Good talk on blocks

Sensei Canna offers insight into the real world of self defense!

Moderator: Van Canna

Re: Good talk on blocks

Postby Van Canna » Sat Mar 07, 2020 5:05 am

Lets get real about what an attorney can and cannot do.

If the police show up with a search warrant and he is present, all he can do is step aside and stay out of their way.

A judge has been convinced there is probable cause for the search and that trumps any attorney who is "a criminal defense legend in his/her own mind." If you shut the door in their face they can just kick it off the hinges and walk right past you and it is all legal with the search warrant in their possession.

And while we are on search warrants--expect one. Especially if the wife left the scene with anything that was at the scene at the time of the shooting.

By the way, establishing probable cause for a search warrant is very easy. Especially if the detective has had warrants signed by that particular judge before.

I had a guy who signed one while he was at a bar stool with more than a few empties lined up on the bar in front of him and would have been a prime candidate for a DUI. Oh well....he IS a judge.
Van
User avatar
Van Canna
 
Posts: 56800
Joined: Thu Mar 11, 1999 6:01 am

Re: Good talk on blocks

Postby Van Canna » Sat Mar 07, 2020 5:06 am

The attorney cannot stop warrant service, but they can advise the subject regarding their rights and caution them about talking while noting how the police conduct their affairs.

Before the police arrive, the attorney can also spirit the subject away to a secure location to calm them down and conclude an interview. Again, they are only a witness.

That does not require that they surrender voluntarily simply because they ASSUME that the police might be interested. At this point, they may not even have been positively identified. The police are only following investigatory leads.

Many (most?) people in this situation are likely to be seriously intimidated by the police, even if the police are not behaving in an intimidating manner. We all want to be cooperative.

We are, after all, the good guys and we have been raised to respect the police. In a situation such as this, cooperation means ONLY "do not physically or verbally offer the least resistance".

There is no requirement to turn themselves in, give a statement or consent to anything.

At a secure location, the attorney can interview the witness. The attorney may then contact the police to offer the witness' statement and will accompany the witness to make that statement.

Under these circumstances, the witness (e.g.: wife) is less likely to be arrested simply for being related to the victim and present during the attack.

At the scene, the police' default procedure will be "Round 'em all up, we'll sort it out later." If she's not there when the police arrive and can get with the attorney before making a statement, she is more likely to remain free.
Van
User avatar
Van Canna
 
Posts: 56800
Joined: Thu Mar 11, 1999 6:01 am

Re: Good talk on blocks

Postby Van Canna » Sat Mar 07, 2020 5:09 am

what I was told in the CCW class was the first words out of your mouth had better be I was in fear of my life because I thought he was going to kill me and I want to speak to my attorney.
Van
User avatar
Van Canna
 
Posts: 56800
Joined: Thu Mar 11, 1999 6:01 am

Re: Good talk on blocks

Postby Van Canna » Sat Mar 07, 2020 5:11 am

When the police ask if she (or you) understand your rights, the answer is always, "No!". Who cares if they think you're stupid? If you don't understand your rights, you cannot knowingly waive them.

If they search anyway, she should not offer the least resistance, physical or verbal. If they don't have consent and the court decides they didn't have adequate justification, nothing they find will be admissible.

Do not consent to a search, but do not interfere.
Van
User avatar
Van Canna
 
Posts: 56800
Joined: Thu Mar 11, 1999 6:01 am

Re: Good talk on blocks

Postby Van Canna » Sat Mar 07, 2020 5:12 am

It seems that a victim would be very upset following a defensive shooting, and it is possible that he/she might even experience some physiological changes such as shortness of breath, confusion, chest pains, etc.

If this were to happen, wouldn't it be prudent for the victim to ask for an ambulance to immediately take them to a hospital to be checked out? Once there, I would imagine that a good attorney would want to follow up with his client to make sure he was OK.

Does anyone know the procedure that the police would use if they intend to pursue the victim as the perpetrator, but the victim indicates medical issues and is taken to a hospital?
Van
User avatar
Van Canna
 
Posts: 56800
Joined: Thu Mar 11, 1999 6:01 am

Re: Good talk on blocks

Postby Van Canna » Sat Mar 07, 2020 5:14 am

The police would accompany them to the hospital and they would be relegated to the secure area (if one exists) and under guard. Once the medical issues were resolved, they would be taken to jail.

