How to avoid arrest when pulled over----US Video

[Sentry]

http://www.videosift.com/video/How-to-Avoid-Being-Arrested-By-the-Police-seriously-though-not-the-Chris-Rock-skit

Interesting video, I wonder how this apply to Canadian Laws.

 

[fuji]

The specific laws are different but the advice in the video probably applies in any jurisdiction. Asking the police why they are stopping you, stating that you refuse to consent to any searches, not confessing anything, and asking if you are free to go force the police to evaluate whether they have a legal right to continue without your consent.

If they do have a right to continue your statements don't do any harm. If they don't they'll either leave off, or else your statements will help you later on if it goes to court.

You have nothing to lose by doing these things, and everything to gain, in any jurisdiction.

 

[Love Technician]

I remember an ex-cop telling us in drivers school that, should you be in a car accident and have an police officer come to the scene, to state directly to the officer that any statements you give are for informational purposes only, and are in now way admission to any fault for causing the accident. Basically, if one acts calm, lets the officer do the talking and you don't admit to doing anything wrong..you should be fine. If you do get arrested, the cop probably would have done it regardless of how you handled yourself.

 

[WhaWhaWha]

The driver was already clocked doing 50 in a 30 zone. He was caught committing an arrestable offense. This video was a fantasy scenario at best.

 

[torontojohn]

I dunno - for minor stuff where you are guilty, like a speeding ticket, it might be better just to play nice as long as the officer plays nice. They have this thing called 'discretion'. If you start to give the cop a headache, he'll find a way to give you one.

It has never happened to me, but if I ever get a cop who is fishing I'd like to think I'll man up and say, 'No' to any search requests etc, simply because I'm anti-police state and pro-privacy despite being generally pro-police.

 

[S.C. Joe]

The driver was already clocked doing 50 in a 30 zone. He was caught committing an arrestable offense. This video was a fantasy scenario at best.

Thats 20 mph over the speed limit. Very few places that be grounds for an arrest. 5 mph they most of the time don't stop you. 10 mph, you may be stop and given a warning or a 5 mph over ticket. 15 mph over, a ticket most likely for 5 to 15 mph depending on the cop. So getting an arrested for 20 mph is unlikely if thats all the driver was doing-not drinking, passing others on the shoulder, etc.

In my "wild" youth, I was stop for 22 mph over and got a 10 mph ticket. Thats non-freeway, on the freeways you can go a little faster.

They keep changing the point system, but last I seen it was 90 mph in a 70 mph zone is a 3 point ticket in michigan. On a reg. highway 20 mph is a 4 point ticket but on the freeways its set higher-the points. 5 mph over is NO points but local roads its 2 points, same for 10 mph over.

Now-different states have different laws and points. Michigan is pretty good-for the lead foots

 

[fuji]

I dunno - for minor stuff where you are guilty, like a speeding ticket, it might be better just to play nice as long as the officer plays nice. They have this thing called 'discretion'. If you start to give the cop a headache, he'll find a way to give you one.

The trick is to be polite, respectful, cheerful, even helpful, all the while firmly asserting your rights. There is just no reason to be an asshole. You aren't there to challenge him to a game of who can talk smarter, you want to end the situation as quickly as you can.

You can work the key phrases into very positive, friendly statements:

"Why do you want to see my keys? I don't consent to any searches, but let me know if there's anything else I can do for you."

"Officer, I hope I've been helpful, am I free to go?"

No need to be rude or abrasive at all.

 

[Hangman]

Or you can just slip him a hundred bucks...

https://terb.cc/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=184858

 

[Never Compromised]

Was that officer Sheik? Was he trying to find new slaves for the Mods clubhouse?

 

[Cinema Face]

I agree that we should know our rights and stand up to defend them. However, nobody has the right to break the law. It seemed like the video was about how to exploit your rights to help transport narcotics in the car.

If someone has done nothing wrong, then they have nothing to loose by letting their car get searched. In this case, the kids had dope in the car and had broken the law and got caught.

 

[BuffNaked]

I agree that we should know our rights and stand up to defend them. However, nobody has the right to break the law. It seemed like the video was about how to exploit your rights to help transport narcotics in the car.

If someone has done nothing wrong, then they have nothing to loose by letting their car get searched. In this case, the kids had dope in the car and had broken the law and got caught.

Wrong and against the law are 2 different things. If a cop is pulling him over for speeding, why does he need to search the car?

 

[Aardvark154]

The video has "ideal situation" scenarios. For instance the video doesn’t mention that the Police Officer could detain them until the drug dog comes (and by no means does that have to be instantaneously). What if when the drug dog comes it alerts on the Car, once again the video doesn't mention that in the U.S. that is probable cause for a search. The outcome presented would have been far more realistic if everyone had been stone cold sober, the marijuana had been in a baggie in a backpack in the trunk which was locked.

