GlockTalk.com
Home Forums Classifieds Blogs Today's Posts Search Social Groups



  
SIGN-UP
Notices

Glock Talk
Welcome To The Glock Talk Forums.

 
  
Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 06-07-2012, 12:29   #41
Mayhem like Me
Semper Paratus
 
Mayhem like Me's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2001
Posts: 16,208
Blog Entries: 3
Quote:
Originally Posted by glockaviator View Post
All available LEGAL resources. I come down on the side that you can't handcuff everyone in the vicinity, point a gun at them or otherwise threaten them and get their "permission" and search them. THAT is illegal.

As for "your job". It seems to me "your job" is to act in a LEGAL way. And yes, I realize it's not easy and the dividing line may not always be clear.

In fact the "edge" of the law seems to be always colored a bit gray. And when those areas are entered, those are the cases that go to trial. If it is obvious and without question, well, those cases don't go to trial.
excuse me I threw up a little your answer sound a lot like blah blah blah blah blah blah I have no idea


Outdoor Hub mobile, the outdoor information engine
__________________
How do you establish intent?
Well when a naked man is chasing a woman down an alley with a butcher knife and a hard on, I figure he's not collecting for the red cross...Inspector H. Callahan
Mayhem like Me is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-07-2012, 13:16   #42
actionshooter10
CLM Number 19
Charter Lifetime Member
 
actionshooter10's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Texas
Posts: 1,970
Quote:
Originally Posted by glockaviator View Post
The Aurora police will be successfully sued. Coloradans don't put up with these kind of arrests (and YES, they were ARRESTED). I am a Coloradan and it turns my stomach. If this goes unpunished it sets a HORRIBLE precedent.
You also need to familiarize yourself with the definition of the word, detained.

These people were detained pending investigation, NOT arrested.

Tell ya what, I'll do the work for you:


de·tain [dih-teyn]

verb (used with object)
1. to keep from proceeding; keep waiting; delay.


ar·rest [uh-rest] Show IPA

verb (used with object)
1. to seize (a person) by legal authority or warrant; take into custody
__________________
"Firearms stand next in importance to the constitution itself. They are the American people's liberty teeth and keystone under independence … from the hour the Pilgrims landed to the present day, events, occurences and tendencies prove that to ensure peace security and happiness, the rifle and pistol are equally indispensable … the very atmosphere of firearms anywhere restrains evil interference — they deserve a place of honor with all that's good."
George Washington
First President of the United States
actionshooter10 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-07-2012, 13:58   #43
glockaviator
Senior Member
 
glockaviator's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: Colorful Colorado
Posts: 979
The plaintiff's lawyers will argue that the citizens were indeed placed under arrest as there appears to be:
1. Restraint by handcuffs
2. Police show of force (guns drawn)
3. Time of restraint was over an hour, perhaps as long as 2 hours
4. A reasonable person would believe that the citizens were indeed under arrest.
5. They will work in the fact that the plaintiff's were coerced to allow search of their persons and vehicles. It may be relevant. Might need a ruling on that one.

And, of course, the reason it matters, is because in order to arrest someone, the police must show probably cause. Otherwise it is an illegal arrest.
__________________
Truth is stranger than fiction, fiction has to be believable.
glockaviator is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-07-2012, 14:11   #44
Sam Spade
Lifetime Membership
Senior Member
 
Sam Spade's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2003
Posts: 21,270
Quote:
Originally Posted by glockaviator View Post
The plaintiff's lawyers will argue that the citizens were indeed placed under arrest as there appears to be:
1. Restraint by handcuffs
2. Police show of force (guns drawn)
3. Time of restraint was over an hour, perhaps as long as 2 hours
4. A reasonable person would believe that the citizens were indeed under arrest.
5. They will work in the fact that the plaintiff's were coerced to allow search of their persons and vehicles. It may be relevant. Might need a ruling on that one.