Some ticklish issues in this, too. While doctor-patient confidentiality is sacrosanct, be careful that you aren't telling the doctor what happened with a cop standing there listening. Overheard conversations are not protected.
Van
User avatar
Van Canna
 
Posts: 56800
Joined: Thu Mar 11, 1999 6:01 am

Re: Good talk on blocks

Postby Van Canna » Sat Mar 07, 2020 5:15 am

We have a duty not to make their jobs more difficult, but we have no duty to give up our rights as citizens for their convenience.

I've discussed elsewhere that the police are not our friends. They have a job to do. Let them do it without UNDULY risking complication of current situation.

If ordered out of the car, assume a non-threatening posture and do nothing to draw attention to the firearm. This includes elbow-tucks, garment tugging and trouser-hitching. If you are about to be frisked, THEN would be the time to disclose weapon (and permit).

If you are about to be SEARCHED, disclose and state, "I do not consent to any searches." Follow orders and not resist in the slightest.

One thing to bear in mind, many police officers now wear body recorders. Cops have no obligation (or inclination) to advise you of your rights before you are arrested. Anything you say prior to arrest can and will be used against you in court. Exercise your right to STFU!

The cop is in control of the situation, let THEM control it without running your mouth and giving them MORE to control.



Craig R. Brownell
Chief Instructor
Van
User avatar
Van Canna
 
Posts: 56800
Joined: Thu Mar 11, 1999 6:01 am

Re: Good talk on blocks

Postby Van Canna » Sat Mar 07, 2020 5:19 am

I am going to quote from a police-training manual in reference to traffic stops. It is in everyone's best interest to read these words carefully and understand their true meaning.

The topic of the training textbook is tactics for criminal patrol. The particular topic discussed is getting consent to search you and your vehicle on a ROUTINE traffic stop: i.e., speeding for example. Let's take a listen shall we?

“Getting consent can be one of the easiest things you do on criminal patrol. But getting it in the right way can be a bit like tap dancing across a minefield.

Stretching between your avid state of mind (suspicion) and your coveted state of action (searching) is the treacherous ground of the Fourth Amendment, with its formidable protection of personal privacy and restrictions against unreasonable search and seizure.

Unless certain special circumstances exist, that Amendment obligates you to get a warrant to search a vehicle you've stopped, a demand for which you may have neither the time nor the probable cause.

By giving you permission to search, the suspect eliminates the warrant requirement; in effect, he opens a passageway for you through the Fourth Amendments impediments by voluntarily agreeing to surrender his right to be secure in the privacy of his vehicle”.

What the above paragraph essentially does is teach the officer that YOUR Fourth Amendment protections are an IMPEDIMENT to him/her.
Van
User avatar
Van Canna
 
Posts: 56800
Joined: Thu Mar 11, 1999 6:01 am

Re: Good talk on blocks

Postby Van Canna » Sat Mar 07, 2020 5:20 am

Allow me to continue:

“Gaining his cooperation requires that you extend the play-dumb guise that you've already used to elicit deception cues and provoke “stress leaks”.

As you bring your concealed interrogation to a close and wind up the exploratory stage of your contact, you need to decide, finally, whether you want to search the suspect's vehicle. If you do, you now need to position him emotionally to grant you his permission”.

“…you must push him to the edge of a psychological cliff, where he freely puts his fate in your hands. You want him to feel compelled to give you what you ask without feeling coerced”.

Folks, this is dirty pool at its best. Let's put this in layman's terms. When you get pulled over for speeding and the officer begins “small talk” with you about ANYTHING UNRELATED to the reason for the traffic stop, you are in the beginning phase of being conned out of your Constitutional Fourth Amendment protections.

Shall we continue?

“Consent must be asked for and granted when a “reasonable” person would believe he is legally free to disregard any further contact with you and leave your presence.

In other words, your request must be posed when the suspect is in what could 'flippantly' be called the “screw you” period.

