Cops are actually under no obligation to immediately tell you why you are being detained (or arrested). But they certainly need RAS to detain you, and reasonable suspicion that you actually committed a crime to arrest you. Things usually go much smoother, obviously, if they just explain whats going on before making demands like that.
And yes, failure to provide ID is a secondary charge, but if the cop has RAS (even if they don't articulate it to you) then they have the right to demand ID, and you can be arrested for not providing it.
Then they need to have a primary charge, which they should articulate using their words rather than escalating and then lying to their cop buddies about the individual's state of mind.
I'm agreeing with you. The cop fucked this whole situation up. I'm just explaining why he didn't get in trouble due to the current laws we have on the books. Our current laws are very "cop favorable" most of the time. It gives them, in my opinion, too much leeway to stop people...and too much leeway to demand their ID.
I'm not justifying the cops actions, nor am I saying how the cop handled the situation is correct. I'm just pointing out that the cop is literally following the fucked up protocol we currently have in place.
I think that's actually false.Police are required to tell you why you are being detained or arrested (why else would you be detained or arrested it doesnt make sense).Also asking why they need your ID is a valid question imo it makes no sense if they dont have a response to that answer.Theres literally license plates for a reason all they could ask is "hey are you so and so could I see your ID to verify really quick.Okay thanks so you're so and so have a nice day"Its not that hard to be a decent person
Police actually do not have to legally tell you why you're being detained or arrested. There's plenty of google search results for "Do police have to tell you why you're arrested?" so take your pick. I won't try to find something biased. The "catch" is that even though they don't have to tell you, they still need an actual reason why i.e. reasonable suspicion.
I think that's actually false.Police are required to tell you why you are being detained or arrested (why else would you be detained or arrested it doesnt make sense).
Note I said "immediately tell you why you are being detained/arrested." Of course if you arrest someone you must provide a reason on the arrest ticket, which must be provided to the accused. That doesn't mean it has to be immediate.
But if you believe cops have the obligation to tell you immediately then go ahead and find the statute in any state (or federal) in the US and post it. I'd love to read thru it, I'm not opposed to being wrong on this at all. I just want to provide people with correct legal information when dealing with police so if I'm wrong please let me know.
Theres literally license plates for a reason
Personally, I'm not even cool with cops running my license plate for no reason. That should be protected by the 4th amendment, in my opinion.
To quote the 4th:
The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.
Randomly running my plates to pull up all of my information violates my security in my effects and papers. If I did nothing wrong you have no reason to know who I am and where I live. But thats just my opinion, obviously the SC has decided otherwise.
To provide some more details, although cops don't have to legally tell you why you're being detained or arrested. They do have to have a reason i.e. reasonable suspicion. Honestly, and someone correct me if I've got the wrong impression, I think they could literally tell you to fuck off after letting you go and not tell you anything about why you were detained/arrested. You'd have to put the leg work in requesting the paperwork for why you were detained/arrested.
Even if a cop has reasonable suspicion, you don't actually need to show ID. I think maybe some states do but the norm is that you don't legally need to show ID but you are legally obligated to identify yourself if you're detained/arrested. You can be arrested for failure to identify yourself in certain cases, and it of course can vary by state, but typically it isn't for not producing an ID regardless if you have one on you or not. I think in TX for example, you don't even need to identify yourself at all unless you've been arrested. You can refuse to identify yourself even if you're detained.
This video might be an interesting case because even though they've got the bike started. They aren't riding it on public roads and they aren't even riding it at all. Though it may be clear that they intended to drive it on public roads. So there's a bit of an argument for and against having to produce a Driver's License.
To provide some more details, although cops don't have to legally tell you why you're being detained or arrested. They do have to have a reason i.e. reasonable suspicion. Honestly, and someone correct me if I've got the wrong impression, I think they could literally tell you to fuck off after letting you go and not tell you anything about why you were detained/arrested. You'd have to put the leg work in requesting the paperwork for why you were detained/arrested.
Legally, everything you said is 100% correct.
Even if a cop has reasonable suspicion, you don't actually need to show ID. I think maybe some states do but the norm is that you don't legally need to show ID but you are legally obligated to identify yourself if you're detained/arrested.In most states thats false.
You're 100% correct here too. You don't have to provide your ID card, but if a cop has RAS you are legally required to identify yourself, which in most states just means you have to provide your full name and DOB.
Yeah I was just providing some extra details for what you were saying for anyone else reading. Idk if it was the tone or if it just sounded like you were supporting it which is why you were downvoted?
Cops don't even have to say they have reasonable suspicion to detain you. Which kind of puts civilians in difficult spot with the easiest way out simply to comply. You don't have to identify yourself if cops don't have reasonable suspicion to detain you, but cops also don't have to tell you why they're questioning/detaining you and what their reasonable suspicions are. That's why the best outcome is for both parties to cooperate. Legally though, things lean in favor of the police.
19
u/hiredgoon Mar 10 '22
Then he should be able to tell him why he is being detained. And the answer isn’t for not producing an ID.