Am I Free to Stay?

[cassandrasdaddy]

don't give em any ideas

 

[ChristopherG]

to briefly detain a person for questioning without grounds for arrest if they reasonably suspect, based on "specific, objective facts" that the person detained is engaged in criminal activity

To my eyes, that makes exactly the distinction I was trying to draw. "Engaged in criminal activity" is intentionally ambiguous. So this statement:

he has to be able to say what crime he suspects you of before the contact.

is, I maintain, incorrect. Articulable facts leading to suspicion? Yes. Requirement that the suspicion be of a specific crime? No. While it shouldn't be a 'fishing expedition', a Terry stop is part of the hunt for crime--not just an early stage of the 'kill'.

 

[cpaspr]

Let's start a thread about what to do is a Police officer leaps on to the roof of your car from an overpass on the highway and puts his PR-24 through your sun roof in an attempt to determine if you are under the influence of NyQuil.

I'm sorry, but that's just plain funny!

Really. How many officers are going to try to make such a leap at night? After all, that's when NyQuil is used, right?

Now DayQuil. That I could see happening. Broad noon. Yep. For sure.

 

[Art Eatman]

I deliberately wear my gimme-cap I bought at the Whittington Center. Funny thing, it seems to be helpful at Border Patrol checkpoints. I guess they figure that a wetback wouldn't be in the NRA.

If I'm drinking coffee somewhere and any cop wanders up, I'm gonna do my usual grin and "Howdy" same as for anyone else. Always have. If he asks about my Shotgun News, Guns&Ammo or Soldier of Fantasy magazine, I'll immediately say something along the lines of, "Can you believe these prices, these days?" and ask him his views on what gun is best for zombies. Ask him how his deer season went, and what's his pet load?

Hey, I can drive almost anybody away, screaming into the night!

Art

 

[springmom]

I deliberately wear my gimme-cap I bought at the Whittington Center. Funny thing, it seems to be helpful at Border Patrol checkpoints. I guess they figure that a wetback wouldn't be in the NRA.

My husband wears a "Silver Bullet Brigade" hat. Young people want to know if he's into horror flicks (how to kill a werewolf....), others ask "What's that?"

If I'm drinking coffee somewhere and any cop wanders up, I'm gonna do my usual grin and "Howdy" same as for anyone else. Always have. If he asks about my Shotgun News, Guns&Ammo or Soldier of Fantasy magazine, I'll immediately say something along the lines of, "Can you believe these prices, these days?" and ask him his views on what gun is best for zombies. Ask him how his deer season went, and what's his pet load?

Hey, I can drive almost anybody away, screaming into the night!

Or make a new acquaintance/friend/possible shooting buddy/potentially useful contact in the LE community.

I must have missed the idea that this was a *scenario*. I was under the impression that this actually *occurred* to the OP. If it didn't and this is a fantasy, then it's a waste of bandwidth. If it's a real occurrence, let's hear the details.

Springmom

 

[Mainsail]

ChristopherG:

Well, all I can do is point out that you’re incorrect, in the end you can either consult a competent attorney or go on believing what you want to believe.

Engaged in criminal activity is not ambiguous at all. Washington case law if chock full of decisions where an officer seeing something suspicious does not meet the requirements of ‘reasonable articuable suspicion’. It helps if you understand what the words mean. Articuable means the officer can articulate (put into words) what illegal activity he suspects you of doing. The word wasn’t just thrown in there because it sounded good; it has a meaning that limits the rest of the phrase.

The State Supreme Court just issued this decision:
State V Gatewood:

Gatewood looked at Longley and the police cruiser, and Longley [the cop] testified that Gatewood's "eyes got big . . . like he was surprised to see us." 1 Report of Proceedings (RP) (July 7, 2005) at 7. Longley then observed Gatewood "twist his whole body to the left, inside the bus shelter, as though he was trying to hide something."