Legally that period begins when you have concluded the reason for the stop (issued him a ticket or warning, for example) and have returned his license, registration, insurance card, and any other documents”.
Van
User avatar
Van Canna
 
Posts: 56800
Joined: Thu Mar 11, 1999 6:01 am

Re: Good talk on blocks

Postby Van Canna » Sat Mar 07, 2020 5:23 am

“Understandably, most criminal patrol officers do not like to draw attention to the suspects option to ignore them in this consensual period, so they try to avoid an abrupt break when the detention technically ends and the contact de-escalates into a voluntary encounter.

Heading toward the finish, they keep the conversation flowing as they're filling out the paperwork, a mix of irrelevant chatter, continued probing for deception cues, and perhaps a segue into the kind of "pin-down sequence” we'll discuss shortly”.
Van
User avatar
Van Canna
 
Posts: 56800
Joined: Thu Mar 11, 1999 6:01 am

Re: Good talk on blocks

Postby Van Canna » Sat Mar 07, 2020 5:24 am

In TX you were required to furnish your CCW license along w/ your DL. Recently, a friend of mine received his CCW, and sd. the instructor told the class a new law will be going into effect that if you are not carrying a weapon, you do not need to hand over your CCW license.

Of course what happens is that most officers have no idea about the CCW laws, but they will see you have a license from computer in the patrol car.

Then they stomp up demanding why you didn't give them the license, you nicely tell them what the law is, and argument ensues, and it all goes downhill from there.

I was once stopped for speeding on the way to hunt one day. I had my rifle laying in the floorboard of my truck.

He looked in there and saw my evil black rifle and immediately advised me in a loud voice, that it was illegal, and asked me if it was loaded. I sd. the magazine is.

He went ballistic, saying it's against the law to have a loaded weapon in the vehicle, much less an illegal assault weapon. I nicely told him the law, and after receiving my warning, just rolled up the window and drove off, leaving him standing there.

He did not pursue me for some reason. A week later, his superior contacted me and sd. the department apologizes for the rookie officer in the way he acted, and it won't happen again.

I guess the officer went back to the station and blurted out to everyone about that stupid citizen he stopped and they straightened him out. I dunno...do police think we are the bad guys??
Van
User avatar
Van Canna
 
Posts: 56800
Joined: Thu Mar 11, 1999 6:01 am

Re: Good talk on blocks

Postby Van Canna » Sat Mar 07, 2020 5:28 am

When and only when the discovery of my concealed weapon is imminent will I disclose it's presence and then I will fully comply with the LEO's instructions.
Van
User avatar
Van Canna
 
Posts: 56800
Joined: Thu Mar 11, 1999 6:01 am

Re: Good talk on blocks

Postby Van Canna » Sat Mar 07, 2020 5:29 am

It is a matter of safety for you and the officer. If the officer were to somehow discover you are armed, and this comes as a surprise, you are setting yourself up for a bad situation. If you happen to move your hand at the wrong time, you may never make it home.
Van
User avatar
Van Canna
 
Posts: 56800
Joined: Thu Mar 11, 1999 6:01 am

Re: Good talk on blocks

Postby Van Canna » Sat Mar 07, 2020 5:30 am

Let me restate and emphasize:

What the LEO might PREFER and what is in your best interests are not usually the same thing. They may be in control of the situation, but you are not obligated to make them happy.

Especially if you waive your rights to do so. You should be businesslike, respectful and generally cooperative, but you have an obligation to yourself to be mindful of your rights.

My dad was stopped by the Chicago Police in a driving rainstorm. He sat behind the wheel and waited. And waited. And waited. Finally, the squad call pulled up alongside and cracked the window. He cracked his.

The passenger side cop hollered, "Why didn't you come back to us?" My dad hollered back, "YOU stopped ME."

They didn't want to get wet, so they drove off. He never found out why he had been stopped.

If we behaved according to what many LEOs preferred, we may as well toss out the Bill of Rights.

Cops do not make the laws and we are not obligated to satisfy their personal preferences. Especially on the basis of what we expect they might wish.

They may WANT to know that you have a firearm, but that wish does not obligate you to disclose UNLESS the law states as much. Same with a permit.

I do not CARE if the cop likes me, -I- care about jail. I'm not going to say or do anything that affects what I care about.

