NFL Arrests and Lawsuits - 2018

[Akrasian]

A couple things. First, if a police officer orders you to stop - legally you must stop, even if you have not done anything wrong. The courts have ruled on this repeatedly - they are allowed leeway for their own protection. If they order you to stop and you run, you will be pursued, you will be restrained forcefully, and if they feel there is danger, you may have a gun pulled on you. Especially since the Bennett situation occurred in a public place with many witnesses, he didn't even have the argument that he wanted to get to a public place for his own safety. Rather, he crouched down and tried to escape, when the police were investigating a report of an active shooter.

Now, that level of cooperation is required. Most lawyers will say though that if they try to question you, you should shut up except for asking for an attorney. It is too easy to say the wrong thing even if you are innocent. You should also not voluntarily agree to a search. If they have probable cause they will search anyway, but if they are fishing they will be stymied. No cop wants to do a search and get an arrest that will then be overturned by a judge. It's a waste of time, and it will likely be used against them in future challenges - and defense attorneys will look up every case that officer has been involved in.

 

[nighttrain]

best advice, do not interact with the police. Should you have to talk to them, say attorney please, and remember the 2nd liar doesn't stand a chance

 

[Farr Be It]

You are free to do what you want, but we all have rights. You don't get to treat an innocent person like a criminal because they refuse to cooperate. Trying to justify that is weak sauce. You don't have to cooperate with law enforcement, and it's often detrimental to your interests to cooperate with law enforcement, even when you're innocent. We have these rights because they are a check on the police power of state and federal governments.

That's the opposite of the advice that the vast majority of lawyers will give you.

I highly doubt that, but there are a lot of people out there who don't trust the police and don't believe the police have they're best interests at heart. There's nothing dumb about that stance.

Anarchist, Jerry?

 

[kurtfaulk]

That's the opposite of the advice that the vast majority of lawyers will give you.

Yeah because they want you to pay them $500 an hour to handle your case. Always trying to find ways to line their pockets.

.

 

[jrry32]

I dont have any reason to not cooperate. I have had many encounters with law enforcement and find that by cooperating I probably get out of 1 or 2 speeding tickets a year, keeping my driving record spotless. Being an ass and acting like the police are out to get me probably would have cost me my license again, due to lots of tickets.

The only people that have no reason to cooperate are those who are breaking the law, therefore cooperation may cause them to go to jail. But many of them would get off with a warning if they would just cooperate.

We're not talking about speeding (at least as far as I understood the conversation). You've broken the law, have to cooperate, and are only benefited by cooperating when you're pulled over for speeding.

Anarchist, Jerry?

Nope. There's nothing "anarchist" about valuing your constitutional rights.

Yeah because they want you to pay them $500 an hour to handle your case. Always trying to find ways to line their pockets.

.

No, it's because anything you say can be held against you in a court of law. Choose to speak with police at your own peril, but they cannot be used to corroborate your story. What you tell them can only hurt you if you end up being tried for a crime.

A couple things. First, if a police officer orders you to stop - legally you must stop, even if you have not done anything wrong. The courts have ruled on this repeatedly - they are allowed leeway for their own protection. If they order you to stop and you run, you will be pursued, you will be restrained forcefully, and if they feel there is danger, you may have a gun pulled on you. Especially since the Bennett situation occurred in a public place with many witnesses, he didn't even have the argument that he wanted to get to a public place for his own safety. Rather, he crouched down and tried to escape, when the police were investigating a report of an active shooter.

Now, that level of cooperation is required. Most lawyers will say though that if they try to question you, you should shut up except for asking for an attorney. It is too easy to say the wrong thing even if you are innocent. You should also not voluntarily agree to a search. If they have probable cause they will search anyway, but if they are fishing they will be stymied. No cop wants to do a search and get an arrest that will then be overturned by a judge. It's a waste of time, and it will likely be used against them in future challenges - and defense attorneys will look up every case that officer has been involved in.

