Old Wound: When I Was Arrested (long, story format, lacking direction)

The BBQ Pit
41

By your own admission, you were a felon at the time. What you are not is a convicted felon.

Bullshit. The cops didn’t decide you were guilty nor did they decide you were innocent. What they did do was arrest you on suspicion of committing a crime. You could’ve gone to court, as Jodi keeps telling you and you keep refusing to hear, and fought the charges.

Personally, I think you are either confusing or intentionally leaving out the rather major issue of what charges you were facing. To me it’s obvious that you were not facing the charges of breaking and entering, but rather were facing the charges of having an illegal loaded firearm in the vehicle. Ever hear of the charge of carrying a concealed weapon?

Right, they were continuing to investigate an apparent crime (that which the alarm is supposed to alert them) and were also investigating an actual crime. Care to guess which one that was?

I’ve snipped some of this out. But here’s the rub: you were guilty of the felony. You admitted that in the OP. Are you or are you not familiar with the concept of lesser included offenses? The DA doesn’t just make up a crime to charge you with instead of the one for which the cops arrested you on suspion of committing. Well, at least a good DA doesn’t. Since you were, in fact, transporting the illegal firearm, then that is what’s known as a lesser included offense to your carrying a concealed firearm in your vehicle. In case you haven’t guessed it yet: your car was the transportation. You were operating the car. Therefore you were transporting the firearm illegally.

Actually, I don’t think the DA gave a rat’s left behind which crime you got convicted of. It was your choice. Given the scenario you’ve described in the OP, I think the prosecution was on dang firm ground.

Let’s see: you were guilty of the more serious crime and the prosecution offered you a plea to a lesser included offense whereby your life would not get ruined. That you don’t accept the fact that you were guilty is irrelevant. The fact remains that, by your own admission (but not acceptance), your ass was guilty.

Actually, no. The DA’s opposition in the next election would be more than happy to publicize each and every case in which a guilty felon “got off” due to the prosecutor or the cops screwing up. That’s big in politics, you realize, trashing your opponent. Even better when the facts are there.

What fixing the odds? You were guilty of the crime originally charged, remember? That’s 100% guilty and if you wanted to be stubborn and take up the court’s time, and the taxpayer’s money, you were more than welcome to do it. Not that that would’ve been any smarter than feloniously carrying the weapon around, but you were more than welcome to do it. And since you were guilty, and the evidence proved it, unless you’re OJ Simpson and getting tried shortly after the LA riots, your tush would’ve been off to the slammer.

See my comment above about the DA’s opposition.

See my comment above about the DA’s opposition.

Actually, you got this one right. You could’ve lost time, freedom, money, and reputation by becoming a convicted felon instead of just a felon or you could’ve just lost money and the illegal weapon by becoming a convicted (remember, kids, admitting in court to the judge in a non-jury trial that you did the crime is a conviction) misdemeanor law breaker.

Bullshit. What it constitutes is the “system” did you a fucking big favor.

And the cops knew this prior to seeing your ass driving away from the apparent scene of a crime exactly how?

Except for the minor bit of the smartass and flippant replies to the cop’s queries.

Nor did they know that you were not the criminal fleeing the scene of a crime.

Bullshit. Given the evidence at hand, they made the proper choices.

AGAIN! Your feeling that the cop didn’t have a right to search your vehicle does not, in fact, mean the cop did not have that right.

Actually, the biggest reason you had for not likely beating it was you were guilty.

Let me explain this to you just one more time: IT’S THE SAME FREAKING CASE! Brush up on the concept of lesser included offense.

And, I have to say, I’m assuming that you’re not, in fact, as brain dead as your latest postings appear to make you. Or did you have your dog type them? Haven’t you figured it out yet? The “system” did you a fucking big favor so quit your bitching about them arresting you when you got caught committing a freaking felony!

Which reminds me: you were a criminal fleeing the scene of a crime. You sure as hell didn’t know why the freaking alaarm went off and, again by your own admission, you were bent on fleeing the scene. And you were a criminal at the time: remember the little bit about the illegal weapon?

42

Well, three comments:

  1. Juries are a (semi) random sampling of the population within the jurisdiction based upon their ability to impartially weigh the evidence. They aren’t people you happened to share the story with in a venue known for its animosity. Not that we can’t be objective…we just have no requirement to be.

  2. Now that I think about it, you never actually “got caught” with the gun. You flat out told them you had it in the car! You volunteered this information to the police and now you’re bitching to us that they unfairly used that information against you?

