would have made it impossible for anyone to smell alcohol on my breath. let alone in the drink. Its a good mix at college parties for obvious reasons.

Your young, and think only "alittle" everclear won't hurt, especially mixed with fruit punch. Well taking into consideration tolerance, weight, food, etc...that little college mixture CAN be smelled, and sure as hell CAN be detected. I am SFST certified and if you drank a decent amount of everclear there WILL be indicators. I was your age once too..and in college you think you can outsmart anyone, you think you been there done that, got the t-shirt, and can take on the world...then you get into the REAL world and realize how wrong you were.

Bottom line, next time ONLY drink the fruit punch...

Also if you need your case number I have it...

reply to post by rcwj1975


It doesn't sound like he knows whether he has to go to court, I hope you guys U2U’ed and got that figured out. I would hate to see the situation get worse by missing court and ending up with a bench warrant, as another ATS’er did recently.

www.belowtopsecret.com...

reply to post by defcon5


hell no i dont know if i have to court it a good thing im gonna get my case number from a ATS user.

and rcwj1975 I wasnt drunk that day, but yeah i do think I am smarter then most, but that is only because I am. LOL

It's weird how many of you are trying to side with the other side here. Maybe the clerk was a nut-job? Either way the issue is that the police need not ever intervene. No crime was committed.

and to the op... Clerks at convenience stores don't set the price of cigarettes. So don't be a dick.

reply to post by Pajjikor


Pajjikor,

You do have a right to ask whatever questions you wish. Those questions may or may not be answered by the officer at the time.

A person does not have the right to have their questions answered to their satisfaction prior to being placed under arrest.

If an officer is acting under the color of their official authority, one may not generally resist an arrest made upon themselves or another.

If one does resist arrest, it is not an affirmative defense that the arrest was in fact unlawful.

As an example,

About 10 years ago, officers were called to my residence in reference to an argument between my wife at the time and I. I was not a cop at this time.

The responding officers placed me in handcuffs, patted me down, and detained me while they investigated this incident. All of these actions were lawful and for their safety. I was released when they determined that no crime had been committed.

Had I resisted their attempts to handcuff me, I could have been charged with resisting or assault, even though the outcome of the domestic situation was resolved without charges.

As to why you were released, and again without having the specifics of your case in front of me, I can think of two possibilities.

One, you were brought in on a "detox" or protective custody hold, which means that the officers felt you were intoxicated, and you may be brought in to sober up.

Two, if you were in fact arrested, the officer who arrested you is required to file an affidavit in support of a warrantless arrest. In my jurisdiction, these are submitted to a judge the next day if a weekday, or immediately if a weekend or holiday. The judge may have looked at the affidavit and decided that the arrest was not warranted, ie no probable cause was found. They may have ordered your release at that point.

Another example,

A coworker of mine arrested a gentleman just last week on a criminal mischief charge, with a domestic violence enhancer. The charge was that the man in question had broken a steering wheel during an argument with his girlfriend.

The judge ordered the man released because my coworker did not establish in his affidavit the ownership status of the steering wheel. In my jurisdiction, if property damaged is owned solely by the one who damages it, it is not a crime to damage that property.

The man will still have to come back to court. My coworker will have to clarify whether the vehicle in this instance was owned only by the man, or jointly by the man and his girlfriend. If the property was jointly owned, then the case may be renewed at that time.

My respectful advice to you is to check with the court in the jurisdiction where you were arrested. They should be able to tell you the status of your case.

Originally posted by sligtlyskeptical
If this is true then you should be able to get a nice settlement and cost the cops their jobs. Don't take it sitting down.

No. He will not get a settlement.

By His own admission He resisted the officers requests to comply.

And, by His own admission, acted like quite the bung hole.

If you fight with police officers you will receive a less than positive reaction from them.

Look, if you fight with a police officer they have no idea how far you are willing to take your fight. How did they know you did not have a concealed handgun? If you start to fight an officer, they will take you down quickly. They do that for their own safety.

My Son's friend, a police officer, was just KILLED a week ago by a bung hole carrying a pistol.

Generally, if you act civilized towards a police officer, they will return the favor.

I personally have no sympathy for you. Quit acting like a spoiled rotten brat.

