Excersizing Rights

[Dan_Guy]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eDJrQ...layer_embedded


watched this in another thread,
Is everything in the video proper? Can the officer actually do nothing?

P.S. I am not one of those pricks that thinks he has more rights than he does and always acts tough guy to the police

[G-spec]

lol, I always put both my hands on the 12 o clock position when I'm pulled over..... last time the cop laughed and he goes "This isn't TV son, you can put your hands down" I'm like "No sir, I don't wanna be reaching for my hair comb and have you mistake it for a gun, then blow my head off" yes I carry a comb in my car, so what

oh and I've faced numerous idle threats from power trippin cops, I love nothing more than staring back at them with a blank poker face.... throws them off every time, they never expect it...

I like how he never talked out of turn, thats the best thing you can do... even if the cop pulled you over for bs reason, they're not stupid, they know they're pulling you over bs, so if you show them you recognize their authority to do what they please they will eventually ease up. The guy in the video however, wasnt pulled over BS, he was speeding.


nice video man, now let's hope the thread doesn't get locked

[stutterr]

There is nothing wrong with flexing your rights. Just because a cop lights up the cherries does not mean you have to bend over and have your rights violated.

Get informed and know what your rights are for Canadian Law. That video along with most of those instructional videos are for USA.

Be polite and know what the cop can and cannot do. Cops are good at playing mind games, they will try and trick you to make their job easier.

ie. They pull over a young driver who is listening to some rap music. Officer thinks, I bet this little punk has some drugs on him. The officer can ask to search the vehicle. The occupant shows no signs of impairment, or there is no apparent sign of drug use. If the driver denies the request the officer will give the same old story about how you are making it harder on yourself. Complete bs.

Most people voluntary give up their rights and freedoms during a traffic stop.

Even if you are breaking the law, like speeding it does not give the officer the right to search your vehicle. You were charged with an offense, not convicted. Of course a cop will argue will probable cause blah blah blah. Or that an officer smells weed/ booze. That is when it starts to get sticky. Many cops scare people, or people just allow the cops to do whatever they want. It really depends on how stickly you want to be. Just remember to be polite and respectful. Its okay to say no to a cop, or to ask simple questions like, "am I under arrest, because if not I will be on my way now". I have many times asked an officer that question a when he was wasting too much of my time, on foot, and in my vehicle.

[Five-Oh]

For the most part that video is accurate. But if you plan on exercising your rights, make sure you know your rights as not every traffic stop is as cut and dry as the one in the video. There are countless variables that could give the officer the authority to search your vehicle.

I can't even count the number of times during traffic stops where a person has "exercised their rights" when they had no clue what they were talking about and all they did was made their situation worse by obstructing me in the lawful execution of my duties, which is a criminal charge.

[zulutango]

Whoever they hired to portray the people in this movie must have hired the bottom of the worst acting class they could find. I expected to hear the Cop say "you'se in a heap a trubble BOY! " The stoners were like rejects from "That 70's Show". Loved the Pukka shell necklaces.

As 5-0 says, you had better be 100% correct on what "rights" you are exercising. There is just a trace of some correct information in the video but what is a "right" and what is obstruction is too detailed to be explained either here or in the video they sell. Too many variables, too many different laws. In BC Police have the authority to inspect your vehicle to see if it complies with the MV Act & Regulations. For instance, an older vehicle may have rusted floor or trunk areas. Doors have to be able to open and close and windows have to roll up and down, seat belts have to be functional etc. Lock the doors and step outside when Police want to check those things and you are obstructing. Basing the way you challenge Law Enforcement on advice from a US made video you buy or see free on utube, is not a good way to do it. Have any Canadian/BC legal questions...talk to a real lawyer. Handcuffs are not comfortable as you are jammed into the back of a Crown Vic.

[stutterr]

Originally Posted by zulutango

Handcuffs are not comfortable as you are jammed into the back of a Crown Vic.

Originally Posted by Five-Oh

I can't even count the number of times during traffic stops where a person has "exercised their rights" when they had no clue what they were talking about and all they did was made their situation worse by obstructing me in the lawful execution of my duties, which is a criminal charge.

