5 Reasons You Should Never Agree to a Police Search (Even if You Have Nothing to Hide)

[Anti Federalist]

Required reading.



5 Reasons You Should Never Agree to a Police Search (Even if You Have Nothing to Hide)

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/scott-morgan/5-reasons-you-should-neve_b_1292554.html

Do you know what your rights are when a police officer asks to search you? If you're like most people I've met in my eight years working to educate the public on this topic, then you probably don't.

It's a subject that a lot of people think they understand, but too often our perception of police power is distorted by fictional TV dramas, sensational media stories, silly urban myths, and the unfortunate fact that police themselves are legally allowed to lie to us.

It wouldn't even be such a big deal, I suppose, if our laws all made sense and our public servants always treated us as citizens first and suspects second. But thanks to the War on Drugs, nothing is ever that easy. When something as stupid as stopping people from possessing marijuana came to be considered a critical law enforcement function, innocence ceased to protect people against police harassment. From the streets of the Bronx to the suburbs of the Nation's Capital, you never have to look hard to find victims of the bias, incompetence, and corruption that the drug war delivers on a daily basis.

Whether or not you ever break the law, you should be prepared to protect yourself and your property just in case police become suspicious of you. Let's take a look at one of the most commonly misunderstood legal situations a citizen can encounter: a police officer asking to search your belongings. Most people automatically give consent when police ask to perform a search. However, I recommend saying "no" to police searches, and here are some reasons why:

1. It's your constitutional right.

The 4th Amendment to the U.S. Constitution protects us against unreasonable searches and seizures. Unless police have strong evidence (probable cause) to believe you're involved in criminal activity, they need your permission to perform a search of you or your property.

You have the right to refuse random police searches anywhere and anytime, so long as you aren't crossing a border checkpoint or entering a secure facility like an airport. Don't be shy about standing up for your own privacy rights, especially when police are looking for evidence that could put you behind bars.

2. Refusing a search protects you if you end up in court.

It's always possible that police might search you anyway when you refuse to give consent, but that's no reason to say "yes" to the search. Basically, if there's any chance of evidence being found, agreeing to a search is like committing legal suicide, because it kills your case before you even get to court.

If you refuse a search, however, the officer will have to prove in court that there was probable cause to do a warrantless search. This will give your lawyer a good chance to win your case, but this only works if you said "no" to the search.

3. Saying "no" can prevent a search altogether.

Data on police searches are interesting, but they don't show how many searches didn't happen because a citizen said no. A non-search is a non-event that goes unrecorded, giving rise to a widespread misconception that police will always search with or without permission.

I know refusing searches works because I've been collecting stories from real police encounters. The reality is that police routinely ask for permission to search when they have absolutely no evidence of an actual crime. If you remain calm and say no, there's a good chance they'll back down, because it's a waste of time to do searches that won't hold up in court anyway.

4. Searches can waste your time and damage your property.

Do you have time to sit around while police rifle through your belongings? Police often spend 30 minutes or more on vehicle searches and even longer searching homes. You certainly can't count on officers to be careful with valuables or to put everything back where they found it. If you waive your 4th Amendment rights by agreeing to be searched, you will have few legal options if any property is damaged or missing after the search.

5. You never know what they'll find.

Are you 100 percent certain there's nothing illegal in your home or vehicle? You can never be too sure. A joint roach could stick to your shoe on the street and wind up on the floorboard. A careless acquaintance could have dropped a baggie behind the seat. Try telling a cop it isn't yours, and they'll just laugh and tell you to put your hands behind your back. If you agreed to the search, you can't challenge the evidence. But if you're innocent and you refused the search, your lawyer has a winnable case.

Remember that knowing your rights will help you protect yourself, but no amount of preparation can guarantee a good outcome in a bad situation. Your attitude and your choices before, during, and after the encounter will usually matter more than your knowledge of the law. Stay calm no matter what happens, and remember that you can always report misconduct after things settle down.

Finally, please don't be shy about sharing this information with your friends and family. Understanding and asserting your rights isn't about getting away with anything, and it isn't about disrespecting police either. These rights are the foundation of freedom in America, and they get weaker whenever we fail to exercise them.

Scott Morgan is Associate Director of FlexYourRights.org and co-creator of the film 10 Rules for Dealing with Police.

[Anti Federalist]

Required viewing:



http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6wXkI4t7nuc

[azxd]

Good find AF (video bookmarked)

Paraphrased words of a LEO friend of mine ;)
A smart individual will revert to a Name, Rank, and Serial Number mode of thinking, when dealing with someone they do not know, but who is authorized to use lethal force during their daily activities, and can ruin your life with much less than lethal force, just because they misunderstand your words.