  3. You said: “That you consider this a viable choice baffels me. 100% chance of not being a felon versus an indeterminable chance of not becoming a felon; hmmm…”

hmm…is right. Keep going with that thought. 100% chance of not being a felon vs X% chance of becoming a felon and 1-X% chance of getting off scot free. No misdemeanor, no nothing. I too think you made the right decision taking the misdemeanor, but that doesn’t mean you didn’t have a very good shot of getting off. If not from jury that apparently wants to hang you, then from the apellate court who can clearly see your rights being violated.

43

Ender: exactly how were rights violated?

44

The OP was about the heavy handed methods of the police and their ‘testosterone-ridden morality’, not whether a crime had really been commited or there was a gun in the car, both of those are clear. Everybody getting around a table and playing Amateur Lawyer with presumption of innocence, constitutional rights, definition of felony and probable cause is missing the point a little.

I stand by my post, the police are in a priviledged position and should be held accountable to a higher standard of morality. Sure it can be a dangerous job, and maybe its hard work sometimes, but so is being a coalminer or a firefighter, and they don’t get to treat people like k.os was treated, or for that matter how Eris was treated. Sure he could have been a little less lippy, but the police are entitled to make him feel like shit because he shot his mouth off?

Hamlet, you’re absolutely right without knowing it, the police do have to earn respect, the same as everybody else, And the more they get the reputation of abusing their authority, even in something as inconsequential as Eris’ arrest, the harder they have to work.

'It sounds to me like he was telling you how hard his job is and that he was as scared of being shot as you were, a little bonding over how tense a situation was by two survivors. ’ You’re kidding right?

‘I won’t even waste my breath (or typing hands) with Moonshine’s comments.’

You cut me there man, you cut me real deep.

45

This is why I’m glad the cops in this country don’t carry guns.

And this:

is why I’m glad it’s so damn difficult to get hold of one.

pan

46

I didn’t read anything slightly immoral about how these cops did their job. I’m sure it sucked being in eris’s position, but still.

Think about it. Everything he described would lead any police officer to think he was there to rob the place. And everything he said is pretty much what a guilty person would have said too. You can call it a fucked up series of coincidences, but you can’t call it bad police work. As far as I can tell, there was no abuse of authority.

47

You’re right Spooje, but what about k.os?

48

I’m sorry. I don’t know what that means. Please explain.

49

No, they didn’t. What they did do was hold me at the scene and asked a battery of questions. The attitiude I typed above is more indicative of the end of the conversation, not the beginning. Then they talked to my friend. THEN they decided to search the car. The female cop was in the car, rooting around. He asks, “Is she going to find anything?” I tell him what she is going to find.

What I would have gone to court over is fighting the probable cause to search, NOT the concealed carry charge (which is what I WAS arrested for). The concealed carry charge would have had to have been dropeed, by my understanding, if they didn’t legally obtain that evidence.

The only thing that’s obvious to me is that you aren’t listening to what I’m telling you.

  1. Cops check on car & driver through dispatch. Nothing.
  2. Cops ask what I was doing. I give them a non-criminal answer.
  3. Cops decide they can search my vehicle without warrant or permission.
  4. erl gets arrested for concealed carry.

Care to get a clue? They were only investigating an apparent crime. They had a person who claimed to have nothing to do with it. During the course of the investigation they would find no result of break-in. Zero evidence of break-in.

I belive I noted that in the second paragraph of the OP. Thanks for finally “getting it.”

Sure they did: the stiffest crime they could reasonably get a conviction on.

Are you actually breathing? When was I unclear that I understand my guilt?

All the more reason to charge me with something they were sure to stick.

DUDE, you do understand that my guilt or innocence as far as it applies to the justice system requires that it be demonstrated in a court? Unless you are now advocating vigilante justice, spare me your guilty outside a court attitude.

And they were 100% guilty of not having probable cause, how about that? Oh, it wasn’t tried in court but they were guilty of it. How’s that sit with you?

Speaking of OJ, you may understand that I feel they did not properly obtain the evidence in question. Or is this too hard for you to understand?

Are you upset that I admit my guilt in the matter? Does it hurt you to think that I saw the system not work correctly (in my opinion, and some others here)? In short, what is your entire fucking problem? Are you Charles Bronson, issuing Pit Justice from the Moral High Ground? Or, are you just some flamer who is ignoring what I posted to try and issue pot-shots. YES I WAS FUCKING GUILTY. I have mentioned that SEVERAL FUCKING TIMES. IF I SHOUT WILL YOU UNDERSTAND BETTER? How about bold? BOLD CAPS??? I WAS GUILTY OF CONCEALED CARRY. Man, fucking idiot! I am saying that the police were also guilty of incorrectly wielding their power and that they fucking got away with it.

