Ask A Police Officer

[Mustanger2]

Originally Posted by MACHrophage

I hear ya mustanger2.

Generally speaking the law takes the position that property is never more valuable than life. Even the life of a crook, so u can use lethal force to protect your life or the life of another, but not to protect your wallet, car, etc... The basic recommendation is to get to a safe location, contact the police give them an accurate description of the perp and let professionally trained individuals (officers) handle it.

They will nab the bad guy and if they do it right they will bring the case to a prosecutor and the prosecutor will do his/her best to ensure the defendant gets what he/she deserves.


That's the system.

Thanks, I just needed to vent my feelings a bit... I realize the reality of our world today & generally abide by the rules. Thank you for such clear explanations of something incomprehensible! LOL... Really, thanks Macro..

We can get permits to carry concealed weapons in Oregon but I don't have one, not to sure of my ability to not respond inappropriately to situations... don't think I am mature enough yet at 62!! Plus I never want to meet "Bubba" on the inside!!!

[Low Drag]

Different courts often have different definitions for what is covered by the term "totality of the circustances". Some view it in a broad sense and include everything that happened leading up to the incident. Others interpret it very strictly and would only look at that brief instant in time in which it occured. In short it would probably make a big difference as to where you are if you were prosecuted for the example of the person who stabbed the armed robber in the neck. As far as the why didn't you run instead question. My answer would be simple "Well counselor, I'm pretty fleet of foot, but the last time I checked I'm not quite up to running the 1000 feet per second it would take to evade the bullet from his gun."

When it comes down to making a decision there should only be one question going through your mind at the time. Would I rather be judged by 12 or carried by 6.

[MvCrash]

Originally Posted by Low Drag

When it comes down to making a decision there should only be one question going through your mind at the time. Would I rather be judged by 12 or carried by 6.

When ever I see this saying it kind of gets me going. The fact of the matter is it is not easy to take a life, ask anyone that has done it.

There are two things to really consider in my opinion, the most important is "Is your life in danger or the life of someone else." If you have the firm thought that someone is going to die if you do not act, your on solid ground and would never have to be judged by 6 since you would not be charged.

The other point is a little different. you have to ask yourself " is it worth it?" Even if the law allows and you are on firm ground, do you really want to kill over something other than another life?
Is getting your wallet back worth the taking of a life so that YOU have to deal with it? Lets not even consider the dead person, just you. Do you want to live with killing someone over a wallet, tv or any other object? If you answer yes, then go ahead, but first talk to someone who has taken a life and ask if it is worth it.
Everyone talks a great game, but until you are put into the position to actually kill, you have no clue. i'm not saying you have had to kill, just be put into that position.

Have I been in that position, YEP, what heppend I won't discuss but its not an easy thing to live with.

It is amazing what a small little 125gr semi-jacketed hollowpoint .357 round does to the human body. Think about it.........I'd rather go get a donut.

[Mustanger2]

I was on a jury in a capital offense case... death penalty was likely... it really shook me in the fact that that I was going to decide if a human being would live or die. I responded to the question "Could you give the death penalty?"... Yes but only if I was absolutely convinced of guilt beyond a shadow of doubt... needless to say I was excused, thankfully.

So it is an awesome, sobering thing to kill, I realize that and still know in my heart that I would kill in defense of my life or family... over property? I like to vent off against the criminals, and say I would shoot them etc.... I hate that they get away time & again with no penalty... but actually kill if not in a life threatening situation? Most likely not. But he better not scare me too much!!

[01TruBluGT]

I understand what you are saying Crash. I have never been in a situation where a persons life was hanging in the balance and hopefully never will. I personaly thing the reason crime rates are so high is that the criminal knows the penalty, and chances for getting cought are alot less than the reward they get for the crime. Out of probably every 10 home invasions and break-ins only about 2 are cought. If lets say out of 10, 5 were killed on the scene, I would be willing to bet the amount of break-ins would drop.

Here is my thinking, If someone broke into my house, they would be killed no way around that for me. I would do it in a second and sleep like a baby the same night. The way I look at it if someone is going to break into a house with people home they must have some plan of action if the home owner wakes up and sees them. Secondly I would sleep easy knowing that I saved a life or two. I am sure at some point in the robbers life he would have killed someone.

If being robbed well depends on the situation. If you want some cash no problem, credit cards take them. There are however some things that I have that cannot be replaced and for thoes you will have to take them off of my dead body, or give yours up in the process.

[MvCrash]

Originally Posted by 01TruBluGT

Here is my thinking, If someone broke into my house, they would be killed no way around that for me. I would do it in a second and sleep like a baby the same night.

If being robbed well depends on the situation. If you want some cash no problem, credit cards take them. There are however some things that I have that cannot be replaced and for thoes you will have to take them off of my dead body, or give yours up in the process.

I have no doubt that most folks would defend their family, as I would mine. If it meant taking a life, so be it. That was the other guys decision, not mine. He decided to try to hurt my family.
As far as sleep well the same night, I know better. Won't happen, if it does, your not human.