If this goes to court the probability that He will lose His case is VERY high.

It will cost you less to just stop now.

And, in the future, if approached by police officers, you would be well advised to relax and talk to them in a more civilized manner.

reply to post by hlesterjerome


You sir, just earned a star from me. You said perfectly what I and others have been trying to say.

Sorry to hear about your son friend. May I ask where it happened? No need to reply, just curious. Far too many officers being assualted and killed within the last two years etc. I'm afraid it will only get worse as most of the perps have no fear of the law as our courts systems sucks anymore-in most cases.

You will beat this outrage. In North Carolina, it is LEGAL to resist an uinlawful arrest. bad idea...but legal. You will have to prove it was an illegal arrest, and in your case that seems easy...the cop were just treating you like they do most people that are young...you are fodder for their arrest quota's and they do not care if they violate your rights.

BUT, in a case I recall, a guy was selling some basketball tickets outside a major game here in NC, and two cops cam eup and told him it was illegal to sell his tickets. The guy objected and they tried to arrest him. He fought with the cops. he was charged, of course, for assaulting the cops, but then the cops found out that there is NO law here that forbids selling tickets!!

the case was thrown out and the charges dismissed: The judge ruled that we have the RIGHT to resist an unlawful arrest. It is the same as if some stranger came up and appempted to kidnap you....how do WE know the cops are not out to murder us? how do we know that they are acting legally? Assuming that a cop is acting within the law is like assuming that a vicious looking dog is sweet and nice.

In any case: Bad idea. you will lose the fight, and no doubt the cops will lie to make it look worse for you. Cops are 99% scum.

Here is the court decision that says that we have a legal right to resist an unlawful arrest:

www.aoc.state.nc.us...


From this case: " [3] Plaintiff asserts there was no probable cause to arrest him for resisting an officer under G.S. § 14-223 because he was legally resisting an illegal arrest.

" Every person has the right to resist an unlawful arrest. " State v. Mobley, 240 N.C. 476, 478, 83 S.E.2d 100, 102 (1954).

However, a person "may use only such force as reasonably appears to be necessary to prevent the unlawful restraint of his liberty." Id. at 479, 83 S.E.2d at 102. "[A]n 'arrest' does not necessarily terminate the instant a person is taken into custody; arrest also includes 'bringing the person personally within the custody and control of the law.'" State v. Leak, 11 N.C. App. 344, 347, 181 S.E.2d 224, 226 (1971). In Leak, this Court held the arrest of the defendant terminated when he was delivered to the jailer and properly confined. Id.

Here, plaintiff's arrest began at the Smith Center and continued while he was at the UNC-CH Police Department and during the time he was taken before the magistrate. Since we have determined Swain did not have probable cause to arrest plaintiff for selling the basketball tickets, his arrest of plaintiff for this conduct was illegal. Since plaintiff's arrest was continuing while he was at the UNC-CH Police Department, at the time he refused to give his social security number, we conclude he was lawfully resisting the illegal arrest for "solicitation" of basketball tickets. "

So if a cop falsely arrests you, you have the legal right to defend yourself from the illegal actions. Of course the cops will just beat or kill you for acting legally, but that is because they are criminals themselves in most regards.

It is an outrage that it usually takes a higher court to undo the awful treachery that most cops commit; lower courts almost always side with the stormtroopers and let the higher courts sort out the real issues and justice....they are so afraid of politics.

Here is some LAW on lawfully resisting arrest. It says that even taking a cops life is legal on some occasions.

www.constitution.org...


From that site: "Citizens may resist unlawful arrest to the point of taking an arresting officer's life if necessary.” Plummer v. State, 136 Ind. 306. This premise was upheld by the Supreme Court of the United States in the case: John Bad Elk v. U.S., 177 U.S. 529.

The Court stated: “Where the officer is killed in the course of the disorder which naturally accompanies an attempted arrest that is resisted, the law looks with very different eyes upon the transaction, when the officer had the right to make the arrest, from what it does if the officer had no right. What may be murder in the first case might be nothing more than manslaughter in the other, or the facts might show that no offense had been committed.”

"
When a person, being without fault, is in a place where he has a right to be, is violently assaulted, he may, without retreating, repel by force, and if, in the reasonable exercise of his right of self defense, his assailant is killed, he is justified.” Runyan v. State, 57 Ind. 80; Miller v. State, 74 Ind. 1.