They did me a favor? You, sir, are the biggest piece of shit I’ve ever had the non-pleasure of being around for that comment. How the fuck did they do me a favor? They charged me with the thing they were most likely to get a conviction on, or a guilty plea on, or both. It wasn’t a tough decision, see? They didn’t do it because they liked me, stupid fuck.

(is this thing on?) They didn’t run up, drag me out of the car, and start rifling through everything demanding I tell them what was up. They ran my liscence, they ran my social, they checked my plates and registration. They asked me my side of the story.

Then, after all that with no further indication of a crime or a potential crime, they figure they should search my car anyway.

AGAIN! I am stating why I feel the law slighted me with its arbitrary hand.

Obviously you have been reading a different thread. What I would beat is that they had a right to assume probable cause for search without permission or warrant.

No, it was not the same freaking case. Brush up on the idea that one involves carrying an unloaded weapon improperly, and one involves having a loaded weapon within reach.

Brush up on sentence comprehension.

With friends like this, who needs enemies?

50

erl, I realize my question is off-topic, but I would like to know anyway. Did your lawyer discuss with you the possibilty of bringing a motion to suppress evidence based on the search of your car? I don’t know which jurisdiction you are in, so I have no idea whether this would be available to you. In my jurisdiction, in a motion like this the judge would hear evidence relating to the reason the police were in your car. If the judge decides it was righteous, then you know its time to take your medicine; but, if the judge decides its a bad reason, the search and your gun would likely have gone away.

Monty, go to law school. You said:

It is not by itself a conviction. What it is, is a judicial confession which will be used against you. In my part of the world, every felony plea is a trial. If it is an agreed plea, the defendant signs a judicial confession. This is then State’s Exhibit #1 in the plea “trial”.

But, you asserted that it is a conviction. I’d like to see you back that up. In my jurisdiction, for historical reasons, it is not always a conviction. If you admit the crime and the judge sends you to a penitentiary, it is a final conviction. Such a conviction can be used to enhance that person’s punishment should he commit a new felony. Probation, however, is a horse of a different color. If a defendant ends up with what we call straight probation, the judge accepts a plea of guilty and finds the defendant guilty. This is a half-way conviction. Straight probation is a conviction, except that it cannot be used to enhance punishment unless that probation was revoked. The other form of probation is called deferred adjudication. In this probation, the judge accepts a plea of guilty but defers finding the defendant guilty. This is not a conviction. This cannot be used to enhance punishment unless the defendant is adjudicated guilty. If a person lives out a deferred probation, he is never convicted of that offense.

Remember kids, don’t take legal advice from Monty.

51

We actually discussed several options. One was that the concealed carry itself was bunk due to the location of the gun… it was not in an easily accessable location. Another was, in fact, to challenge the search itself. Indeed, had the search been nullified any evidence obtained would have to have been thrown out. I don’t know if I would have my gun back, but no charges could have been pressed at all.

In the end, however, a first degree misdemeanor (fine, suspended jailtime, and 40 hours community service with 12 months probation was what I ended up getting) was what they offered (well, they couldn’t guarantee the sentence, of course, but both parties agreed this was likely) and after consideration it was better to take this then to try to push my luck. It was, of course, my decision the whole way, and the lawyer did say he would fight the search, but he agreed it was best to take the mis and forget the whole affair. He was a good lawyer… a rat would try to push the case to make more money. Actually, I’ve never had experience or known personally people who had rat lawyers. I think they’re a good bunch, actually.

Which is only going to serve to piss other people off: like the lawyers, hate the government? :stuck_out_tongue:

But… yeah, he had discussed several methods of avoiding a felony charge with me.

52

Wanted to mention: there was little doubt in anyone’s mind that I had broken a law. The doubt was which law actually applied (was it, in fact, concealed carry felony or not) and if the evidence was legally obtained.

53

erislover, I had just been wondering whether there was an intermediate step you could have taken in your defense. It was just curiosity, since it is only a part of your story.

I think it would be fair to say the police were allowed to stop you to find out why you were leaving a building with a alarm sounding, but I’m still trying to figure out what they should have done after that. I do think Monty got it backwards - the police need to be able to explain their actions at the beginning with what they know at the beginning. They don’t get to explain their actions at the end with what they learned at the end. Saying, “look, he really is criminal”, doesn’t excuse them - they have to be right from the start.

54

Interesting to note my own opinions on the matter: I did, and do, believe that I was guilty of concealed carry. My lawyer felt this was arguable due to the location of the weapon in regards to legal wording.

I wonder if anyone is using that gun right now (it was a .45) or if they just disposed of it?

55

Monty, there were two rights that may have been violated.

