REFUSING to talk to the police. STUPID.

[Mo]

What comes upon you in this world in regard to speaking, you ask.
Micheal McDonald of the Doobie Brothers once said.
"But what a fool believes. He see's no wise man has the power to reason away what seems to be."

Speak, speak, speak, could be foolish when its the devil you're speaking to spoken by a wise priest.

Consider the consequences and you'll surely see.

 

[Tucker6900]

I did not take the time to read all responses to your post, but I will say this.

As citizens we are expected to know every law. Dont think so? How many times have you seen or heard of someone being ticketed for a traffic infraction that they didnt know they were violating? Or that it even existed? I was stopped and ticketed in NC for driving in the passing lane. After getting ticketed and released, I drove the highway looking for signs, lights, arrows, etc. And found nothing. It is a law, but I had no idea.

So why shouldnt police employees be expected to know the laws? Especially laws about carrying firearms.

Want to know why I dont talk to police? Because they are not my friend. They are doing one job, enforcing the law. Period. If a police employee makes contact with you for any reason, their fishing expedition starts.

The other reason is two words. Qualified immunity. These servants have been given the freedom to violate rights and scream "I DIDNT KNOW" or "OFFICER SAFETY" and get a lengthy paid vacation for their crimes.

I will tell anyone who reads this. Dont. Talk. To. Police. It doesnt matter how polite they are, or whether they are just making conversation. Exercise your right to remain silent. You can tell them that, and I believe the USSC has ruled that you must. But keep your mouth shut. Next move is theirs.

Sent from my SCH-R970 using Tapatalk

 

[Ezek]

has anyone thought of maybe after invoking the 5th, when they then engage in conversation, maybe saying they are about to enter dialogue under Duress? cause after all if you answer an officer with 5th 5th, the 5th again, and oh yeah the 5th for that oen too.. then they say they are going to arrest you, you now engage in dialogue to protest the action since it is illegal detainment thereby requiring you to re-invoke the 5th ( that ruling pisses me off by the way as he mistakenly calls it a privilege!) but if you engage in protest dialogue UNDER DURESS, can you maintain your 5th without having to re-invoke since your essentially being forced to speak in protest to the ACTION.

 

[Tucker6900]

The sequence is simple. Invoke (means speak) your Fifth Amendment Right to silence. Then KYBMS!

Exactly. Say it clearly. Say it in a firm voice. Say it loud enough for other servants, bystanders, witnesses, and dash cams can hear it. Then dont say another word. If they threaten to and arrest you, keep quiet. Even if they ask you if you want water, need to use the restroom, if the cuffs are too tight, dont be fooled. These are all tactics to get you talking. The only words out of your mouth should be requesting your/an attorney/phone call. Done.

Talking to servants gets you nowhere.

Sent from my SCH-R970 using Tapatalk

 

[davidmcbeth]

LEGAL NOTICE
PROHIBITION OF CONSENSUAL CONTACT BY
LAW ENFORCEMENT PERSONNEL



Legal Notice is given to: DEPARTMENT OF EMERGENCY SERVICES AND PUBLIC PROTECTION, HEADQUARTERED AT: 1111 COUNTRY CLUB ROAD, MIDDLETOWN, CT 06457.

Now comes John Smith, the person producing this notice and serving the notice upon the agency noted in the above paragraph.

John Smith now provides notice that he does not nor does in the future consent to any consensual encounter by any member of law enforcement (that would include but not be exclusive to: state policeman, state troopers, judicial marshals, game wardens, policeman, patrolman, deputy, bailiff, or other law enforcement or any and all types of regulatory enforcement officers, etc.) of the aforementioned agency.

To all members of the agency: do not approach John Smith in a manner that could be viewed as a consensual encounter as defined by or ruled upon by any court any of the following basis: the United States of America Fourth Amendment ; common law; reasonable person definition; all other possible definitions.

Failure to comply with this notice and appropriate action will be taken.