Wow what great responses. Some great cops here!!! Beat down the citizen for wanting to exercise their rights. Threaten and taunt with thoughts of being arrested. You are here to serve and protect.

Five-Oh what exactly did the person to do "obstruct a police officer"?

[zulutango]

I have had people refuse to roll up their tinted windows so that I could check them, had one guy refuse to open his trunk. ( car was rusted so severely that the rear shock tower was rusted out & the car was slumped). Told them I had the authority to check the vehicle. If they did not comply the car would be towed at their expense and inspected at a Provincial Inspection centre at their expense. If they did not permit this, they would be arrested for obstruction. The decided their "rights" were not being violated.

[stutterr]

Hey Zulu,

So you used the fact that his car was rusted to inspect his trunk? Since my car has no rust and you wanted me to pop my trunk, I would refuse. I guess since his car was rusted you had grounds to check his whole car if it was road safe?

[jlenko]

Jedi Mind Trick? Oh boy. It looks like a poor video plug to sell something. And if you watch to the end, you'll see what they're selling.

The last time I was pulled over... which was a long time ago, but I digress... all I needed to do was talk to the officer like he was someone doing their job, and I wasn't a jerk about anything. I was let off with a warning.

[zulutango]

When the car came towards me, leaning like the Titanic just before it sank, I figured there was a problem. If I see a car with rusted out rocker panels and wheel wells, I always check further. The rocker panels are part of the body structure and rusted wheel wells have shown me broken springs and rusted out frames before. I don't us it as a fishing expidition to find the 2 kg of crack you have hidden in the trunk of your Bimmer. The MV Act & Regs do give the authority to inspect. Abuse your authority and a can of whoop ass gets opened on ya.

If you are proceeding with a criminal code charge based on non-supportable grounds, you are hooped from the start. You must be able to articulate why you went ahead with the search.

[skidmark]

Originally Posted by stutterr

I guess since his car was rusted you had grounds to check his whole car if it was road safe?

Exactly!

Inspection of motor vehicles

7.08 The owner or the person in charge of a motor vehicle or trailer operated, or about to be operated, on any highway shall, upon the request of any peace officer, forthwith take the motor vehicle or trailer to the place designated by the peace officer and submit the motor vehicle or trailer there for inspection and testing.

Equipment of motor vehicles

219(2) A peace officer

(a) may require a person who carries on the business of renting vehicles or who is the owner or person in charge of a vehicle

(i) to allow the peace officer to inspect a vehicle offered by the person for rental or owned by or in charge of the person, or

(ii) to move a vehicle described in subparagraph (i) to a place designated by the peace officer and to allow the vehicle to be inspected there by the peace officer, or, at the expense of the person required, to present the vehicle for inspection by a person authorized under section 217, and

(b) must remove any inspection certificate of approval affixed to the vehicle if, in the opinion of the peace officer or a person authorized under section 217, the vehicle is unsafe for use on a highway.

[Great68]

Originally Posted by zulutango

I have had people refuse to roll up their tinted windows so that I could check them, had one guy refuse to open his trunk. ( car was rusted so severely that the rear shock tower was rusted out & the car was slumped). Told them I had the authority to check the vehicle. If they did not comply the car would be towed at their expense and inspected at a Provincial Inspection centre at their expense. If they did not permit this, they would be arrested for obstruction. The decided their "rights" were not being violated.

If you asked someone to open their trunk, and they asked what the purpose was, and you said "Your car is rusted, I am doing a safety inspection", I wouldn't see that as them consenting to a vehicle search but rather, only to a safety inspection. Therefore, if you found anything unrelated to the "safety inspection" how could you explain you had probable cause and/or permission to search for those items?

[stutterr]

Originally Posted by skidmark

Exactly!

Inspection of motor vehicles

7.08 The owner or the person in charge of a motor vehicle or trailer operated, or about to be operated, on any highway shall, upon the request of any peace officer, forthwith take the motor vehicle or trailer to the place designated by the peace officer and submit the motor vehicle or trailer there for inspection and testing.