Generally correct. Although, when there's shooting going on, you can't really blame a person for running.

 

[12intheBox]

What does cooperate mean?

If it means make admissions to elements of a crime - then no don’t cooperate.

If it means be polite and repspectful, then always cooperate

If it means consent to a search then never cooperate.

Always clarify whether you are free to go or being detained.

Clarify whether you are being ordered to do something or asked. If asked, say no, if ordered - do it.

If being detained - say you want a lawyer present before you say or do anything.

If you are free to go, then go

Whether to do field sobriety tests or blow into their machine is a state by state decision. Sometimes yes, most times no. In some states you lose your license just for refusing.

Those are the basics.

 

[nighttrain]

the 4th amendment in reference to a routine traffic stop, you are allowed to tell police to forget about searching your car, dont let them..

 

[ReekofRams]

What does cooperate mean?

If it means make admissions to elements of a crime - then no don’t cooperate.

If it means be polite and repspectful, then always cooperate

If it means consent to a search then never cooperate.

Always clarify whether you are free to go or being detained.

Clarify whether you are being ordered to do something or asked. If asked, say no, if ordered - do it.

If being detained - say you want a lawyer present before you say or do anything.

If you are free to go, then go

Whether to do field sobriety tests or blow into their machine is a state by state decision. Sometimes yes, most times no. In some states you lose your license just for refusing.

Those are the basics.

Plus ask the officer if by refusing to take a breath test is he legally allowed to take away your license.

 

[RamBall]

We're not talking about speeding (at least as far as I understood the conversation). You've broken the law, have to cooperate, and are only benefited by cooperating when you're pulled over for speeding.



Nope. There's nothing "anarchist" about valuing your constitutional rights.



No, it's because anything you say can be held against you in a court of law. Choose to speak with police at your own peril, but they cannot be used to corroborate your story. What you tell them can only hurt you if you end up being tried for a crime.



Generally correct. Although, when there's shooting going on, you can't really blame a person for running.

When I was younger I had many interactions with law enforcement, thats what happens when you break the law. But never did it hurt me in any way to cooperate even when I was in the wrong, I actually got away with shit because I didnt act guilty and run or try to withold my identity. I even walked away from a brawl where I struck a police officer by mistake and after it was all said and done I got to call my mother and go home. The only people that have any reason to fear the police are criminals. I've been pulled over and ordered out of my car at gun point, because I cooperated and was only smoking cocaine they let me go after a quick look in my trunk proved I was not the person they were looking for. Had I not cooperated they probably would have searched my car and found a half smoked joint laced with cocaine and I would have certainly gone to jail.

You will never convince me it is better to be tackled or shot just because I dont want to provide my ID when legally obligated to do so, which is anytime law enforcement asks for my ID. Anyone that would rather be shot than cooperate, proves we should remove warning labels and let natural selection prevail.

 

[FaulkSF]

the 4th amendment in reference to a routine traffic stop, you are allowed to tell police to forget about searching your car, dont let them..

That is correct. Unless they have reasonable suspicion to search for evidence.

 

[nighttrain]

That is correct. Unless they have reasonable suspicion to search for evidence.

hahaha, put your guns and drugs away! and always hide the bank loot!
train

 

[jrry32]

The only people that have any reason to fear the police are criminals.

Tell that to all the people wrongfully convicted and wrongfully killed.

 

[Corbin]

Would like a section based opinionated viewpoints so it doesn’t always spill over into other parts of the forum.

 

[kurtfaulk]

.

this is what happens when you don't just cooperate and be polite, and instead act like an arse with the wrong cop. instead of just driving away with a traffic ticket she ends up dead in her cell that night.



.

 

[12intheBox]

That is correct. Unless they have reasonable suspicion to search for evidence.

Probable cause to search for evidence.

Reasonable suspicion to detain or do a frisk for weapons (including a frisk of the car if that’s what you are talking about).