Other than my family, there is nothing in my house worth taking someones life for, and I have those same kind of things you do, the ones that cannot be replaced. Remember this, you cannot be replaced either and taking a life changes you. I would still point the heater (I'm old, means gun) and tell them to get out.
Oh, I have a dog, if you break into my house and kill my dog, I'll pay you. I hate my dog. I don't hate ALL dogs....just mine.

Hopefuly no one on the registry or anyone I know will ever need to find out what I already know.

[IMachU]

MVC, I already know. OIS team said it was justified, too. Only took about 3 days to come to that conclusion. That was the longest 3 days of my life. Only because we, as police professionals, tend to second guess ourselves waaaaaaayyyyyy too much. I still can't talk about it. And I won't until I'm retired. Suffice it to say I am here to talk about a bad encounter with a worse suspect.

But in the defense of human life, I will do what I have to do to stop the aggressor's actions and save that life, no question about it.

You guys (and gals) have been bringing some great discussion to this thread....thanks! Keep it up!!

[Mustanger2]

I for one sure appreciate the good advice and info that has been provided here... thank you Officers and Legal types. It helps to know the Law, understand the nuances, and yes the penalties of our own actions sometimes. Plus you all let me blow off steam and frustration with some of the finer points!! (but don't drive!!)

[MvCrash]

Originally Posted by IMachU

MVC, I already know.

Sorry you do.

Originally Posted by IMachU

OIS team said it was justified, too. Only took about 3 days to come to that conclusion. That was the longest 3 days of my life. Only because we, as police professionals, tend to second guess ourselves waaaaaaayyyyyy too much. I still can't talk about it. And I won't until I'm retired. Suffice it to say I am here to talk about a bad encounter with a worse suspect.

Yep we always second guess. It is the Paradigm engrained in our ranks. Its time it changed

Originally Posted by IMachU

But in the defense of human life, I will do what I have to do to stop the aggressor's actions and save that life, no question about it.

Agreed, still difficult even when you know what you did was the right thing to do. Saving a life is a really cool thing to do. It is especially cool when the one you saved looks you in the eye with a warm smile and says "Thanks."

Originally Posted by IMachU

You guys (and gals) have been bringing some great discussion to this thread....thanks! Keep it up!!

BACK TO THE DONUTS I SAY!!!!

[ponygt65]

I have a question:

How do we fight this instance............unknowledged officers wasting our time?

http://www.mach1registry.org/forums/...681#post540681

No offense IMU - but not all cops know about all cars.

[MACHrophage]

Respectfully explain to the ofc. that the car has not been modified ( if that is true in your case) and that the sound and look of the car is exactly as it was when it rolled off the maufacturer's assembly line.

If you have to go to court...get a copy of dealers invoice listing out what the car came with stock...if possible get your hands on a Ford brochure when the Mach was new so you can have adequate evidence to support your position.

However, most states have traffic laws regulating everything from ride height, degree of tint, volume of exhaust etc... and the ofc. has a good faith basis for making a stop and writing a citation or repair order if it appears to him or her that your vehicle is violating the traffic code.

You would not believe how many handgun or CDS (drug) cases spring from stops based on minor traffic violations. It is unlike states will change their positions on these laws b/c they allow ofc. to make stops that lead to the discovery of serious criminal violations.

[ponygt65]

Originally Posted by MACHrophage

Respectfully explain to the ofc. that the car has not been modified ( if that is true in your case) and that the sound and look of the car is exactly as it was when it rolled off the maufacturer's assembly line.

If you have to go to court...get a copy of dealers invoice listing out what the car came with stock...if possible get your hands on a Ford brochure when the Mach was new so you can have adequate evidence to support your position.

However, most states have traffic laws regulating everything from ride height, degree of tint, volume of exhaust etc... and the ofc. has a good faith basis for making a stop and writing a citation or repair order if it appears to him or her that your vehicle is violating the traffic code.

You would not believe how many handgun or CDS (drug) cases spring from stops based on minor traffic violations. It is unlike states will change their positions on these laws b/c they allow ofc. to make stops that lead to the discovery of serious criminal violations.

I completely understand. And in my case I would be at fault (per signature). But, the above bolded section is what I have a problem with. The fact that an officer is going to do what he believes. How does any one person know what all cars come with stock. And officer can write a ticket if he so chooses, and the citizen then has to go to court and proove it. Now the citizen is out all that time and effort because an officer may be under knowledge about what is stock and what isn't. BTW - I was a volunteer firefighter in a small town (the town my father is now the mayor of), I am well aware of officers finding other things as a result of a minor pull over. Please do not mis-interpret my concern/question.

[Mustanger2]

The problem in Calif is that if your car is impounded wrongly due to the officers misunderstanding... the charges YOU have to pay without recourse are significant. I have one input of $2000!! This is for towing, storage fees, tear down of parts etc for verification, a hearing, court fees... just to prove you were right! So far I have not heard of any compensation for the innocent victim yet. Not to mention the time involved for you, the loss of your car...If you are found with modifed parts there is a huge fine also... your car can even be demolished... Welcome hotrodders to Calif.!!


So in reality it does you no good to go to court!

[IMachU]

Pony - I may have misunderstood your line, but when you sign a citation you are not admitting to guilt, just promising to appear in court.