Likewise with slight changes in the facts, the wild party scenario has several loopholes through which one could walk an elephant.

Indeed on both sides of the border people have certain fundamental rights, but giving the impression that if one merely asserts their rights to the police they will be able to get away with all sorts of criminal behaviour is very misleading.

I might add that the video presents a very stereotyped “Deputy Dogg” type police officer - there are indeed such still around, but in ever decreasing numbers.

 

[S.C. Joe]

The biggest thing-on both sides of the border-is what you say or don't say and how you act!

Way too long to get in to it but most times when a case goes to court, its the defend own words or their actions that are talked about from the arresting officer.

 

[The Options Menu]

Indeed on both sides of the border people have certain fundamental rights, but giving the impression that if one merely asserts their rights to the police they will be able to get away with all sorts of criminal behaviour is very misleading.

Yes, but it is a good way to get tazered and put on YouTube.

Fuji hit it on the head. Be polite and respectful, but as assertive as you can. I have no criminal record but I've had my share of run ins with the police. The above is about the best you can do.

When I was younger, and looked a little wilder, I've had police reach in check my cigarette pack and / or open my glovebox while I was rummaging for my insurance. All you can say is, "Excuse me?", look him in the eye, and hope the officer isn't in the mood to find some 'probable cause'. (Albeit, I never actually had anything in the car, so the point would be moot. But still...)

 

[fuji]

The video has "ideal situation" scenarios. For instance the video doesn*t mention that the Police Officer could detain them until the drug dog comes

Could he really? To bring the drug dog he has to DETAIN them while he waits for the dog. In order to detain he needs probable cause. That is the key behind the question, "Am I free to go?" That question forces the officer to assess whether he has legal grounds to prevent you from leaving.

At every step here the key is that you are putting the ball back in the officer's court, forcing him to assess whether he has a legal right to proceed without your consent.

In some cases, where he does have probable cause (perhaps probable cause that is unknown to you! For example you may fit the description of a suspect called out on the radio, even though you are innocent--in that case he has probable cause). If he does have it then he will proceed without your consent. Your statements in that case will not have prevented the detainment or search--but nor will they have harmed anything!

So basically it is worth saying these things simply because they MIGHT help you, and they certainly won't hurt, so it's well worth trying.

Once you've verbally asserted your rights there are then three possibilities:

1. The officer realizes he has no probable cause and stops

2. The officer realizes he has no probable cause, but does not stop, your defense attorney later will make much of this

3. The officer has probable cause and continues without your consent, legally, your statement having accomplished nothing, but also (if you're polite) no harm either.

 

[S.C. Joe]

Remember too, if the police have no grounds to search your car-house but they do it anyhow, all you can hope for is getting the charges against you thrown out. The police NEVER give you back your dope, weapons, etc. if the case is throw out

 

[KBear]

Did not know you could be arrested in the US for going 20mph over the speed limit.

Would be interesting to see a similar video that covers Canadian law.

 

[Aardvark154]

Could he really? To bring the drug dog he has to DETAIN them while he waits for the dog. In order to detain he needs probable cause. That is the key behind the question, "Am I free to go?" That question forces the officer to assess whether he has legal grounds to prevent you from leaving.

Fuji, I'll admit that I wasn't watching it in great detail - had it running in the background while doing something else - but I thought the Officer says something about a smell from the car, perhaps that was one of the other hypotheticals - which would give him enough to detain for the dog.

Fuji is of course correct that the Officer would need to have Probable Cause to detain but that could be provided by any number of different things: the vehicle or occupants fitting certain profiles that have proved reliable in the past, smells or observations.

I just find the video misleading, in implying that just saying no is a "get out of jail free card." Realistically, where I think both Fuji and I would agree is in a case where the car didn't look like a rolling garbage dump, the occupants were sober, and the marijuana was in a plastic bag in a backpack in the locked trunk of the car in that case in a simple you were 20 over the speed limit scenario I would agree that there would be no probable cause. Hint to anyone who is actually concerned about this. Then again I doubt that in the real world in that situation the Police Officer or Constable would be acting like a character from a bad soap opera, and even if they did ask for a consent search would not be expecting to get permission or if they got it to find anything.

 

[S.C. Joe]

Many times people do say OK I have nothing to hide even when they do!

Sometimes the police are like "you are not carry anything that you should not be, right, how bout I take a quick look around" dude goes "ok" then the police spend an hour searching the car because the dude said "ok"


Many times the cops say one thing but they can not do it. Like arresting you for driving 20 mph over the limit. This way the dude thinks if he gives the cop a hard time and don't agree with him, the dude will go to jail anyways.

 

[Aardvark154]

Did not know you could be arrested in the US for going 20mph over the speed limit.

Would be interesting to see a similar video that covers Canadian law.

The law varies from state to state as to what constitutes 'Criminal Speed' and what motor vehicle violations are arrestable offenses.