Behave like a citizen, not a subject. The stop will be shorter and far less confusing regarding what you should do. When in doubt, STFU!

You cannot be convicted of exercising your rights. The only winning move is not to play the game. If you decide to play, you raise your chances of losing exponentially.

If you ever want to see how it's done, be WITH an LEO when they are stopped and watch how they behave. It will be EXACTLY as Mark and I have described because they know the rules of the "game".

I have only been stopped about six times. Usually, within about 10 seconds, the officer has an idea that I am either an LEO or an experienced criminal. During the ensuing 10 seconds, they have me pegged. Cops and crooks are FAR more aware of their rights than the average citizen.

Decent, honest people cooperate willingly with the police. They are often intimidated by the contact and say or do things that they think will help their situation. This is NEVER a good idea. To the cops, it's about as sporting as stepping on ants, an easy bust.

I have seen investigators tell a subject, "Look, we understand you're in a bad situation. Give us a quick statement and we'll get you a ride home. We can settle this all tomorrow." The subject bares their soul and earns at least one night in jail. WTF?!?!?! But they said...

Doesn't matter what they said. They can lie with impunity. They can say ANYTHING to obtain your cooperation. Once they have your words, they lock you up and use everything you said against you.

If things start to get a little dicey, "I want my lawyer and I do not consent to any searches."



Craig R. Brownell
Chief Instructor
Van
User avatar
Van Canna
 
Posts: 56800
Joined: Thu Mar 11, 1999 6:01 am

Re: Good talk on blocks

Postby Van Canna » Sat Mar 07, 2020 3:02 pm

I was a cop. I'm not anti-police, they're the good guys. They're just not the "good guys" that honest, law-abiding citizens expect.

Just as most folks' "understanding" of firearms comes from TV and movies, so does their "understanding" of how police operate.

"Do you mind if I take a look in your car?"

"I do not consent to any searches."

This is not anti-police, this is pro-ME. I don't have anything to hide (that I know of), but neither do I have any obligation to allow the police to inspect my property without just cause.

I have no idea if a co-worker dropped a marijuana seed in my carpet. He's not here now. If it's found, it's mine and I'm going to jail. If the cop has to ask, they don't have probable cause to search without consent. If they can't search legally, why should I let them? What's in it for me?

"If you won't let me search, we'll have to bring a dog."

"I do not consent to any searches."

However long it takes them to bring the dog, it's less time than I would spend in jail for something of which I was unaware or forgot about. Most of the time the dog threat is a bluff to see if that will get you to allow the search.

I have NOTHING to gain by consenting to a search or submitting to what the cop might prefer. If it's not required, don't provide, volunteer or consent to it. If it is required, you won't have a choice. Given the choice, take the path in YOUR interests, not theirs.

We're all familiar with the "Miranda Warning". The first line goes something like: "You have the right to remain silent, anything you say can and will be used against you."

In practice, this is not accurate. It SHOULD say, "You have the right to remain silent. Anything you say or do, can and will be written down inaccurately, misconstrued, misunderstood, twisted, distorted and manipulated and then used against you.

You cannot be convicted for something you did not say or do.

You are not dealing with TV cops. You are dealing with real cops, their supervisory staff, department regulations, prosecutors and courts. These are people, not ideals, and they all have their own motivations and agendae. Little of this has your best interests at heart.

You might happen to be in a jurisdiction in which the Chief of Police (or the officer themselves) happen to be seriously opposed to RKBA and carry permits.

If you are not required to disclose, don't. If you do, you could find yourself on the receiving end of a lengthy roadside "investigation". It may all be bogus, of course. It could even open the officer and/or department up to civil rights litigation.

Most folks are so glad to "get off" with the inconvenience and a minor ticket that they don't press the issue. This is politics operating under the color of law enforcement.

Why on earth would you willingly surrender your rights to the unknown?



Craig R. Brownell
Chief Instructor
http://www.mnpistolclass.com
Van
User avatar
Van Canna
 
Posts: 56800
Joined: Thu Mar 11, 1999 6:01 am

PreviousNext

Return to Van Canna's Self Defense Realities

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 4 guests