[BUSHLIED]

What about before entering the DC metro? I think if you refused you couldn't board. Anyone remember that?

[Anti Federalist]

What about before entering the DC metro? I think if you refused you couldn't board. Anyone remember that?

I refused to answer TSA questions, on 5th Amendment grounds.

I was allowed to board.

[Danke]

//

[donnay]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=e00sUUm0TdQ

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=e00sUUm0TdQ

[MooCowzRock]

5. You never know what they'll find.

Are you 100 percent certain there's nothing illegal in your home or vehicle? You can never be too sure. A joint roach could stick to your shoe on the street and wind up on the floorboard. A careless acquaintance could have dropped a baggie behind the seat. Try telling a cop it isn't yours, and they'll just laugh and tell you to put your hands behind your back. If you agreed to the search, you can't challenge the evidence. But if you're innocent and you refused the search, your lawyer has a winnable case.

This is the number one point that sticks with me and why I will most likely refuse a search request. I don't do drugs, I don't condone the existence of drugs in my car or in my room, etc, even though I support legalization. I have no interest in using or dealing or helping friends deal.

Yet the fact still stands that I hang out with a lot of people, and I am traditionally the driver to all of our outings. I make sure to stress to my friends no food, no smoking, no drugs, and have had to tell a few of them that I wouldn't drive them because they were holding.

But it's impossible and unreasonable for me to pat down all my friends and their friends, so I can't guarantee that drugs weren't brought into my car without my knowledge, and I can't guarantee that I didn't have anything on the bottom of my shoe, etc.

And who is going to believe me when I say it isn't mine? It ain't worth my car getting taken away, and it ain't worth the record for something I didn't do, limiting me from future and current jobs and certain other functions, and definitely isn't worth the chance of jail time.

I've got nothing to hide, but no, you can't search my car without probable cause or a warrant.

[Gary4Liberty]

They will just get the canine and have it alert on silent command. Then they can search all they want and plant drugs if they want. I think they can search your car anyway except for the trunk.

[Moo2400]

The most important point is that agreeing to a search can never help you, it can only work against you; same with talking to the police without a lawyer. For some reason a lot of people think the police will let them get on their way more quickly and easily if they're more agreeable to the police and consent to searches, talking with them, etc., but it's almost never the case. Maybe the cop will try to be an asshole to you if you refuse to consent to a search, but let them. If there's nothing in it for you, only negatives, why on earth would you willingly agree to that? Let the dogs come and let the cop waste his time with worthless drug enforcement rather than actually fighting crime.

[azxd]

They will just get the canine and have it alert on silent command. Then they can search all they want and plant drugs if they want. I think they can search your car anyway except for the trunk.
You are wrong ... Without a signed court ordered search warrant, they cannot search your car/property unless you give them permission.

[Gary4Liberty]

You are wrong ... Without a signed court ordered search warrant, they cannot search your car/property unless you give them permission.
I used to think that too but I remember finding out that it didnt apply to the passenger area of the car for some reason and I dont have any references. I think something about plain view not being the expectation of privacy or something. Still, they can always get a dog to false alert they do it all the time. Then they leave you on the side of the road with your car all torn apart to teach you not to say no to police searches.

[John of Des Moines]

This is from about 12 years ago, it was a letter to the editor of the Cityview Des Moines' "underground" newspaper:

FREE lawyer advice!

Local attorney Bill Mooney offers his five rules for ptoential criminal defendants:

1) Shut up

2) Never tell your girlfriend anything

3) Never consent to a search

4) Never keep anything in your car you wouldn't want your grandmother to find

5) Never write a check under a living person's account that is not your own (In Iowa, it's a felony even if the check is for under $5.)

[PaulStandsTall]

The Flex Your Rights group has really good videos on Youtube with different scenarios of intrusive policemen trying to search cars and homes and the sneaky ways they use their perceived "authority" to coerce people into consenting with the search. A disclaimer comes with each video, "Watch this video often to remind yourself of your rights and so that you can have the courage to assert your rights in the face of an unlawful police search."

I watch them quarterly.

No consenting from me! Thanks, Bill O'Rights :)

[speciallyblend]

bottom line, listen to Nancy Reagan, Just say NO to a Search! http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7cSudpyEU9w<a href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7cSudpyEU9w">
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7cSudpyEU9w (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7cSudpyEU9w)

[John of Des Moines]

They will just get the canine and have it alert on silent command. Then they can search all they want and plant drugs if they want. I think they can search your car anyway except for the trunk.


