The unintended consequences of remaining silent

Vitaeus · Oct 9, 2012

amzbrady said:
Correct me if I'm wrong, but I Believe Washington is a can defend with equal to or less than with state. Every state should be can defend with what ever it takes to save yourself states. If a small woman is being beat on by a large male attacker, than for the most part that woman can not use a baseball bat in defense. I also believe that it should be if a cop starts to draw down on you, you should be able to draw back, and if a cop can come up on what he thinks may be trouble down and ready then we should be able to, too. But thats, just me.

actually in Washington we have teh following if a felony is at issue:

9A.16.050
Homicide — by other person — when justifiable.
Homicide is also justifiable when committed either:

(1) In the lawful defense of the slayer, or his or her husband, wife, parent, child, brother, or sister, or of any other person in his or her presence or company, when there is reasonable ground to apprehend a design on the part of the person slain to commit a felony or to do some great personal injury to the slayer or to any such person, and there is imminent danger of such design being accomplished; or

(2) In the actual resistance of an attempt to commit a felony upon the slayer, in his or her presence, or upon or in a dwelling, or other place of abode, in which he or she is.

There is also RCWs that protect self=defense by making it expensive for the state to prosecute a case that ends up in a self-defense verdict http://apps.leg.wa.gov/rcw/default.aspx?cite=9A.16.110

We have it better than states with stand your ground laws, we have a good State Constitution and the case law to back it up.

Citizen · Oct 9, 2012

EMNofSeattle said:
SNIP It does not appear that there is a requirement one use only the exact class of weapon used against them

Which, if you think about it, makes sense.

If somebody comes at me with a knife, I'm supposed to hunt around for a knife? What if the victim is elderly and uses a cane? Is he really supposed to try to dance against a knife and use only his own knife?

Freedom1Man · Oct 9, 2012

Citizen said:
Which, if you think about it, makes sense.

If somebody comes at me with a knife, I'm supposed to hunt around for a knife? What if the victim is elderly and uses a cane? Is he really supposed to try to dance against a knife and use only his own knife?

We are talking about Maryland right? That whole state does not make sense.

sudden valley gunner · Oct 9, 2012

EMN want to be a cop maybe, so of course he wants you to talk.

Hayes has posted in Washington Forum...didn't like my idea of not carrying or showing ID to an officer when not required to do so by law so yes he too is biased toward the Enforcers.

Attorney suggestion to me....don't say anything to cops except I defended myself.....let your attorney point out the evidence.

He has seen people who thought they were helping their cases harm their cases. Prosecutors and cops do and may use any apparent "inconsistency" against you. This of course isn't always the case and maybe not the norm, but do you want to chance it?

Yard Sale · Oct 9, 2012

EMNofSeattle said:
also if you have blood tests ran and they show you weren't under the influence of something that strengthens your defense.

Been there, done that. After an arrest, I went to the E.R. to treat police-inflicted injury. I asked the doc for a blood test because I was arrested for DUI/possession of a firearm while intoxicated, despite not having a drink in months. Doc refused to draw blood without a medical reason to do so.

You think after shooting somebody and getting arrested for suspicion of ADW/murder, the police are going to honor your request for a blood draw?

Ca Patriot · Oct 9, 2012

The issue is never "what to tell police" of "if I should speak to police"

The issue is WHEN.

If you are involved in a self defense shooting then there will be a time and a place for you to speak with police.

99.9% of the time that time and place is AFTER you speak with your LAWYER.

There is absolutely no reason to speak with police at the scene unless there just happens to be 12 jurors sitting there.

There police dont care about the truth and the police are not your friends and the police are not there to help you.

You need an advocate and an expert who is on YOUR side. That is your lawyer.

Gunslinger · Oct 9, 2012

Citizen said:
Which, if you think about it, makes sense.

If somebody comes at me with a knife, I'm supposed to hunt around for a knife? What if the victim is elderly and uses a cane? Is he really supposed to try to dance against a knife and use only his own knife?

Disparity of force is always an extenuating circumstance. A 68 year old may indeed be in fear of death or grievous bodily injury by an unarmed 240 pound 18 year old and deadly force is then a defensable option. As would be someone faced with three attackers. A shod foot is a deadly weapon, as well, and if the person reasonably feared being kicked/stomped, deadly force is again defensable.Even in the marxist workers paradise of ny, Goetz was not charged with murder or even manslaughter. He acted in self defense. The Sullivan Act was all they got him for.

WalkingWolf · Oct 9, 2012

Yard Sale said:
Been there, done that. After an arrest, I went to the E.R. to treat police-inflicted injury. I asked the doc for a blood test because I was arrested for DUI/possession of a firearm while intoxicated, despite not having a drink in months. Doc refused to draw blood without a medical reason to do so.

You think after shooting somebody and getting arrested for suspicion of ADW/murder, the police are going to honor your request for a blood draw?

Sorry but I am having a hard time with the above. I have never been to the Dr. or ER without having blood drawn... NEVER!

EMNofSeattle · Oct 9, 2012

WalkingWolf said:
Sorry but I am having a hard time with the above. I have never been to the Dr. or ER without having blood drawn... NEVER!

yeah I'm having a hard time believing a doctor wouldn't be happy to add to your bill with an alcohol test.

I agree, I've never heard of anyone going to ER and never getting a piss test/blood draw until now. That's routine, I think they have to so they know if you do have any drugs or alcohol in your system the require special consideration in what kinds of drugs/treatments they can use or prescribe.