“These principles apply as well to an officer attempting to make an arrest, who abuses his authority and transcends the bounds thereof by the use of unnecessary force and violence, as they do to a private individual who unlawfully uses such force and violence.” Jones v. State, 26 Tex. App. I; Beaverts v. State, 4 Tex. App. 1 75; Skidmore v. State, 43 Tex. 93, 903.

“An illegal arrest is an assault and battery. The person so attempted to be restrained of his liberty has the same right to use force in defending himself as he would in repelling any other assault and battery.” (State v. Robinson, 145 ME. 77, 72 ATL. 260).

“Each person has the right to resist an unlawful arrest. In such a case, the person attempting the arrest stands in the position of a wrongdoer and may be resisted by the use of force, as in self- defense.” (State v. Mobley, 240 N.C. 476, 83 S.E. 2d 100).

“One may come to the aid of another being unlawfully arrested, just as he may where one is being assaulted, molested, raped or kidnapped. Thus it is not an offense to liberate one from the unlawful custody of an officer, even though he may have submitted to such custody, without resistance.” (Adams v. State, 121 Ga. 16, 48 S.E. 910).

So, we, the People have an absolute RIGHT to be left alone unless a cop has proper legal grounds to bother us; when they have NO LEGAL grounds, then they are NO different than any other citizen who is attempting to take your rights away. being a cop does NOT automatically confer some superior position...cops are the same as everyone else when they cross the line.

Resisting cops is legal and proper IF the cops are amking a false arrest. Cops falsely arrest people CONSTANTLY, all the time...hoping that the accused will roll over and plead so the cop does not have to get on the stand and lie some more...it makes it SO easy!! BUt, when someone resists, then the cop has to PROVE that he was legally arresting, and we all know that many of their busts are thrown out later as insufficient, and that means that cops are arresting illegally all the time.

Hmm..if more cops got their noses busted open and had to take trips to the ER every time they falsely arrested, maybe they would begin adhering to the laws!!

Originally posted by Pajjikor
hell no i dont know if i have to court it a good thing im gonna get my case number from a ATS user.

and rcwj1975 I wasnt drunk that day, but yeah i do think I am smarter then most, but that is only because I am. LOL

I sent you your case number in the U2U, and make sure you call Chatham County Court and find out your court date...as defcon said you WILL get a bench warrant if you don't show.

reply to post by rcwj1975


Well, he may get a bench warrant but, unless he lives within the area-and depending if they want him real bad, within the State, it would only be good if he got into another run in w/ L.E. in that area/state.

If he resides outside the state, they aren't going to go get him. It would mean two sheriff deputies driving to where ever he is and getting him from the arresting agency.

So, if he lives in say, PA, they aren't going to incur the expense for minor violatons. Just my opinion. See if you can find out, if he doesn't go to court, what kind of warrant they put on him.

I do not mean to encourage bad behavior, or raher inappropriate behavior, just want the facts to be out there. It isn't like you see on TV shows etc.

Originally posted by Pajjikor
reply to post by JB527

 

couple of questions.

Did I have the right to ask what I was being accused of. And did the police officer have to tell me when I asked him?

Also seeing as how no one posted bail, and I was never put in front of a judge. What does that mean?



[edit on 18-3-2010 by Pajjikor]

1. Yes, you have the right to know why you have been detained.

2. The reason you were let go and freed is because once they had arrested you and had you in custody under charges they were to inform you of your rights which they did not.

While it is true that the police do not have to read you your rights if they have good cause to believe a crime has been committed, or if you directly resist detention, use combative language etc. Once they decide to arrest you for a crime, they must read you your Miranda rights.

In your case they detained you, so they didn't have to read you your rights. But then they placed you under arrest because you resisted arrest and went off on them with your mouth (though you only wanted to know why they jumped you). But still they did not inform you that anything from that point on would be held against you in court and the rest was inadmissible in court. Defense attorneys would have had the case for lunch. So they let you go.