M2 - In Los Angeles County, if your car is impounded wrongly, the police or sheriff's department is charged for the fees by the tow company. I can't speak for all Calif agencies. I hope this helps clear things up (if even just for me!).

[MACHrophage]

How does any one person know what all cars come with stock. And officer can write a ticket if he so chooses, and the citizen then has to go to court and proove it.

PonyGT65-
The burden of proof is on the state during trial. The standard is beyond a reasonable doubt, which is the highest burden that US laws allow. What that actually translates into is different depending on jurisdiction some are more state friendly than others.

However, when u go to court the state will have to go first and they have the burden of producing evidence in support of the ofc.'s allegation...( that is all a ticket/citation/arrest is...an allegation of guilt. ) When the State is done putting forth it's evidence you could in theory do nothing and argue that the evidence is insufficent to prove the offense alleged beyond a reasonable doubt OR you can go forward and put forth evidence to support that the ofc/state is wrong...

All this is said to say that you don't HAVE to prove anything but in certain situations it would be wise to put forward evidence supporting your position but the State is the one that must always go forward w/ evidence to support it's position.

[kopacko]

Signing a ticket, which is a court document, just states that if you do agree with what you are being charge, you will appear in court on the given date.

[JRKANOT]

Originally Posted by kopacko

Signing a ticket, which is a court document, just states that if you do agree with what you are being charge, you will appear in court on the given date.

In Virginia signing the summons indicates only that you agree to appear in court (or pre-pay if it isa pre-payable offense). It is not an agreement or admission to anything.
In other words you don'y have to sign the ticket...however..... if you refuse to sign the ticket, right or wrong, the officer is required to take you before a magistrate (or judge). This means you will be arrested, handcuffed, and transported to the facility where the magistrate or judge is located. This might also mean that your vehicle will be towed (at your expense since you refused to sign). This might not be necessary if you have a passenger with a valid driver's license that you allow to take control of your car.
Once before the magistrate or judge you will have an opportunity to speak your piece. The case will be set for trial and you will be required to appear. If a court is currently sitting that handles your type of case you may request an immediate hearing. This rarely happens unless the charge occurs during a time when traffic court is currently in session.
Bottom line is if you get a summons in VA the best thing to do is sign and appear in court. This allows you to continue on with your business and gives you time to research your case and dig up evidence why you were right and the officer was wrong.
It's a no win situation to refuse to sign if you really think about it.

[ponygt65]

I complete understand what you guys are saying. Unfortunately, MACHrophage - the 'burden' of proof is NOT in the hands of the officer. THat may be what is in the penal code and the constitution. But, anyone who has spent time in traffic court, will say otherwise. The officers word, is the proof. The times I have been, (which I was excuse on 2 of 3 acounts) the "proof" was in the hands of the citizen. Technically, legally, yes, the officer has to proove it. Realistically, no he doesn't. When was the last time you saw an officer bring pictures and whitnesses to 'proove' his case? - You haven't. You see the citizen bringing documents, pictures, and whitnesses to proove his innocence....that is wrong.

And I have been mis-understood, because I didnt' work myself right. Mustanger2 did it for me. The citizen is out all the time, effort, and money, and not even an apology is given when the citizen has to 'pay' for all of that. What about the time off from work? I understand officers make mistakes, they are only human. I just think there is no 'help' for the citizen. There were a select few trouble makers throughout, that have now made it hard for the rest of us.....we should all sue the producers of Fast and Furious. LOL

[kopacko]

Hey you other officers, had a DUI class last night at my in-service. You guys have to "observe" the suspect for 21 minutes in other states?

[MvCrash]

NOPE, not in NJ. What if the guy cannot walk? You have to watch him lay on the floor for 21 minutes?

[kopacko]

Let me rephrase. Before get the suspect to blow for a BAC test, we have to watch them, on camera, for 21 minutes. To make sure they do not put anything in their mouth, etc.

[IMachU]

Yes, we have had to observe them for at least 20 minutes before we do the BAC or other chemical test. This is accomplished by 1) waiting for the tow truck, 2) time it takes for the FSTs to be completed, and 3) drive time to jail. Not really a concern here. But we do NOT have to obs them on camera for the whole 20 mins either. Hope this helps!

[kevsrcode]

In texas it is 15 mins. The time transporting them to jail doesn't count because the defense attorney will say that there is no way you could have been constantly observing them while driving your police car. So, a certified BTO has to "constantly observe" them for 15 mins prior to administering the test.

[streakn]

Originally Posted by kevsrcode

In texas it is 15 mins. The time transporting them to jail doesn't count because the defense attorney will say that there is no way you could have been constantly observing them while driving your police car. So, a certified BTO has to "constantly observe" them for 15 mins prior to administering the test.

Same as California. It only applies to the Alcosensor (breathe). One little belch , burp or vomit and you have to start all over. If they start to play games we just draw blood and if they refuse.....it's time to force the blood.

[kevsrcode]

They only time we can force blood is if there is serious bodily injury or death resulting from the intoxication. I wish we had that option, it'd make life alot easier.