Equipment of motor vehicles

219(2) A peace officer

(a) may require a person who carries on the business of renting vehicles or who is the owner or person in charge of a vehicle

(i) to allow the peace officer to inspect a vehicle offered by the person for rental or owned by or in charge of the person, or

(ii) to move a vehicle described in subparagraph (i) to a place designated by the peace officer and to allow the vehicle to be inspected there by the peace officer, or, at the expense of the person required, to present the vehicle for inspection by a person authorized under section 217, and

(b) must remove any inspection certificate of approval affixed to the vehicle if, in the opinion of the peace officer or a person authorized under section 217, the vehicle is unsafe for use on a highway.

So I would think there are limitations onto where you can search. If my glove box is say locked, or I have some sealed boxes or gym bag in the trunk, you have no right to search in them correct? The law does not specifically state where the officer is allowed to inspect. I would think most rust would be visible underneath the vehicle, or on the body panels. If my car has no visible rust on the body, or minor surface rust would that justify me to pop my trunk to have you look at the strut towers?

I know that Zulu has already kinda answered this. I just wanted further clarification.

[skidmark]

Originally Posted by stutterr

So I would think there are limitations onto where you can search. If my glove box is say locked, or I have some sealed boxes or gym bag in the trunk, you have no right to search in them correct?

Speaking strictly about vehicle condition inspection, no. Officers are not likely to find indications of vehicle condition in your gym bag.

The law does not specifically state where the officer is allowed to inspect.

It does, "allow the peace officer to inspect a vehicle." This would mean all of the vehicle itself, but not the contents.

I would think most rust would be visible underneath the vehicle, or on the body panels. If my car has no visible rust on the body, or minor surface rust would that justify me to pop my trunk to have you look at the strut towers?

Inspection of the trunk seals to see if they would allow exhaust to enter the passenger compartment would be a reason. It is commonly done with taxis.

[Five-Oh]

Originally Posted by stutterr

Wow what great responses. Some great cops here!!! Beat down the citizen for wanting to exercise their rights. Threaten and taunt with thoughts of being arrested. You are here to serve and protect.

Five-Oh what exactly did the person to do "obstruct a police officer"?

How can you interpret my post as a bad reply. I am encouraging people to know their rights as they could get themselves into trouble, not threatening them.

I would say the most common example is people who watch too much American television and choose to "plead the fifth" during traffic stops by refusing to say a single word. I have had quite a few times where somebody will not say a single word to me other than that it is their "right to remain silent" and will not produce a drivers license nor state their name, address, and date of birth. I explain to them their obligations under the Motor Vehicle Act and advise them if they continue to refuse to state their name, address, and date of birth, they will be arrested for obstruction. If they continue to refuse they are arrested for obstruction, go in handcuffs, and in the back of a police car. To avoid situations like this, people should be informed on what they need to do.

I also wonder what causes police to be drawn to you which makes you so in favour of standing up for your rights and resent the police so much? For the most part the police don't ask everyone in the general public to search their vehicle. So what encounters have you had with the police that makes the police want to search your vehicle? And what do you do that so frequently puts you into these situations. I am all for knowing your rights and standing up for them, but what makes you so passionate about it?

[yamahar6]

Just know you're rights to a limit, don't act like you know everything when you know nothing. Then you just look like a jackass and you will get your ass handed to you by a cop

[impactX]

For the first couple of years after getting my DL, my driving record was less than stellar. During those years, the officers that I encountered had never tried to search the car that I was driving; probably because I wasn't a criminal, never did drugs, and was never flagged on PRIME or PIRS.

Act shady and be like d****** b** and you will be treated as such. You want to be on your merry way after getting pulled over, then know your duties & rights and be cooperative. Just because they ask "can we look at your trunk", it doesn't really mean they want to do that.

[zulutango]

Originally Posted by Great68

If you asked someone to open their trunk, and they asked what the purpose was, and you said "Your car is rusted, I am doing a safety inspection", I wouldn't see that as them consenting to a vehicle search but rather, only to a safety inspection. Therefore, if you found anything unrelated to the "safety inspection" how could you explain you had probable cause and/or permission to search for those items?