You are wrong ... Without a signed court ordered search warrant, they cannot search your car/property unless you give them permission.

Gary is more right then azxd. The police can search - without a warrant - the whole vehicle if they have suspicion rising to the level "probable cause" and they can conduct a warrantless "inventory search" of the passenger and trunk compartment if the vehicle is towed to a police impound lot.


I used to think that too but I remember finding out that it didnt apply to the passenger area of the car for some reason and I dont have any references. I think something about plain view not being the expectation of privacy or something. Still, they can always get a dog to false alert they do it all the time. Then they leave you on the side of the road with your car all torn apart to teach you not to say no to police searches.

You're getting close.

For a primer on the everyday application of fourth amendment law watch the show COPS. No, I'm not kidding.

From Wikipedia: "The motor vehicle exception (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Motor_vehicle_exception) was first established by the United States Supreme Court in 1925, in Carroll v. United States. The motor vehicle exception allows an officer to search a vehicle without a warrant as long as he or she has probable cause to believe that evidence or contraband is located in the vehicle."

The motor vehicle exception is based on the idea of a lower expectation of privacy in motor vehicles due to the regulations they are under. Additionally, the ease of mobility creates an inherent exigency. In Pennsylvania v. Labron the U.S. Supreme Court, stated, “If a car is readily mobile and probable cause exists to believe it contains contraband, the Fourth Amendment thus permits police to search the vehicle without more.”[

The scope of the search is limited to only what area the officer has probable cause to search. This area can encompass the entire vehicle including the trunk. The motor vehicle exception in addition to allowing officers to search the vehicle also allows officers to search any containers found inside the vehicle that could contain the evidence or contraband being searched for. The objects searched do not need to belong to the owner of the vehicle. In Wyoming v. Houghton, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled that the ownership of objects searched in the vehicle is irrelevant to the legitimacy of the search.


More at Link (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Motor_vehicle_exception)

More on Fourth Amendment law here (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fourth_Amendment_to_the_United_States_Constitution ).

[LibForestPaul]

I used to think that too but I remember finding out that it didnt apply to the passenger area of the car for some reason and I dont have any references. I think something about plain view not being the expectation of privacy or something. Still, they can always get a dog to false alert they do it all the time. Then they leave you on the side of the road with your car all torn apart to teach you not to say no to police searches.
It is called an inventory, not a search. Safety first.

[azxd]

I used to think that too but I remember finding out that it didnt apply to the passenger area of the car for some reason and I dont have any references. I think something about plain view not being the expectation of privacy or something. Still, they can always get a dog to false alert they do it all the time. Then they leave you on the side of the road with your car all torn apart to teach you not to say no to police searches.
I guess that would work for those who prefer to cower to oppression and not stand their ground when confronted with rights violations.

I've got all the time in the World, and a lawyer on permanent retainer ... Call the dog.
It's important to know your rights, and the law !!!
You'll never be able to protect yourself, if you don't understand both.

[azxd]

Gary is more right then azxd. The police can search - without a warrant - the whole vehicle if they have suspicion rising to the level "probable cause" and they can conduct a warrantless "inventory search" of the passenger and trunk compartment if the vehicle is towed to a police impound lot.

Sounds like a great lawsuit potential :D

Once they take possession via impound, they will have to prove they did not plant evidence (where are my finger prints ? ) ... Or are you of the belief that they can confiscate your property whenever they feel like it, and hold you accountable for what you do not possess ?

ETA:
Did I mention that I live a very boring life, and rarely leave my zip-code except to go to work :D

[John of Des Moines]

Sounds like a great lawsuit potential :D

Yup, the prisons are filled with prisoners filing 1983 lawsuits.


Once they take possession via impound, they will have to prove they did not plant evidence (where are my finger prints ? ) ... Or are you of the belief that they can confiscate your property whenever they feel like it, and hold you accountable for what you do not possess ?

You've got it ass-backwards - you got to prove it's not yours. "Your Honor, the defendant easily could have used gloves."


ETA:
Did I mention that I live a very boring life, and rarely leave my zip-code except to go to work :D

Sadly boring.

[azxd]

Yup, the prisons are filled with prisoners filing 1983 lawsuits.



You've got it ass-backwards - you got to prove it's not yours. "Your Honor, the defendant easily could have used gloves."



Sadly boring.
Whatever, John ;)

I'm not really concerned, and those who don't know their rights, are not my concern in such a situation.