And, of course, the reason it matters, is because in order to arrest someone, the police must show probably cause. Otherwise it is an illegal arrest.
Yet as of yesterday, Aurora PD had only 5 complaints about the situation. None (zero, nada, zilch, goose egg, null set) came from people who were actually there.
__________________
"To spit on your hands and lower the pike; to stand fast over the body of Leonidas the King; to be rear guard at Kunu-Ri; to stand and be still to the Birkenhead Drill; these are not rational acts. They are often merely necessary." Pournelle
Sam Spade is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-07-2012, 14:12   #45
Mayhem like Me
Semper Paratus
 
Mayhem like Me's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2001
Posts: 16,208
Blog Entries: 3
[QUOTE=glockaviator;19063160]The plaintiff's lawyers will argue that the citizens were indeed placed under arrest as there appears to be:
1. Restraint by handcuffs
2. Police show of force (guns drawn)
3. Time of restraint was over an hour, perhaps as long as 2 hours
4. A reasonable person would believe that the citizens were indeed under arrest.
5. They will work in the fact that the plaintiff's were coerced to allow search of their persons and vehicles. It may be relevant. Might need a ruling on that one.

And, of course, the reason it matters, is because in order to arrest someone, the police must show probably cause. Otherwise it is an illegal arrest.[/QUOTEtick tock tick tock goes the clock what would you do ?

Outdoor Hub mobile, the outdoor information engine
__________________
How do you establish intent?
Well when a naked man is chasing a woman down an alley with a butcher knife and a hard on, I figure he's not collecting for the red cross...Inspector H. Callahan
Mayhem like Me is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-07-2012, 14:18   #46
c01
Crazy Eye
 
c01's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: Spokane
Posts: 551
Blog Entries: 1
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tiro Fijo View Post
It was wrong and who ordered this should be fired. Here's why from a Judge:

http://foxnewsinsider.com/2012/06/06...d-bank-robber/

Agree. The people who are for this tactic....wow
c01 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-07-2012, 14:22   #47
Sam Spade
Lifetime Membership
Senior Member
 
Sam Spade's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2003
Posts: 21,270
Quote:
Originally Posted by glockaviator View Post
The plaintiff's lawyers will argue that the citizens were indeed placed under arrest as there appears to be:
1. Restraint by handcuffs
2. Police show of force (guns drawn)
3. Time of restraint was over an hour, perhaps as long as 2 hours
4. A reasonable person would believe that the citizens were indeed under arrest.
5. They will work in the fact that the plaintiff's were coerced to allow search of their persons and vehicles. It may be relevant. Might need a ruling on that one.
To hit your points:
1. Handcuffs are a safety tool, and appropriate in securing unknowns in the search for an armed robber who may have a a hostage.
2. The show of force was applied to unknown and unsecured people who might have access to firearms. None of the detainees faced a gun while moved off to the side.
3. Time of restraint works out to about 5 minute per car that needed to be secured and cleared. Excessive?
4. The people were undoubtedly told at least a bit of what was going on, and a reasonable person would have known that the search for a bank robber wasn't going to lead to him.
5. Whether coerced or not, no contraband was found in any of the innocent parties' cars. No charges, nothing to supress, nothing to be made whole.


And as has been asked---tell us *your* plan to solve the problem. Violent man with guns has robbed a bank, threatening death to both employees and general public. He might have a hostage. You have a tip, whatchya gonna do?
__________________
"To spit on your hands and lower the pike; to stand fast over the body of Leonidas the King; to be rear guard at Kunu-Ri; to stand and be still to the Birkenhead Drill; these are not rational acts. They are often merely necessary." Pournelle

Last edited by Sam Spade; 06-07-2012 at 14:25..
Sam Spade is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-07-2012, 14:23   #48
Sam Spade
Lifetime Membership
Senior Member
 
Sam Spade's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2003
Posts: 21,270
Quote:
Originally Posted by c01 View Post
Agree. The people who are for this tactic....wow
Keep reading on the thread. The (ex-)judge is full of it.
__________________
"To spit on your hands and lower the pike; to stand fast over the body of Leonidas the King; to be rear guard at Kunu-Ri; to stand and be still to the Birkenhead Drill; these are not rational acts. They are often merely necessary." Pournelle

Last edited by Sam Spade; 06-07-2012 at 14:24..
Sam Spade is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-07-2012, 14:35   #49
actionshooter10
CLM Number 19
Charter Lifetime Member
 
actionshooter10's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Texas
Posts: 1,970
Quote:
Originally Posted by glockaviator View Post
The plaintiff's lawyers will argue that the citizens were indeed placed under arrest as there appears to be:
1. Restraint by handcuffs
2. Police show of force (guns drawn)
3. Time of restraint was over an hour, perhaps as long as 2 hours
4. A reasonable person would believe that the citizens were indeed under arrest.
5. They will work in the fact that the plaintiff's were coerced to allow search of their persons and vehicles. It may be relevant. Might need a ruling on that one.