Once again.,..too much US TV...in Canada, where you want to exercise your Canadian rights, it's called "reasonable & probable cause". If I'm doing a mechanical inspection on a vehicle and I find an illegal things during this inspection, then I will deal with it. Not gonna slam the trunk shut and walk away from a gun, body, bag of grass or crack, stolen property just becaus it was found during a legally authorized inspection. To even consider doing so would be just stupid. The criminal code permits this. I will have to articulate in court excatly how it was found. If the court decides the search was without legal foundation, then the case will be tossed but you don't get your crack or Tec 9 back.

[fukkeneh240]

so true on the "american" aspect. I was towed home from Washington state and the tow truck driver was telling me that his neighbor was a county police officer. this police officer saw a suspicious vehicle in a industrial complex in the middle of the night. turns out it was a drunk driver sleeping off the alcohol. well it went to court and it was thrown out because this officer did not have the right or authority to check on this person because he was not a state trooper (i guess they have more authority with drunk drivers??).

so, this is just an example of how things in the US are different from Canada. every state in the USA has there own criminal code and ways of doing things.

[zulutango]

Not only that, but the laws vary from County to County.

[Great68]

Originally Posted by zulutango

Not gonna slam the trunk shut and walk away from a gun, body, bag of grass or crack, stolen property just becaus it was found during a legally authorized inspection. To even consider doing so would be just stupid.

This is not what I was suggesting.

The criminal code permits this. I will have to articulate in court excatly how it was found. If the court decides the search was without legal foundation,

So what you are saying is that you leave it for the COURT to decide if you had legal foundation for the search. O.K. It seems to me that this is playing the "Easier to ask for forgiveness than permission" game.

then the case will be tossed but you don't get your crack or Tec 9 back.

I was not suggesting this either.

Stutterr's post is closer to the idea of what I was trying to ask. Rifling through gym bags would not be part of a "mechanical inspection" if there was nothing else that could possibly give you reason to search through those bags.

[zulutango]

Originally Posted by Great68

This is not what I was suggesting.



So what you are saying is that you leave it for the COURT to decide if you had legal foundation for the search. O.K. It seems to me that this is playing the "Easier to ask for forgiveness than permission" game.


It is not "OK for the court to decide", every time a trial goes ahead, the court decides ALL aspects of the case, including IF the search was legally conducted. It's is what they do. If thay agree it was legal, then the seized items are accepted...if they rule that it was not, then they are excluded. No Cop wants to spend all the hours involved in processing a file from contact all gthe way to court, just to see it flushed. They make as sure as possible that is was legal.


I was not suggesting this either.

Stutterr's post is closer to the idea of what I was trying to ask. Rifling through gym bags would not be part of a "mechanical inspection" if there was nothing else that could possibly give you reason to search through those bags.

IF I had to move a gym bag to inspect the vehilce and I smelled grass in it, then I would proceed accordingly under the criminal code and CDSA..I would not have authority to do as you suggested and to do so would be a charter breach and a huge waste of time and effort on my part...and I would be held personally liable for doing so. Without disclosing investigational techniques, there are a huge number of indicators that something is not as it is being presented. We enter into an investigation if we have reasonable and probable grounds to believe something illegal has happened. It's what we do. Hope that helps.

[Great68]

If asked (by the driver/owner of the vehicle), are you required to disclose what grounds you have to perform the search?

What other legal ways other than "Maintenance inspection" could you use to get yourself access into their trunk? (or are those things you wouldn't dare tell us here)

IE: you pulled someone over, they don't have drugs, booze, or anything illegal in their car but they are acting sketchy/nervous enough that you get suspicious. What legal ways other than "Mainenance/safety inspection" (you could even do this on a brand new car with no visible outside rust or damage, couldn't you?) could you get into their trunk if you wanted to?

Please don't get the wrong impression, I do not engage in illegal activity, I do not drive with illegal items in my car but I am of the "If I have nothing to hide, why should I be searched" mindset.

[Dan_Guy]

Thanks for all the answers and a great discussion

/another great thread by Me

So, lets say someone gets pulled over and is later asked to step out ( as seen in the video ) and the person closes and locks the car. Would the officer question it/try to get in, and if yes, would the officer have the authority to get in?

[woob]

So there is no Canadian equivalent to the 5th amendment?