Snip

Longley jumped out of the car and said to Gatewood,"Stop. I want to talk to you." 1 RP (July 7, 2005) at 21. Gatewood turned around and walked away. Longley ordered him to stop several times, but Gatewood kept walking.
When Gatewood reached some bushes, he bent over and reached into his waistband. The officers could not see what he was doing, so they drew their guns and ordered Gatewood to stop and show his hands. Gatewood pulled something out of his waistband, threw it into the bushes, and then complied with the officers' request.

"Terry requires a reasonable, articulable suspicion, based on specific, objective facts, that the person seized has committed or is about to commit a crime." State v. Duncan, 146 Wn.2d 166, 172, 43 P.3d 513 (2002) (citing Terry, 392 U.S. at 21). The officers' actions must be justified at their inception.

...we only need to analyze the facts known to the officers up to this point: (1) Gatewood's widened eyes upon seeing the patrol car, (2) his twist to the left like he was trying to hide something, (3) his departure from the bus shelter, and (4) his crossing the street mid-block.
These facts are insufficient for a Terry stop. Startled reactions to seeing the police do not amount to reasonable suspicion. State v. Henry, 80 Wn. App. 544, 552, 910 P.2d 1290 (1995) (nervousness is not sufficient for Terry stop).

Officers' seizure of Gatewood was premature and not justified by specific, articulable facts indicating criminal activity.

Conclusion
Officers seized Gatewood to conduct a speculative criminal investigation. Our constitution protects against such warrantless seizures and requires more for a Terry stop. Since the initial stop of Gatewood was unlawful, the "subsequent search and fruits of that search are inadmissible
We reverse and suppress the evidence.

 

[ProficientRifleman]

OK I'll bite...

MarcusWendt said:

Let's start a thread about what to do is a Police officer leaps on to the roof of your car from an overpass on the highway and puts his PR-24 through your sun roof in an attempt to determine if you are under the influence of NyQuil.

First, accelerate as you approach the overpass so as to throw off the JBT's calculation of the timing of his leap.

Second, swerve into the other lane as you pass under. The JBT will be dropping, gun drawn, ninja face on, fully prepared to stick like Spiderman to the roof of your car, and cast bolts of hot lead into the driver's compartment, when...

He'll realized he has missed his objective and is about to frap in on some hot asphalt, unable to roll out of the way of the semi approaching at 70 MPH.

Howzzat?

P.S. You know they're just sitting up there too....don't you? I always look.

 

[Deanimator]

Tell us more about the experience you actually had.

No actual experience, but since I visit Chicago at least once a year, the possibility is always there.

 

[Deanimator]

The first thing out of your mouth should be, “Am I being detained?”

I just finished a business meeting with our lawyer, and asked him. That's exactly what he said.

Thanks.

 

[Deanimator]

Is Ohio really so bad that you really need to worry about that?

No.

Chicago IS.

I have to visit there at least once a year. I often find myself sitting around waiting to pick up relatives, take my cousin to do laundry, etc. Under those circumstances, I'm NEVER without a book. 98% of the time it's a gun book. The city government and police are militantly anti-gun.

 

[Deanimator]

unwanted police contacts.

Are There any other kind?

Yeah, if I call them to report a crime, or if they have some legitimate police business, such as questioning me as a [possible] witness to a crime.

 

[Deanimator]

Pay for your meal/put your book down and leave.

Nah, that's not going to work. I don't throw food or money away because somebody can't act right, no matter who it is. At that point, lawyers get involved. I'm just trying to avoid getting to that point without being bullied by someone.

 

[Deanimator]

I just want to read the whole interchange before I go giving advice on this.

How about:

"Why are you reading that?"

"Are you planning to kill someone?"

"Why does someone like you have that?"

"We don't allow stuff [books] like that here."

Or perhaps standing very close and staring.

General non-physical harassment.

 

[Deanimator]

Hey, I can drive almost anybody away, screaming into the night!