And, of course, the reason it matters, is because in order to arrest someone, the police must show probably cause. Otherwise it is an illegal arrest.
The Supreme Court has ruled there are 3 types of police encounters
1. Consensual Stop
2. Detention
3. Arrest

Lets use our imagination briefly.

I get an assault call involving a weapon.
I arrive on scene and observe you coming out of the house where the assault was committed. I have no actor information.
I draw my gun and order you to the ground where I place you in restraints.

Are you under arrest?

No. I have no probable cause to arrest you.

You're detained. You're not free to leave and you will remain detained until 1. My safety is not in jeopardy, and 2. I determine that you did not commit a crime.

The Supreme Court has never set a time frame for a stop. They've gone out of their way not to.

The circumstances involved and public interest will determine what is a "reasonable" time period to keep someone detained.

I would love to see this go the Supreme Court. I believe it would be upheld.

The police department did an excellent job communicating to the people they had detained why they were detained and what was going on.
__________________
"Firearms stand next in importance to the constitution itself. They are the American people's liberty teeth and keystone under independence … from the hour the Pilgrims landed to the present day, events, occurences and tendencies prove that to ensure peace security and happiness, the rifle and pistol are equally indispensable … the very atmosphere of firearms anywhere restrains evil interference — they deserve a place of honor with all that's good."
George Washington
First President of the United States
actionshooter10 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-07-2012, 14:53   #50
larry_minn
Silver Membership
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Dec 1999
Location: Minnesota
Posts: 18,142
Guess it would have been a bad day for me if I had been on that road. Legally armed in pickup with MN plates. Since I had a gun I MUST be robber. Heck they likely would find duct tape, extra clothes (must be my disguise) and in winter stocking mask/scarfs/gloves.
Then they would arrest me for RAPE as well. (I have the tool)
BTW a road block where they look at people/glance in trunk let folk go. Vs pull people at gunpoint/cuff/restrain them..
larry_minn is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-07-2012, 15:32   #51
RussP
Moderator
 
RussP's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Central Virginia
Posts: 44,659
Blog Entries: 64
My question is, "What the hell was running through the bad guy's mind during those two hours as they were getting closer and closer and closer...?"
__________________
Freedom has a taste to those who fight and almost die, that the protected will never know.

"Comment is free, but facts are sacred." C.P. Scott, 1921
RussP is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-07-2012, 15:47   #52
glockaviator
Senior Member
 
glockaviator's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: Colorful Colorado
Posts: 979
Police always want to be able to detain without arrest. That way they don't have to have probable cause.
__________________
Truth is stranger than fiction, fiction has to be believable.
glockaviator is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-07-2012, 16:02   #53
Sam Spade
Lifetime Membership
Senior Member
 
Sam Spade's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2003
Posts: 21,270
Quote:
Originally Posted by glockaviator View Post
Police always want to be able to detain without arrest. That way they don't have to have probable cause.
Which may have something to do with the fact that we conduct investigations way more frequently than we bring charges...
__________________
"To spit on your hands and lower the pike; to stand fast over the body of Leonidas the King; to be rear guard at Kunu-Ri; to stand and be still to the Birkenhead Drill; these are not rational acts. They are often merely necessary." Pournelle
Sam Spade is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-07-2012, 16:55   #54
DaBigBR
No Infidels!
 
DaBigBR's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Circling the wagons.
Posts: 15,924
Quote:
Originally Posted by glockaviator View Post
All available LEGAL resources. I come down on the side that you can't handcuff everyone in the vicinity, point a gun at them or otherwise threaten them and get their "permission" and search them. THAT is illegal.
Please provide case law supporting your assertion that some how handcuffing a person makes them "under arrest" and not merely "detained." You imply that the police need to have probable cause to place a person in handcuffs.

I submit the following:

Terry v. Ohio, 392 U.S. 1 (1968)
Landmark case specifically establishing "reasonable, articulable suspicion" as the standard for investigatory stops.