Submitted by:

John Smith
1 main st
Anytown, ct

I am willing to try a new & novel approach regarding contacts with LEOs (that can never make us free-er).

I filed this today with my state police. Its similar to a notice of trespass that I have served them (and others) with in the past. They took it and file stamped my copy of the notice.

I took several recent court opinions to heart wherein the courts have suggested "just don't consent to an encounter" and took it to the next logical step of proactively denying them the authority to try to begin a consensual encounter. They were very puzzled by the notice having never seen one before but I think its golden in many future instances (not all mind you but some ~ especially if a cop already knows who you are w/o the need to ID you beyond his own memory)~they wanted me to take it back but I refused and informed them that they were served in accordance with notice service requirements and they should behave appropriately.

I'll see where this takes me ... possible 4th amendment issues with approaching then?

 

[adk_mechetech]

Interesting idea. I'm not trying to argue, just asking a serious question. I am having a hard time figuring out how this would work in practice.

How would this affect a consensual encounter initiated by you in the event you needed the assistance of an LEO? I'm not sure I understand how it would be a 4th amendment issue. My understanding is that the 4th amendment applies "arbitrary governmental intrusions" and "Private persons are exempted". -(Legal information institute, Cornell University link below) However, I do not have case law to back that up.

Also, how would this work if you are approached by an LEO that may or may not have seen this notice and does not know you? They would have to identify you before being able to comply with this notice by approaching you and initiating some sort of contact.



https://www.law.cornell.edu/wex/fourth_amendment

 

[OC for ME]

To all members of the agency: do not approach John Smith in a manner that could be viewed as a consensual encounter as defined by or ruled upon by any court any of the following basis: the United States of America Fourth Amendment ; common law; reasonable person definition; all other possible definitions.

Specifically describes the cop(s) initiating the contact. If the citizen approaches the cop(s)...

Passive silence is golden. Cops hate being ignored. There is a video or two around here somewhere where a cop approaches a LAC OCer, the cop asks a few questions, is met with silence, cop "frees" the LAc and the LAC leaves. Odd, is it not, that a cop initiated "consensual" encounter, that we do not consent to (agree to in advance/at the beginning) by the way, is informed by the cop that the LAC is free to go, yet is considered by the evil, unaccountable, judiciary that the LAC was never seized under the 4A. Go figure.

 

[davidmcbeth]

Interesting idea. I'm not trying to argue, just asking a serious question. I am having a hard time figuring out how this would work in practice.

How would this affect a consensual encounter initiated by you in the event you needed the assistance of an LEO? I'm not sure I understand how it would be a 4th amendment issue. My understanding is that the 4th amendment applies "arbitrary governmental intrusions" and "Private persons are exempted". -(Legal information institute, Cornell University link below) However, I do not have case law to back that up.

Also, how would this work if you are approached by an LEO that may or may not have seen this notice and does not know you? They would have to identify you before being able to comply with this notice by approaching you and initiating some sort of contact.



https://www.law.cornell.edu/wex/fourth_amendment

Well, a good question; since I have never seen this type of legal notice before its hard to say what will happen. However, in my notices of trespass where cops still came to my door this is how I handled it: a single cop, I simply inform him that he is violating a notice of trespass and he must leave immediately (he was asking ? about some graffiti that occurred days before ~ clearly not something that would negate the notice). He left immediately. I further complained to the first selectman that the town violated my notice. No further incursions occurred after that point in time and neighbors have wondered why they avoided going through my property when searching for a lost animal.

So for this one I would likely do the same with LEOs that I do not recall seeing. If I know a LEO (and maybe anytime) then I would ask "do you know me?" if he answers no, I would either just tell him of the notice of give him a copy; if he answers yes, then I may sue the agency and take other action as the situation dictates ~ if the cop is preventing me from doing something then I may threaten a citizen's arrest and may proceed with such an action (I have citizen arrested several folks in the past ~ its a risky thing to do so if you don't know about this action I would not recommend doing it ~ I have only done it when I was 100% sure it was OK to do.)

