Successfully avoiding a vehicle search!

[artificialsteve]

The other day I was heading home from the bowling alley when a code-enforcement officer pulled me over. He had sped up right next to me in the other lane before putting his lights on.

Here is what I remember:

Pig: "Do you know why I pulled you over?"
Me: "No, I have no idea what this is about."
Pig: "You have a cracked windshield, you can't drive in the state of washington with a cracked windshield, it's against the law."
Me: "I didn't know that."
Pig: "Yeah, and what were you doing at the bowling alley just now?"
Me: "oh, just talking to a friend."
Pig: "Are you sure about that? Can I see your driver's license, POI, and Registration?"
Me: "I don't have those."
Pig: "SO YOU DON'T HAVE A LICENSE?"
me: "Not with me, no."
(he takes my info down, and then comes back...)
Pig: "Ok, well i'm going to give you a ticket for failure to carry driver's license on person, failure to show registration, and no valid proof of insurance."
(hands me the ticket)
Me:"Do you have a business card, sir?"
Pig: "Yes I do, and you can't have one."
Me: "......Ok, do you have a pen so I can sign this contract?"
Pig: "You don't sign it."(looking assured of himself)
Me: "May I leave now?"
Pig: "No! You are being detained."
Me: "For what?"
Pig: "Do you have anything in the car that I should know about? Guns, knives, rifles, DRUGS?"
Me: "no, may I leave now?"
Pig: "Would you just read this real quick?...
(hands me a small leaflet)
....Basically what it says is that you give us permission to search your vehicle and your personal belongings just in case you're lying to me about not having any illegal substances in here."
(now there are two Pigs, and they don't look nice!)
Me: "well, I understand you're trying to do your job sir, but I do not consent to that."
Pig:"So you're trying to hide something then!"
Me: "I do not consent to you searching my property or vehicle."
Pig: "So then what you're saying is that you have something illegal in there, right?"
Me: "No, that is not what I am trying to say, and may I leave now?"
Pig: "We're cracking down on illegal activity in the city of *********, if you are engaging in illegal activity and drug trafficking, WE WILL FIND OUT and you will be ARRESTED."
Me: "May I leave now?"
Pig: "you're free to go"

[quasimodo]

Good for you Steve!
Now what about the tickets?
Q

[Shoonra]

In the criminal court there have been plenty of drug defendants who were nailed by searches of their cars. Did the cops have permission to search their cars? Yes. Well, if you gave them permission, then it was a lawful search. And the answer: I said Yes only because I thought it would make them suspicious otherwise, and I hoped that my consent would be enough to make them think I didn't have drugs in the car.
And they go to jail.

Assuming you have a few hours to kill, refuse consent. Make them get a search warrant.
If you have drugs or other contraband in the car, you're up a creek either way (but maybe it's the end of the shift or something and they let you go rather than search).


If the cop who stops you asks "Do you know why I stopped you?" ALWAYS ALWAYS ALWAYS say "No, I don't." Giving a response like "I was over the speed limit" or "I was weaving" - even if just a guess - not only can be an admission of a violation (and maybe not the one he stopped you for) but an indication of KNOWING violation which only makes it worse.

[Livefire]

If the cops are hell bent on making a bust, one of them has a bag of weed to toss in your car in such cases!!! I say make the lousy bastards work for it!

[Ownmaster]

Originally Posted by Shoonra

In the criminal court there have been plenty of drug defendants who were nailed by searches of their cars. Did the cops have permission to search their cars? Yes. Well, if you gave them permission, then it was a lawful search. And the answer: I said Yes only because I thought it would make them suspicious otherwise, and I hoped that my consent would be enough to make them think I didn't have drugs in the car.
And they go to jail.

Assuming you have a few hours to kill, refuse consent. Make them get a search warrant.
If you have drugs or other contraband in the car, you're up a creek either way (but maybe it's the end of the shift or something and they let you go rather than search).


If the cop who stops you asks "Do you know why I stopped you?" ALWAYS ALWAYS ALWAYS say "No, I don't." Giving a response like "I was over the speed limit" or "I was weaving" - even if just a guess - not only can be an admission of a violation (and maybe not the one he stopped you for) but an indication of KNOWING violation which only makes it worse.

Great post Shoonra. Still giving straight forward, researched out, no bs, posts I see.

[heyday]

Assuming you have a few hours to kill, refuse consent. Make them get a search warrant.
If you have drugs or other contraband in the car, you're up a creek either way (but maybe it's the end of the shift or something and they let you go rather than search).

And what would be the grounds establishing PC for the SW? Refusing to give consent? I don't think so!

Here is a very well presented and fact-filled PDF that more than covers protecting your rights. Not just a simple pamplet, this is a veritable treatese:

You and the police

I highly recommend it. I even learned a few things. And I have invested years studying this subject.

Regards

[heyday]

Assuming you have a few hours to kill, refuse consent. Make them get a search warrant.
If you have drugs or other contraband in the car, you're up a creek either way (but maybe it's the end of the shift or something and they let you go rather than search).

Neither is necessarily true.

If one is unlawfully detained when one gives consent then legal grounds exists to suppress the fruits of that search.

Legally speaking, the odds are better in your favor if you refuse to give consent.

Generally under the law as it exists now, if LE have enough PC to obtain a SW than the automobile exception allows them to search without a warrant.

However, any search conducted without a warrant (or consent) is presumptively unconstitutional and thus, if LE can not show proper PC the exclusionary rule dictates that upon proper motion the evidence must be excluded from any prosecution for same. Can you spell d-i-s-m-i-s-s-e-d?

[heyday]

Personally, I never give consent.

LE: What do you have to hide?

Me: I don't have anything to hide. I just refuse to waive a constitutional right, ever. My policy.

Although I'm considering an alternative:

Sure, officer, if you will allow me to search your vehicle...

[...]

Officer, what do you have to hide?

But, that's just me. I'm jaded. ;)

[artificialsteve]

Originally Posted by quasimodo

Good for you Steve!
Now what about the tickets?
Q

The officer has been sent a subpoena, and I am going to use one of the many available tactics I have been studying
for the last 3 years to hopefully get the case dismissed. I guess you could say my level of knowlege in exposing the fraud in an open courtroom has now advanced to the point that I am ready for just about whatever they may potentially throw at me. I want the cop there so I can effectively waste his time too, if he even shows at all.
Thanks for the support.

[artificialsteve]

Originally Posted by Livefire

If the cops are hell bent on making a bust, one of them has a bag of weed to toss in your car in such cases!!! I say make the lousy bastards work for it!

You're right, they have been known to sink that low. What a bunch of hypocrisy! But wait; even if they were to set someone up like that, it would still be fair game for a dismissal based on how the person accused played the court game. Obviously this is an extreme example but nonetheless a scenario worth contemplating.
Are there any suijuris members who can come forward with proof that a drug charge is any different than a traffic citation, in terms of defeating one. Another member posed the same question and I can't seem to think of any reason why they are.....