[Danke]

//

[azxd]

But it is not your property if you surrendered title to the the state via registration.
I'm pretty sure Timmy agrees with you - GEITHNER:
Rich must pay more for 'privilege of being an American'... (http://www.weeklystandard.com/blogs/geithner-privilege-being-american-why-rich-need-higher-taxes_631859.html)

[Danke]

//

[azxd]

You want true freedom, or do you want to continually suck cock on your uninformed positions?
Timmy talks this way, also :D

[asurfaholic]

I used to think that too but I remember finding out that it didnt apply to the passenger area of the car for some reason and I dont have any references. I think something about plain view not being the expectation of privacy or something. Still, they can always get a dog to false alert they do it all the time. Then they leave you on the side of the road with your car all torn apart to teach you not to say no to police searches.

This is only true if they are going to place you in custody - example - you drive through a chceckpoint, officer sees you have a failure to appear warrant. They have to take you into custody. At that point (at least in NC) they can search any area that is within reach of your drivers seat - all around the floor, backseat, etc.. Areas you can't reach, such as the trunk, locked glove compartment, 3rd row seats - can't be searched.

But this ONLY applies if they are taking you into custody. They MUST HAVE PROBABLE CAUSE to search your vehicle.

Know your rights, if you sound like an educated person who will be able to challenge an illegal action, then they are less likely to mess with you.

[asurfaholic]

Gary is more right then azxd. The police can search - without a warrant - the whole vehicle if they have suspicion rising to the level "probable cause" and they can conduct a warrantless "inventory search" of the passenger and trunk compartment if the vehicle is towed to a police impound lot.



You're getting close.

For a primer on the everyday application of fourth amendment law watch the show COPS. No, I'm not kidding.

From Wikipedia: "The motor vehicle exception (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Motor_vehicle_exception) was first established by the United States Supreme Court in 1925, in Carroll v. United States. The motor vehicle exception allows an officer to search a vehicle without a warrant as long as he or she has probable cause to believe that evidence or contraband is located in the vehicle."

The motor vehicle exception is based on the idea of a lower expectation of privacy in motor vehicles due to the regulations they are under. Additionally, the ease of mobility creates an inherent exigency. In Pennsylvania v. Labron the U.S. Supreme Court, stated, “If a car is readily mobile and probable cause exists to believe it contains contraband, the Fourth Amendment thus permits police to search the vehicle without more.”[

The scope of the search is limited to only what area the officer has probable cause to search. This area can encompass the entire vehicle including the trunk. The motor vehicle exception in addition to allowing officers to search the vehicle also allows officers to search any containers found inside the vehicle that could contain the evidence or contraband being searched for. The objects searched do not need to belong to the owner of the vehicle. In Wyoming v. Houghton, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled that the ownership of objects searched in the vehicle is irrelevant to the legitimacy of the search.


More at Link (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Motor_vehicle_exception)

More on Fourth Amendment law here (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fourth_Amendment_to_the_United_States_Constitution ).

All that still quotes the fact there has to be probable cause to believe there is something in there. For the purposes of this discussion, it is very hard for an officer to get to that sort of conclusion at a random dui or license checkpoint.

[Johnny Appleseed]

Ive had both cops and thieves go through my truck...the feeling afterward is the same

[asurfaholic]

Ive had both cops and thieves go through my truck...the feeling afterward is the same

No kidding. My car was broke into twice in the last month, and last night someone stole the porch furniture off my front porch...

[John of Des Moines]

All that still quotes the fact there has to be probable cause to believe there is something in there. For the purposes of this discussion, it is very hard for an officer to get to that sort of conclusion at a random dui or license checkpoint.

Ever see a list of possible indica of drug traffickers? People with long hair, short hair, no hair, people who wear blue jeans, people who don't wear blue jeans, people who eat in the car, people who haven't washed their car, people who wash their car, people with bumper stickers ... the list is endless with counter-indications pointing to the same "suspected" activity. It's said a good prosecutor can get a ham and cheese sandwich indicted by 10:00 a.m. Same with cops "looking" for probable cause.

"Your honor, the car had a lot of trash about the interior of the vehicle and in my experience that's an indication of drug use. Then when asurfaholic rolled down the driver's side window to hand my his driver's license I smelled an odd odor like burnt leaves and in my experience that's an indication of drug use. And asurfaholic was well groomed to the point I thought was excessive and in my experience that's an indication of being a drug mule. ...."

I could go on an how easy it is for a cop to come up with "probable cause."