Next agency to file with : my Capitol Police Dept. who has done nothing but harass me in my legal first amendment activities at the Capitol complex. Now they all know me, its a small dept. Now, they are immune under our law for their activities (yeah, the state gave them total immunity ~ if they still have immunity for illegal acts is another question which is answered state by state. For example: I sued an IRS agent once who worked in Utah, many states away from where I was living. The Justice Dept. argued that since he has doing work for the IRS he was immune. But in Utah, doing illegal activities was ruled as being outside the scope of employment (whereas in the state I was living in, they still should have had been considered to be within the scope of their employment, even illegal acts if it ). The Justice Dept. lost that motion to dismiss and the case went on). So some research is going to be needed to see if one in my state can pierce that corporate veil and immunity provisions. Of course under a 42 USC 1983 case, this requires further research in addition to the normal non-constitutionally based cause of action.

I don't see any immunity barring a citizens arrest though ~ while it is certainly fatal to a civil case it does not make a civil case frivolous. As any immunity must be plead in court as people can waive immunity and people sometimes do.

 

[adk_mechetech]

Well, a good question; since I have never seen this type of legal notice before its hard to say what will happen. However, in my notices of trespass where cops still came to my door this is how I handled it: a single cop, I simply inform him that he is violating a notice of trespass and he must leave immediately (he was asking ? about some graffiti that occurred days before ~ clearly not something that would negate the notice). He left immediately. I further complained to the first selectman that the town violated my notice. No further incursions occurred after that point in time and neighbors have wondered why they avoided going through my property when searching for a lost animal.

So for this one I would likely do the same with LEOs that I do not recall seeing. If I know a LEO (and maybe anytime) then I would ask "do you know me?" if he answers no, I would either just tell him of the notice of give him a copy; if he answers yes, then I may sue the agency and take other action as the situation dictates ~ if the cop is preventing me from doing something then I may threaten a citizen's arrest and may proceed with such an action (I have citizen arrested several folks in the past ~ its a risky thing to do so if you don't know about this action I would not recommend doing it ~ I have only done it when I was 100% sure it was OK to do.)

Next agency to file with : my Capitol Police Dept. who has done nothing but harass me in my legal first amendment activities at the Capitol complex. Now they all know me, its a small dept. Now, they are immune under our law for their activities (yeah, the state gave them total immunity ~ if they still have immunity for illegal acts is another question which is answered state by state. For example: I sued an IRS agent once who worked in Utah, many states away from where I was living. The Justice Dept. argued that since he has doing work for the IRS he was immune. But in Utah, doing illegal activities was ruled as being outside the scope of employment (whereas in the state I was living in, they still should have had been considered to be within the scope of their employment, even illegal acts if it ). The Justice Dept. lost that motion to dismiss and the case went on). So some research is going to be needed to see if one in my state can pierce that corporate veil and immunity provisions. Of course under a 42 USC 1983 case, this requires further research in addition to the normal non-constitutionally based cause of action.

I don't see any immunity barring a citizens arrest though ~ while it is certainly fatal to a civil case it does not make a civil case frivolous. As any immunity must be plead in court as people can waive immunity and people sometimes do.

That clears things up a bit. Thank you. Would your original notice cover local (not State) police departments, or would a notice also need to be given to each municipality individually?

Please keep me(us) posted with any incidents relating to the notice you submitted. I am also in CT and a similar notice, if effective, may be a useful tool for others.

 

[Phoenix David]

I have nothing to hide, had a secret clearance for 21 years..snip

Actually you have a lot to hide.

 

[travr6]

Ignorance of the law is no excuse unless you are a cop?

 

[davidmcbeth]

That clears things up a bit. Thank you. Would your original notice cover local (not State) police departments, or would a notice also need to be given to each municipality individually?