I used to take Greyhound occasionally while in college. I found a great way to prevent unwanted conversation was to read the Special Forces programmed text on improvised demolitions and pyrotechnics.

 

[springmom]

Quote:
I just want to read the whole interchange before I go giving advice on this.
How about:

"Why are you reading that?"

"Are you planning to kill someone?"

"Why does someone like you have that?"

"We don't allow stuff [books] like that here."

Or perhaps standing very close and staring.

General non-physical harassment.

Sooooooo....

This entire thread is about fantasy. Ok. Just as long as we're clear that we're discussing nothing that has ACTUALLY HAPPENED.

Even in Chicago, LEO's have other things to do than hassle people who are reading a copy of American Handgunner. Or Louis L'Amour (he was real big on guns). Or any other reading material. You're painting a enormously exaggerated picture of life in Chicago.

Now, wave your .45 around in that coffeeshop and all bets are off. But books? Give me a break.

Springmom

 

[cassandrasdaddy]

hey it coulda happened that way

 

[bdickens]

This whole thread is ridiculous! No wonder LEOs can be so insular; yahoos like you. Your tinfoil beanie must be too tight. They might not have the Second Amendment in Chicago, but they do still have the first.

Personally, I really don't have much of a problem with some cop coming over to shoot the breeze with me.

 

[EricTheBarbarian]

i doubt law enforcement would give you a hard time for a book. I would think its more likely a manager at the store would ask you to leave.

 

[MechAg94]

If that happened down here, I think it would more likely be the beginning of a friendly conversation guns/shooting/hunting. If he probes for how many guns I own, I generally don't tell anyone that anyway.

 

[Aguila Blanca]

I beg to differ. The standard for a 'Terry Stop' is Reasonable Suspicion that a crime is afoot--but he (the Officer) doesn't have to be able to articulate what precise crime he suspects until he gets to Probable Cause--at which point detention becomes arrest.

I believe you are incorrect and that Mainsail is correct.

In order for an officer to conduct a "Terry stop," the Supreme Court guidelines say that the officer must have a "reasonable suspicion, based on clearly articulable facts, that a crime has been committed, is being committed, or is about to be committed." Clearly articulable facts does not include hunches, nor does it include engaging in potentially lawful behavior such as wearing a gun if there are conditions under which wearing a gun would be legal -- such as, the state is one that issues carry permits, or is a state in which open carry is legal.

An officer cannot stop you or question you just for the heck of it. Yes, the standard is "reasonable suspicion," which is a lower standard than "probable cause" -- but it nonetheless has to be based in "clearly articulable facts."

 

[cassandrasdaddy]

folks have issues. can any of the heros flesh out the fantasy with a real life example of an adult so bothered?

 

[Don Gwinn]

Sorry, cassandrasdaddy, as entertaining as that might be, I think we're better off leaving it to the imagination.

If anyone has been hassled by random cops at a bookstore recently, you can always post about it at www.armedpolitesociety.com .

 

[cassandrasdaddy]

kill joy

 

[Kentak]

What if an LEO hassles you because of your choice of reading material....

What if an LEO hassles you because of your ethnicity....

What if an LEO hassles you because of your unusual facial hair/body piercings....

What if an LEO hassles you because of your unconventional clothing....

What if an LEO hassles you because of your sexual orientation....

What if an LEO hassles you because of your inability to speak English clearly....

I suppose any of these things could happen, probably have happened, and may even happen to someone on this forum. I guess you politely respond as the situation warrants and excuse yourself to go about your lawful activity. If you are given what appears to be an official police order to leave the area, or whatever, you do it, noting badge number. Then you file a complaint or see a civil rights lawyer.

I do want to note that given no other suspicious activity, I suspect these kinds of unwanted LE attention incidents are relatively rare.

K

 

[Art Eatman]

"...relatively rare."? About like hen's teeth, most likely.