[addy85]

Originally Posted by Peanuto

Apparently you do not no how to read. I wish I was treated within my rights. I was not. I have no problem with my punishment. Future in law enforcement will suit you well with those rage issues.

Rage issues lol. If you were smart then you would of figured out that I was trying to figure out why you were treated that way but oh well. Enjoy your probation.

[addy85]

Originally Posted by CollinsE90

thanks

You're welcome.

[335R1]

Miranda is not law. Miranda is a SCOTUS ruling that allows you to either keep or waive your rights under formal questioning and interrogation. Asking for a lawyer and to be read your Miranda rights would only inflame the situation during their initial investigation at the scene. Due process starts the moment they charge you. The best thing you could do when put in that situation is ask to leave if you're not being charged with anything. Until then, only identify yourself and say nothing that would incriminate you. That means denying and not admitting to anything illegal.

[Peanuto]

Originally Posted by addy85

If you were smart then you would of figured out that I was trying to figure out why you were treated that way but oh well.

If I was smart? That sentence isn't even English. If you are going to insult my intellect at least use proper grammar and spelling. There was no reason for me to be treated that way. I did commit a crime, but I gave the officer nothing but respect and was denied my rights in return.

[Peanuto]

Originally Posted by 335R1

Miranda is not law. Miranda is a SCOTUS ruling that allows you to either keep or waive your rights under formal questioning and interrogation. Asking for a lawyer and to be read your Miranda rights would only inflame the situation during their initial investigation at the scene. Due process starts the moment they charge you. The best thing you could do when put in that situation is ask to leave if you're not being charged with anything. Until then, only identify yourself and say nothing that would incriminate you. That means denying and not admitting to anything illegal.

I didn't say anything at the scene. None of this was at the scene. According to the officer, to this day I was never arrested. I was never given an option to either keep or waive my rights. Also I passed my field sobriety test. Haha. He made me walk the heel-toe straight line on the part of uneven road where the asphalt meets the concrete gutter.

[addy85]

Originally Posted by Peanuto

If I was smart? That sentence isn't even English. If you are going to insult my intellect at least use proper grammar and spelling. There was no reason for me to be treated that way. I did commit a crime, but I gave the officer nothing but respect and was denied my rights in return.

I'm confused, would you rather have had your rights and charged with dui? Or not been arrested and get pbj? Trust me that cop did u a favor.

[Peanuto]

Originally Posted by addy85

I'm confused, would you rather have had your rights and charged with dui? Or not been arrested and get pbj? Trust me that cop did u a favor.

I was charged and not given my rights. That is why I have an issue. This was not the cops choice. How do you not understand this. I was charged with a DUI. At my court hearing months after the incident I was not found guilty or innocent. I was given PBJ. So as long as I don't fuck up before my probation ends, I will be found not guilty. It was not the cop's choice. It was the judge's. The cop wanted me to burn. You clearly do not understand law enforcement or the legal process nearly as well as you think you do.

[addy85]

Originally Posted by Peanuto

I was charged and not given my rights. That is why I have an issue. This was not the cops choice. How do you not understand this. I was charged with a DUI. At my court hearing months after the incident I was not found guilty or innocent. I was given PBJ. So as long as I don't fuck up before my probation ends, I will be found not guilty. It was not the cop's choice. It was the judge's. The cop wanted me to burn. You clearly do not understand law enforcement or the legal process nearly as well as you think you do.

Your story sounds like bull shit to me peanut boy, if you were charged with a DUI then your license is automatically suspended for 45 days regardless whether you were convicted or not.


Maryland DUI (driving under the influence) consequences include a minimum driver's license suspension of 45 days, and punishment of up to $1,000.00 and one year in jail for a first offense DUI, and $2,000.00 and two years in jail for a second offense DUI. A Maryland DUI conviction will result in 12 points on the Maryland Driver's License record.


You could not have been charged with a DUI if you didn't lose your license.