Please keep me(us) posted with any incidents relating to the notice you submitted. I am also in CT and a similar notice, if effective, may be a useful tool for others.

With any notice, you have to notice an individual entity ... so you would need to file a notice with every agency you wished to notice.

The Capitol Police will be an easy test as I am there often and they all know me. If they approach or try to start in a consensual encounter then I'll make a huge deal over it being that this would be a 4th amendment violation (IMO). I howl every time they demand to search me as in JAN 14 the chief put out a press release that security was fine w/o the need for searches (US DHS and state police did an audit)...and my conversations with the chief, nothing has changed since the press release..so how can they demand searches after they said everything was good (and they ordered the metal detectors and packaging scanners, that they originally and continually told me could not save images until one security guy told me that they can and I then pushed and pushed for saved images until I got some, the same week that the chief put our his press release in JAN 2014). Almost every time I howl about the searches a Capitol Policeman runs up and tells me to stop complaining...which is the worst thing a gov't official can say to a Libertarian.

Every gun owner should file at least a notice of trespass to keep gov't officials off your lands. They cannot say that they saw something in your house if they cannot gain close proximity to it.

 

[Dario]

Every gun owner should file at least a notice of trespass to keep gov't officials off your lands. They cannot say that they saw something in your house if they cannot gain close proximity to it.

Would that prevent them from ordering you to evacuate say during a SWAT action at a neighbors house? I figured the best defense for that is just don't answer your door.

 

[countryclubjoe]

With any notice, you have to notice an individual entity ... so you would need to file a notice with every agency you wished to notice.

The Capitol Police will be an easy test as I am there often and they all know me. If they approach or try to start in a consensual encounter then I'll make a huge deal over it being that this would be a 4th amendment violation (IMO). I howl every time they demand to search me as in JAN 14 the chief put out a press release that security was fine w/o the need for searches (US DHS and state police did an audit)...and my conversations with the chief, nothing has changed since the press release..so how can they demand searches after they said everything was good (and they ordered the metal detectors and packaging scanners, that they originally and continually told me could not save images until one security guy told me that they can and I then pushed and pushed for saved images until I got some, the same week that the chief put our his press release in JAN 2014). Almost every time I howl about the searches a Capitol Policeman runs up and tells me to stop complaining...which is the worst thing a gov't official can say to a Libertarian.

Every gun owner should file at least a notice of trespass to keep gov't officials off your lands. They cannot say that they saw something in your house if they cannot gain close proximity to it.

Would said notice of trespass apply to EMP and fire fighters? If yes, don't have a heart attack trying to put out that there fire..

Regards
CCJ

 

[SFCRetired]

1. If you need the police to investigate a possible crime, investigate a defensive shooting, etc., and you contact them, the rule still applies: You do not talk to the police without the presence of an attorney. In practice, a police officer will not make a statement to IA until at least 24 hours have passed and his attorney is present.
2. If you are approached by police, remember that, in most every state, you are not required to present identification papers unless you are engaged in a permitted action (driving).
3. I don't know about other states, but in the Great State of Alabama, the officer must have RAS that you have committed, are committing, or are about to commit a crime before he can demand of you your name, address, and an explanation of your actions. (Ala. Code 15-5-30) Notice that there is no requirement for you to present an identification document.
4. Bottom line: If an officer approaches you with a friendly greeting and attempts to engage in a friendly conversation, that is one thing. If that same officer turns the friendly conversation into a de facto interrogation, then it is time to tell him, "I don't answer questions. Why am I being detained?" If he says you are not being detained, turn and walk away without saying anything else.

I exchange friendly greetings with several different officers on a daily basis and especially on Sunday morning when I exchange greetings with the officers on traffic control outside my church. Were those officers to start interrogating me, it would become a one-sided conversation very quickly.