United States v. Place, 462 U.S. 696 (1983)
In this case, the USSC specifically declined to set an outside maximum period of detention during a "Terry" stop, stating: "Although we decline to adopt any outside time limitation for a permissible Terry stop, we have never approved a seizure of the person for the prolonged 90-minute period involved here and cannot do so on the facts presented by this case,” and, “In assessing the effect of the length of the detention, we take into account whether the police diligently pursue their investigation"

Illinois v. Caballes, 543 U.S. 405 (2005)
Continued detention to bring a drug-sniffing dog to the scene of a traffic stop is reasonable as long as it does not unreasonably prolong the stop.



United States v. Sharpe, 470 U.S. 675 (1985)
In assessing whether a detention is too long in duration to be justified as an investigative stop, it is appropriate to examine whether the police diligently pursued a means of investigation that was likely to confirm or dispel their suspicions quickly, during which time it was necessary to detain the defendant. Here, the DEA agent diligently pursued his investigation, and clearly no delay unnecessary to the investigation was involved.

Gallegos v. City of Colorado Springs
"A Terry stop does not automatically elevate into an arrest where police officers use handcuffs on a suspect or place him on the ground. Police officers are authorized to take such steps as are reasonably necessary to protect their personal safety and to maintain the status quo during the course of a Terry stop."

People of California v. Osborne
United States v. Stewart

All cases where handcuffing during an investigative detention was reasonable.

In re Carlos M. 220 CA3 372,385 (1990)
“The fact that a defendant is handcuffed while being detained does not, by itself, transform a detention into an arrest.”

United States v. Acosta-Colon
"Officers engaged in an otherwise lawful stop must be permitted to take measures—including the use of handcuffs—they believe reasonably necessary to protect themselves from harm, or to safeguard the security of others."

Haynie v. County of Los Angeles
"A brief, although complete, restriction of liberty, such as handcuffing, during a Terry stop is not a de facto arrest, if not excessive under the circumstances.”

US v. Neff, 300 F.3d 1217 (10th Cir. 2002)
The allowable scope of an investigative detention cannot be determined by reference to a bright-line rule; "common sense and ordinary human experience must govern over rigid criteria."

United States v. Hensley, 469 US 221 (1985)
When police have a reasonable suspicion, grounded in specific and articulable facts, that a person they encounter was involved in or is wanted in connection with a completed felony, then a Terry stop may be made to investigate that suspicion
...
Since police officers should not be required to take unnecessary risks in performing their duties, they are authorized to take such steps as [are] reasonably necessary to protect their personal safety and to maintain the status quo during the course of [a Terry] stop.

United States v. Maguire
The use of handcuffs to address legitimate officer safety concerns during a Terry stop or investigative detention does not transform that detention into an arrest

Bruzy and Riordan v. Trooper Joyner, et. al.
Troopers received a report of a possible gunshot fired from a vehicle. The vehicle was the subject of a high risk stop and the occupant (Bruzy) was handcuffed. Her fiance, Riordan, was traveling in a separate vehicle and stopped ahead of the scene. He was also detained and handcuffed, despite not being party to the original complaint. They filed a lawsuit and the court ruled that the detention and handcuffing were lawful measures taken in response to reasonable, articulable suspicion, and no "full blown arrest" occurred.
http://www.ctd.uscourts.gov/Opinions...JS.Riordan.pdf

Sorry, I got tired of looking up and writing proper citations after a while. I eagerly await the case law and/or statutes that you have to present in support of your position.
__________________
"Logic is rarely the engine that propels a police department forward."

-David Simon in "Homicide"
DaBigBR is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-07-2012, 17:20   #55
glockaviator
Senior Member
 
glockaviator's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: Colorful Colorado
Posts: 979
Those people were all involved in the crime or related somehow to the person who was involved. What is different about what Aurora police did, was they handcuffed and detained and searched 20 or more people whose only involvement in the crime was WAITING AT THE RED LIGHT! They were "arrested" for just being there.

THAT is a big difference.

Police can't just cuff everyone down and then go through and eliminate people as suspects. Not in masse and not when they are not remotely involved in the crime.
__________________
Truth is stranger than fiction, fiction has to be believable.
glockaviator is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-07-2012, 17:33   #56
kenpoprofessor
Senior Member
 
kenpoprofessor's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: Ex POW in the PRK now N. Phoenix AZ
Posts: 5,228
For all you guys that think it was OK to use these tactics, you should be ashamed of yourself. It's supposed to be difficult to arrest, try, and adjudicate a person, it's the checks and balances of the legal system. It shouldn't be easy for an officer to just arrest and process a person and say "let the judge or jury settle it, I'm going home tonight".