[Peanuto]

Originally Posted by addy85

Your story sounds like bull shit to me peanut boy, if you were charged with a DUI then your license is automatically suspended for 45 days regardless whether you were convicted or not.


Maryland DUI (driving under the influence) consequences include a minimum driver's license suspension of 45 days, and punishment of up to $1,000.00 and one year in jail for a first offense DUI, and $2,000.00 and two years in jail for a second offense DUI. A Maryland DUI conviction will result in 12 points on the Maryland Driver's License record.


You could not have been charged with a DUI if you didn't lose your license.

I was charged with a DUI and lost my license for 3 months. It sucked. I basically couldn't work for 3 months. I was not CONVICTED. Everything you just wrote is based off of conviction. I was given PBJ. How you do not understand this is beyond me.

[Peanuto]

I was given the option of license suspension for 3 months or 1 year of ignition interlock just for being charged. I took the suspension. Google searches won't tell you everything chief.

[ktdw]

Originally Posted by addy85

You could not have been charged with a DUI if you didn't lose your license.

[addy85]

Originally Posted by Peanuto

I was charged with a DUI and lost my license for 3 months. It sucked. I basically couldn't work for 3 months. I was not CONVICTED. Everything you just wrote is based off of conviction. I was given PBJ. How you do not understand this is beyond me.

You never mentioned anything about your license being suspended. All you said was that you were arrested, not read your rights, and given PBJ. How you don't understand that is beyond me.

Originally Posted by Peanuto

I was given the option of license suspension for 3 months or 1 year of ignition interlock just for being charged. I took the suspension. Google searches won't tell you everything chief.

Again, if your arrested for dui YOUR LICENSE IS AUTOMATICALLY SUSPENDED REGARDLESS IF YOU'RE CONVICTED OR NOT. Jesus Christ kid, get that through your head.

Obviously the suspension was the better choice, nonetheless your situation sounds all fucked up and is very confusing.

[addy85]

Originally Posted by ktdw

that's the most productive post you have ever had

[Peanuto]

License isn't suspended automatically. That is incorrect. If you sign up for the ignition interlock system for one year it is not suspended. I didn't say I lost my license for 3 months for the same reason I didn't say I have to meet with my probation officer every month, or what the fines are. I found it irrelevant to the story of me not being given my rights.

[ktdw]

Originally Posted by addy85

that's the most productive post you have ever had

Dude, I probably know more about this area than you, but I still wouldn't be writing like I'm the authority on the subject. And I find it amusing that you choose to do so, even though you obviously do not understand the legal terms you are using.

So, I guess we can all look forward to seeing the future officer in Texas...

[BTM]

I was about to say, it can't be suspended just for being charged with something. You're usually given an ultimatum. In Illinois its 6 mo for refusing a breathalyzer, 3 for accepting it if found guilty, 0 for accepting and found innocent...

Even after you are charged with something you are still innocent until proven guilty from the POV of the justice system, being charged with something cannot be the sole basis for experiencing consequences...

[Peanuto]

Originally Posted by BTM

I was about to say, it can't be suspended just for being charged with something. You're usually given an ultimatum. In Illinois its 6 mo for refusing a breathalyzer, 3 for accepting it if found guilty, 0 for accepting and found innocent...

Even after you are charged with something you are still innocent until proven guilty from the POV of the justice system, being charged with something cannot be the sole basis for experiencing consequences...

In MD there is an automatic 3 month suspension if you refuse or fail the breathalyzer. It has nothing to do with being proven guilty. At your court date if you are found guilty the judge can add an addition suspension as he sees fit. I refused, that is why I was suspended.

[immiketoo]

Ok, lets take it easy here. There are a lot of things we don't know regarding the search warrant. For example, what is the criminal history of the offender. Is he a known dealer? Does he have a violent history? Have there been prior contacts at the house?

I can't speak for other areas in the country, but I can say in my experience that SWAT is not called to do search warrants unless there is some type of elevated risk factors such as those listed above.