 

[Citizen]

1. If you need the police to investigate a possible crime, investigate a defensive shooting, etc., and you contact them, the rule still applies: You do not talk to the police without the presence of an attorney. In practice, a police officer will not make a statement to IA until at least 24 hours have passed and his attorney is present.
2. If you are approached by police, remember that, in most every state, you are not required to present identification papers unless you are engaged in a permitted action (driving).
3. I don't know about other states, but in the Great State of Alabama, the officer must have RAS that you have committed, are committing, or are about to commit a crime before he can demand of you your name, address, and an explanation of your actions. (Ala. Code 15-5-30) Notice that there is no requirement for you to present an identification document.
4. Bottom line: If an officer approaches you with a friendly greeting and attempts to engage in a friendly conversation, that is one thing. If that same officer turns the friendly conversation into a de facto interrogation, then it is time to tell him, "I don't answer questions. Why am I being detained?" If he says you are not being detained, turn and walk away without saying anything else.

I exchange friendly greetings with several different officers on a daily basis and especially on Sunday morning when I exchange greetings with the officers on traffic control outside my church. Were those officers to start interrogating me, it would become a one-sided conversation very quickly.

Elaboration for new readers, not contradiction.

1. Keep in mind that the person of who identity is demanded is not the person who gets to decide whether the cop has genuine reasonable articulable suspicion (RAS). It is the judge who gets to decide after the fact whether the cop had RAS.

2. The part about an explanation of your actions may be a holdover from times long past. Facially, demanding an explanation of your actions violates your 5A right against self-incrimination. Remember Professor Duane's explanation from the podium at Regent University Law School: "Even the truthful statements of an innocent witness can be used against him..." (See youtube video, formerly posted on Regent University's website).

 

[davidmcbeth]

Would said notice of trespass apply to EMP and fire fighters? If yes, don't have a heart attack trying to put out that there fire..

Regards
CCJ

Notices of trespass don't apply to actual emergency situations. Real emergencies...as normal people like us think of as emergencies. Otherwise...yes, my notice was provided to the town relating to all town employees which would include fire dept. folks. I got insurance for any situation anywho..tired of sending in premium payments for no return !

 

[Tucker6900]

Elaboration for new readers, not contradiction.

1. Keep in mind that the person of who identity is demanded is not the person who gets to decide whether the cop has genuine reasonable articulable suspicion (RAS). It is the judge who gets to decide after the fact whether the cop had RAS.

Which is why we now have a system of police employees (not all, mind you) that are free to do what they wish with little to no repercussions. More often than not, the judge will simply side with the servant and there will be no avenue for the victim to take. Our justice system has skewed enough to the point that we (the people) no longer get to choose whether or not a servant is breaking the law. The courts are a system of control. It works when an actual crime has been committed, but when the good law abiding citizen ends up arrested for something that the servant decided was a crime, and turns out wasn't, then we are left with the scam that is the courts. Men in robes decide our fate, not us. Time for a change.

 

[davidmcbeth]

A physical ID is not required under a RAS request. 99% of the time, cops ask for a DL or similar physical ID. One does not have to provide one.

I do not carry ID with me...I just keep my DL inside my car...when they ask for ID I ask a followup question "Are you asking for DL or other document?" If they say "yes" then I simply state that I would not be able to comply without consulting my lawyer. Then the ball is in their court. Usually they just stop asking. Last time, they arrested me..I am preparing a civil complaint regarding that unlawful arrest.

 

[solus]

A physical ID is not required under a RAS request. 99% of the time, cops ask for a DL or similar physical ID. One does not have to provide one.

I do not carry ID with me...I just keep my DL inside my car...when they ask for ID I ask a followup question "Are you asking for DL or other document?" If they say "yes" then I simply state that I would not be able to comply without consulting my lawyer. Then the ball is in their court. Usually they just stop asking. Last time, they arrested me..I am preparing a civil complaint regarding that unlawful arrest.

ah that explains your extended absence...lol :shocker:

your dialogue has been missed...

ipse