 

[12intheBox]

Would like a section based opinionated viewpoints so it doesn’t always spill over into other parts of the forum.

It’s a message board - it’s 99% opinion. This particular thread is about arrests and lawsuits. I’d say things are pretty well contained. No?

 

[kurtfaulk]

.

Michael Bennett To Turn Himself In; More Details On Indictment
March 25th, 2018 at 9:38am CST by Rory Parks
New Eagles defensive end Michael Bennett, who has been indicted on the felony charge of injury to the elderly — which is punishable by up to ten years in prison and/or a $10K fine — is expected to turn himself in tomorrow, per Tom Schad and A.J. Perez of USA Today. Bennett is represented by Rusty Hardin, the well-known Houston defense attorney who has represented Roger Clemens and other high-profile clients. Per Jeff McLane of the Philadelphia Inquirer, Hardin indicated that Bennett is currently out of the continental United States and that, as he has not yet met his client, he will refrain from speaking on his behalf at this time.

Once Bennett turns himself in, more specifics will begin to emerge. As of right now, we have the press release from the Harris County District Attorney’s Office noting that Bennett has been indicted, a few details from various sources, and a whole host of unanswered questions.

Zack Rosenblatt of NJ Advance Media took a look at some of those questions yesterday, most of which pertained to the on-field ramifications of the incident (i.e. will the Eagles release Bennett, will they make any precautionary moves to shore up the defensive line, etc.). Today, one of Rosenblatt’s colleagues at NJ Advance Media, Eliot Shorr-Parks, examines the curiosities surrounding the case and sets forth his opinion as to why the Harris County DA will have a difficult time proving its case.

For instance, despite witnessing the alleged assault, a police officer at the scene did not attempt to arrest Bennett and instead allowed him on the field. According to Houston Chief Police officer Art Acevedo, speaking at a press conference on Friday, that was because Bennett was much larger than the officer at the scene, who was operating as a “one-man unit,” and because the officer needed to continue to monitor his area and did not perceive Bennett to be an additional threat to anyone else. Nonetheless, Shorr-Parks wonders why Bennett was not arrested after the post-game commotion if the incident was serious enough to warrant an indictment.

Shorr-Parks also observes that there is no video of the incident, which could certainly complicate matters for the prosecution. He also wonders why the case sat for three months before it was assigned to a detective, and why it took roughly five months from the time the last interview was conducted during the police department’s investigation — with the NRG stadium security manager in October 2017 — to the issuance of the arrest warrant. Finally, he sees Acevedo’s personal attacks against Bennett — Acevedo called Bennett “morally bankrupt” during his press conference — as another red flag.

The police department and DA, of course, have answers for all of those questions, and since it has procured the indictment, it is unlikely the DA will simply dismiss the case without a fight. And regardless of the ultimate outcome, McLane writes that Bennett, always a polarizing figure, has already become a major distraction for the defending Super Bowl champs. Eagles brass will doubtlessly have to answer questions concerning Bennett during league meetings in Orlando this week, but McLane believes the team may have to ride out the storm with him instead of cutting him loose (though Philadelphia could release him and save $5.65MM in cap space without incurring any dead money).

Photo courtesy of USA Today Sports Images.

http://www.prosportsdaily.com/Headlines/ExternalArticle?articleId=506202

.

 

[nighttrain]

more to this than meets the eye!

 

[Corbin]

It’s a message board - it’s 99% opinion. This particular thread is about arrests and lawsuits. I’d say things are pretty well contained. No?

Im not talking about this thread in particular, im mostly talking about in general. Always discourse things that are forbidden here but that neber stops it from happening now does it?

 

[nighttrain]

Im not talking about this thread in particular, im mostly talking about in general. Always discourse things that are forbidden here but that neber stops it from happening now does it?

why we have Mods, and why they can ehhhhhhhhhhh, disipline