Its easy to judge these factors in the vacuum of internet posts. IF it is as it appears, there are clearly things that could have been done better. I am an animal lover, and in an effort to avoid situations like this, we use a CO2 fire extinguisher against dogs as an effective tool to subdue them. It appears that there was not a lot control in this case and as someone suggested earlier, there are better ways to get the job done in MOST, not ALL cases.

Despite the disagreements I have had with some of you in the Taser post, I agree with the sentiment of this post. It appears that there was technically justified but morally objectionable force used in this case. Ultimately, the violation of the law is what precipitated this search warrant, and while the criminal behavior was causal, the LE agency has the responsibility to ensure that any innocents are not harmed.

Peanuto, I will try and clarify the law for you and everyone here. You got fucked, if what you say is true. Custody is defined as the moment the subject reasonably believes they are not free to leave, whether it is caused by statements or actions of the officers. Clearly, you were in custody. However, Miranda warnings are NOT required as part of an arrest. They only come into play when custody is present AND you are being questioned. If you are arrested and the officer doesn't question you specifically about the case, Miranda is not required.

Example: You are observed by police damaging someone's BMW. You are arrested and charged and ultimately bonded out. The officer has no need to question you, therefore Miranda is not needed.

Lastly, we are all from different parts of the country and therefore certain terms and practices vary from one jurisdiction to another. To me, PBJ is a sandwich. What you describe does not exist in IL, and dispositions like yours are handled differently, though the premise is the same.

So, back to the OP. Situations like this viewed in a vacuum look horrible and the public outcry is undeniable. I am not defending what clearly looks bad, only suggesting that you all consider the factors that may have been present that are not clear in the video. The Rodney King case is a perfect example of this. There was clearly excessive force used, but most people have never heard the whole story, nor are they aware of all the factors that preceded the incident. I implore you to look past the face value of the things you see on the internet, and realize there are tens of thousands of cops out there that never make the news because they do it right. How often do you hear about the good things cops do? NEVER. Because its not news. No one cares that a cop DIDN'T violate someone's civil rights, or that just the right amount of force was used. Its only news when someone fucks up. Just my 2 pennies.

[BTM]

Exactly, that's the ultimatum. No private citizen can suffer legal consequences from merely being charged with something, all being charged means is that you are subject to having to defend yourself in a court of law.

[radix]

Originally Posted by immiketoo

Ok, lets take it easy here.

[...]

Just my 2 pennies.

Why did you have ruin such an entertaining argument by posting something that makes sense?

[Peanuto]

Originally Posted by immiketoo

Peanuto, I will try and clarify the law for you and everyone here. You got fucked, if what you say is true. Custody is defined as the moment the subject reasonably believes they are not free to leave, whether it is caused by statements or actions of the officers. Clearly, you were in custody. However, Miranda warnings are NOT required as part of an arrest. They only come into play when custody is present AND you are being questioned. If you are arrested and the officer doesn't question you specifically about the case, Miranda is not required.

Example: You are observed by police damaging someone's BMW. You are arrested and charged and ultimately bonded out. The officer has no need to question you, therefore Miranda is not needed.

Lastly, we are all from different parts of the country and therefore certain terms and practices vary from one jurisdiction to another. To me, PBJ is a sandwich. What you describe does not exist in IL, and dispositions like yours are handled differently, though the premise is the same.

.

Thanks. It is all true and I did indeed get fucked. I was also questioned while in custody at the station. They took me into a room and asked where I had been, how much I had had to drink, a timeline of my evening, etc... So unless that does not count as questioning, I should have been read my rights. I am not sure if addy is trying to say I am lying, disprove what happened to me somehow, or saying I should not have had rights and I apologize for the derail. I only intended to share my first hand story and the opinions of myself and my lawyer as they were relevant to the topic. I did not intend on having to spend 2 pages trying to justify my position.

[BTM]

Realize you're arguing with someone who's having trouble getting a job with homeland security...