First, the 4th amendment and the Police officer’s right to physically search your car. This may or may not have been a violation. I suppose it’s up to a court to decide

Second, his 8th amendment rights were violated. I do not have the case here, but I’ll try to find it when I get home. A suspect was interogated for over 25 hours. He had a 7 hour break where he was kept in a cold cell and not allowed to lay down to sleep. The court found this to be improper police interrogation procedures.
If what Eris is describing is correct, then his not being allowed to put his arms in his shirt and not being allowed to sleep is also a violation.

If the police didn’t mirandize him, that’s a third violation. Either way, Eris did have the right to remain silent and he did have the right to contact a lawyer and stop the interrogation. Why he didn’t, I have no idea.

Erislover, do you see at all why people are getting upset here? Ignore that you were, for all practical purposes, guilty. We both accept that. You could have fought back.
“But it would have been too tooooouuuuughh…”
Fuck that. Then stop bitching about it. You had the choice and you chose the path of least resistence.
“They shouldn’t have searched my car!”
Then tell them not to! Speak up and say “Get a warrant. You are NOT looking in my vehicle.”

Not only did you not invoke your rights, not only did you not fight for your rights, but now you’re bitching to us that the government is too powerful. Well fuck yes it is! Especially when you turn a blind eye to every opportunity you have to lessen the government’s power.

Imagine it’s you and the government in a fight. “Hey!” you scream “they’ve got a sword and all I have is my fists. That’s completely unfair.”
Someone taps you on the shoulder and says “There’s a sword waiting for you on the table five feet away.”
“You mean you want me to walk all the way over there?!? Fuck that! I resign government. Good fight.”

Two years later. “Lousy government and their swords…”

56

Whatever. It wasn’t the difficulty of the task, it was weighing the potential losses versus the potential benefits.
Choice 1: accept the plea bargain.
Result 1: Remain a free man, pay fines, lose gun.
Probability of result: 100%

Choice 2: Fight the system.
Result 2a: Win, remain a free man, pay legal fees
Probability of result: indeterminate.
Result 2b: Lose, become a felon, pay fines, serve jail time, lose certain rights, pay fines and legal fees, and then end up on probation or parole.
Probability of result: indeterminate

Perhaps you have something both witty and stunning to demonstrate why I would choose any other option. Perhaps you’ve failed to understand the whole point. But there is a 100% probability that it wasn’t “too tough.” Thanks for playing at the erl casino, we’ve got an ATM machine for your convenience.

57

IANAL, but if I’m not incorrect (and would one of the lawyer Dopers weigh in here if I am), your car is not completely protected under the 4th anywhere. If you’re speeding, and the officer thinks you’re stoned, he or she can search your car. If the officer merely thinks you’re drunk, he or she can pull you over and search your car. A car is not a home, and as such has different requirements for S&S.

Watch “COPS” sometime. Jeez, even a Springer redneck knows that the fuzz can get into your car for no more reason than you refuse them permission!

58

I watch COPS every Saturday evening when baseball decides to not interrupt regular programming. COPS and America’s Most Wanted, actually. I’m addicted to those shows. And wildest police videos, too.

And I’ve yet to see any officers search anything arbitrarily. They ask, each and every time. And they always see something indicative of a crime: smell alcohol on their breath, smell chemicals from a meth lab, etc etc. They were welcome to shine a flashlight all throughout my car. I would have gladly opened the trunk for them. Since the car was a two seater there was little else to see.

Did I mention the place was a lumber yard? No, I see that I didn’t. Heh. What could two guys in a tiny car steal from a lumber yard? Oh, I know! I know!— er, nothing!

But, alas, why be polite to a suspect when you can simply use your power to get what you want? Well, many cops would, no doubt in my mind. I’ve known a few police officers and seen many handle all sorts of assorted situations IRL. That is, many cops have the power but don’t use it.

59

My idle curiousity again.
erislover, what was the felony that they charged you with? If you are uncomfortable answering this particularly, would you answer categorically? (something like, property crime, trespassing).

A two seat car at a lumber yard doesn’t look so good for the police. But, come on and admit that you were trying to steal nails. :slight_smile:

60

ERIS, a few points:

  1. I have asked if you could look at the situation from the cops’ point of view. It seems clear that you are unable or unwilling to do so.

  2. I have explained that they probably had probable cause to search your car, your bleating to the contrary notwithstanding.

  3. I have corrected your construing your decision not to take your chances with the system as having “no choice” but to plead guilty, which is utter bullshit on its face, as everyone but you seems to have grasped.

  4. In light of recent events, I no longer give the smallest shit about this topic.

I hereby leave you to hang from your cross; I hope you at least enjoy the view.