For those who think it was a use of a good tactic, this is what Obama thought of his agenda, and you people are making the same objection.


Have a great gun carryin' Kenpo day

Clyde
__________________
"Occasionally, Mr. Darwin offers a spontaneous IQ test, some people fail."
kenpoprofessor is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-07-2012, 17:48   #57
lpo
what?!?!?!?!?
 
lpo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: mississippi
Posts: 1,415
Send a message via Yahoo to lpo
Quote:
Originally Posted by kenpoprofessor View Post
For all you guys that think it was OK to use these tactics, you should be ashamed of yourself. It's supposed to be difficult to arrest, try, and adjudicate a person, it's the checks and balances of the legal system. It shouldn't be easy for an officer to just arrest and process a person and say "let the judge or jury settle it, I'm going home tonight".

For those who think it was a use of a good tactic, this is what Obama thought of his agenda, and you people are making the same objection.

Good Grief. Obama Blames Founding Fathers For His Failures - YouTube

Have a great gun carryin' Kenpo day

Clyde
Well, they only arrested the bank robber suspect, not anyone else. Considering it took "up to 2 hours" and all those other people they had to get through first, id day it was pretty damn difficult to get them arrested.

Have a gay ****** carryin' *****slap fighting day

Outdoor Hub mobile, the outdoor information engine
__________________
"Stupid hurts" -- USMCsilver
lpo is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-07-2012, 17:51   #58
rockapede
Senior Member
 
rockapede's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Posts: 1,302
Quote:
Originally Posted by kenpoprofessor View Post
For all you guys that think it was OK to use these tactics, you should be ashamed of yourself. It's supposed to be difficult to arrest, try, and adjudicate a person, it's the checks and balances of the legal system. It shouldn't be easy for an officer to just arrest and process a person and say "let the judge or jury settle it, I'm going home tonight".

For those who think it was a use of a good tactic, this is what Obama thought of his agenda, and you people are making the same objection.

Good Grief. Obama Blames Founding Fathers For His Failures - YouTube

Have a great gun carryin' Kenpo day

Clyde
Where in the world did you get the idea that it's "supposed" to be difficult to detain or arrest someone? I think you need to familiarize yourself with the level of proof required for reasonable suspicion and probable cause.

The court system is the most definitely the proper arena for defining the constitutional legality of any given tactic or action. Do I think this case is borderline? Heck yeah. However, not every situation falls neatly into the extreme right or sovereign citizen's view of the Constitution.
rockapede is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-07-2012, 17:52   #59
RetailNinja
Senior Member
 
RetailNinja's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Tuktoyaktuk
Posts: 1,421
Send a message via AIM to RetailNinja
KenpoWat
__________________
Conservatism is a cardiac disorder - Brietbart
Liberalism is a mental disorder - Savage
RetailNinja is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-07-2012, 18:56   #60
DaBigBR
No Infidels!
 
DaBigBR's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Circling the wagons.
Posts: 15,924
Quote:
Originally Posted by glockaviator View Post
Those people were all involved in the crime or related somehow to the person who was involved. What is different about what Aurora police did, was they handcuffed and detained and searched 20 or more people whose only involvement in the crime was WAITING AT THE RED LIGHT! They were "arrested" for just being there.

THAT is a big difference.

Police can't just cuff everyone down and then go through and eliminate people as suspects. Not in masse and not when they are not remotely involved in the crime.
In this case, they had specific, articulable facts that led them to believe that the bank robber was at the intersection. The fact that most of them proved to be uninvolved is completely immaterial.

What more could you want?
__________________
"Logic is rarely the engine that propels a police department forward."

-David Simon in "Homicide"
DaBigBR is offline   Reply With Quote

 
  
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump




All times are GMT -6. The time now is 16:32.




Homepage
FAQ
Forums
Calendar
Advertise
Gallery
GT Wiki
GT Blogs
Social Groups
Classifieds


Users Currently Online: 1,074
333 Members
741 Guests

Most users ever online: 2,672
Aug 11, 2014 at 2:31