There is a lot of bravado in the police force, and while they do try to screen people for psychological problems, still a lot of cops let power go to the head. So they feel superior to the general populace like it us against them. They get carried away and sometimes go off on a citizen forgetting that they are to protect even them. The wink at the law when it says they don't have to read you your rights in "all" situations, because they don't want to tell the people they are coming down on that they actually have rights that limit their power. But still the wise cop will always inform the person they have in custody and have placed under arrest of their Miranda rights if for no other reason than to not screw it up when it gets to court. The first thing a Prosecutor looks for is proper police conduct and procedure. If it is severely lacking they will not go forward.

In your case, the good old boys jes wanted to teach you a lesson, give you the business, let you get the message what happens to people like you when you mess with them. You got yours, no need for a judge.

But in the end, they screwed it up and you got to walk. But if you get in a similar situation again, just stay calm, the dog doesn't bite if you don't look em in the eyes and stare him down or smack him on the snout. Power is a rush to some cops.

reply to post by anon72


No I understand what you mean and no, most agencies won't extradite for most misdemeanor crimes, but that warrant WILL still be issued and be hanging over your head....so much easier to make the trip and come to court and get it done and over with...and NOT drink everclear again while in GA...

Oh and next time BRING a bunch of cigs so you don't have to pay alot for them while in a tourist town, where the price of everything is a bit more than it should be.

Originally posted by Fromabove
2. The reason you were let go and freed is because once they had arrested you and had you in custody under charges they were to inform you of your rights which they did not.

Ummm that is 100% untrue. He was let go on a ROR/Subpoena bond, which just means they trust he WILL show for court. Had NOTHING to do with miranda rights being read. He was still charged, still processed, and still has to go to court.

Sorry but you really need to get off the Miranda kick and not give advice that is simply WRONG. For example. even if a cop decides to come talk to you about a specific crime, DOESN'T read you miranda, and questions you...then decides to arrest you for that crime, your still going to jail, still getting processed, still going to court. Its in court where you will be "released" for the cops lack of procedural knowledge...you won't just be let go from the jail.

Originally posted by Pajjikor
reply to post by defcon5

 

hell no i dont know if i have to court it a good thing im gonna get my case number from a ATS user.

and rcwj1975 I wasnt drunk that day, but yeah i do think I am smarter then most, but that is only because I am. LOL

If you do end up in court (though I doubt it), some things to consider to do. I am not in any way telling you to do this. It is what I would do. You need to decide what you need to do and seek proper legal defense. So for this scenario, I'll play the suspect here and say what I myself i a hypothetical situation would do.

1. Be as calm and clean as possible.
2. Be respectful and lamb like before the judge.
3. Be polite to everyone.
4. Do not stare or frown at people. Look into the eyes of people when you talk with them but only for four seconds at a time, anything after that is a stare which means a challenge.

5. Do NOT go off topic about anything prior to the event. Tell the judge the following.

A. You Honor, as I was departing a store, I was approached by police and detained and cuffed. Not aware of having done any offense, they beat me to the ground. I panicked out of fear for my safety and resisted all the while "pleading" with them to why they were doing what they were doing to me. I was not given an answer. At no time was I informed of charges and after being held for some time, was released. At no time your Honor was I ever informed for what I had been initially detained and arrested for, nor at any time was I ever informed of my Miranda rights. Your Honor, had I been informed of my rights I might not have panicked for my safety the way I did. It all seemed so brutal at the time.

B. The DA will state his case. Find a piece of paper to write on and do so the whole time he is talking, this offsets them more than not because they think you may be smart. If you do take a note or two, take note of the specific charge they state and the events only. Remember, you do not have to prove innocence, they need to prove guilt.

C. "The closing argument". After you defend, and they rebut and prosecute, you get a closing argument to rebut them. Here's how it should go.
1. Your Honor, I was not told why I was stopped, detained and arrested.
2. My actions were that of any reasonable person who, if they had simply been stopped, cuffed and beat to the ground would have been. Fear, and panic and confusion. Your Honor, had they simply told me why they stopped me and talked to me about it, I probably would not even be here today.
3. Lastly your Honor, I was never informed of any of my Miranda rights upon arrest.

4. Your Honor, ask and move that this case be dismissed for the reasons I just stated and because of the failure of the arresting officers to inform me of my Miranda rights. Thankyou.



And as anyone should always do, again, always seek proper legal aid before you stand before the judge.