Fallschirjmäger · Oct 9, 2012

With the greatest respect to EMNofSeattle, the gentleman's advice is specious.

Well following his advice if you acted in self-defense can get you accommodations of the state for 20 to life under certain circumstances.

Anyone taking the time to listen to the advice given will note that what is recommended is that you allow your attorney to address all questions and concerns of the police officers. This is Absolutely the very best advice that can be given, your attorney will presumably be much more familiar with the applicable laws and the responses to any laws than you are. It's his job to be, right?

In the aftermath of a life-threatening event, one is quite likely to be suffering from a massive adrenaline dump into the bloodstream.

I suppose one might want to inquire just how long a period of time a police union wants to elapse before any of its union members are allowed to be interrogated or give a statement after a police-involved shooting.....

Ca Patriot · Oct 9, 2012

Fallschirmjäger said:
I suppose one might want to inquire just how long a period of time a police union wants to elapse before any of its union members are allowed to be interrogated or give a statement after a police-involved shooting.....

Great point.

Police are NOT taken to interrogation rooms and hammered by multiple detectives over the course of hours.

They are sent home and then given union provided attorneys. Then the police give some general evidence to the attorney and then ask the officer to come in to the station 2 weeks later with his attorney to give a statement.

OC for ME · Oct 10, 2012

You forgot to add the multiple opportunities to "clarify" his initial report to ensure that all of the "relevant facts" are clearly articulated to ensure the accuracy of his report.

LV XD9 · Oct 10, 2012

WalkingWolf said:
Sorry but I am having a hard time with the above. I have never been to the Dr. or ER without having blood drawn... NEVER!

I have, both with my regular doctor and in an ER.

Didn't you say you have a heart condition? Did it ever occur to you that that condition may have something to do with them drawing blood every single time you visit?

EMNofSeattle said:
yeah I'm having a hard time believing a doctor wouldn't be happy to add to your bill with an alcohol test.

I agree, I've never heard of anyone going to ER and never getting a piss test/blood draw until now. That's routine, I think they have to so they know if you do have any drugs or alcohol in your system the require special consideration in what kinds of drugs/treatments they can use or prescribe.

It is not routine to have a "piss test/blood draw" in the ER.

It all depends on the circumstances.

Good god, where do you people come up with this BS? Do you honestly think he's lying? To what end?

skidmark · Oct 10, 2012

LV XD9 said:
.... It is not routine to have a "piss test/blood draw" in the ER. It all depends on the circumstances.

Good god, where do you people come up with this BS? Do you honestly think he's lying? To what end?

Analysis for presence of a drug, or the quantification of the presence of a drug, is part of a search and needs to follow all the rules for searches. The ER may draw blood for other medically appropriate tests, but the cops cannot use any of that to see what your BAC might be. AFAIK every state has some sort of implied consent law for breathalyzer testing if arrested on suspicion of DUI/DWI, and a blood test if the breathalyzer is refused. I may be wrong but they may need a court order to draw the blood if you refuse to give the medical staff permission - but that's pretty much a conviction for something as well as having your license suspended.

If you are arrested on suspicion of DUI/DWI and refuse the breathalyzer then the cops can tell the ER to draw blood. If the ER doc refuses to do it "unless there is a medical reason" then the cops can go get a court order for the blood draw - it does not then have to be approved by the doc. If he tries to prevent it he could be arrested (obstruction of justice) and also find himself in front of the judge for contempt. Now the doc may have some moral/ethical reason for not approving a blood draw that is not directly related to medical care. In that case he can allow it to be done over his objection that is written into the medical care notes. Again, if they need to, the cops can get a court order.

As to being arrested for DUI/DWI and not having any sort of test (besides possibly a field breathalyzer screening) would be my sense of ideal - no evidence, therefore no crime and thus very likely false arrest/imprisonment.

stay safe.

WalkingWolf · Oct 10, 2012

skidmark said:
Analysis for presence of a drug, or the quantification of the presence of a drug, is part of a search and needs to follow all the rules for searches. The ER may draw blood for other medically appropriate tests, but the cops cannot use any of that to see what your BAC might be. AFAIK every state has some sort of implied consent law for breathalyzer testing if arrested on suspicion of DUI/DWI, and a blood test if the breathalyzer is refused. I may be wrong but they may need a court order to draw the blood if you refuse to give the medical staff permission - but that's pretty much a conviction for something as well as having your license suspended.

If you are arrested on suspicion of DUI/DWI and refuse the breathalyzer then the cops can tell the ER to draw blood. If the ER doc refuses to do it "unless there is a medical reason" then the cops can go get a court order for the blood draw - it does not then have to be approved by the doc. If he tries to prevent it he could be arrested (obstruction of justice) and also find himself in front of the judge for contempt. Now the doc may have some moral/ethical reason for not approving a blood draw that is not directly related to medical care. In that case he can allow it to be done over his objection that is written into the medical care notes. Again, if they need to, the cops can get a court order.

As to being arrested for DUI/DWI and not having any sort of test (besides possibly a field breathalyzer screening) would be my sense of ideal - no evidence, therefore no crime and thus very likely false arrest/imprisonment.

stay safe.

Most cases I have seen the blood drawn, but a court order must be obtained to get the results. BUT if the person is bleeding, towels, gauze, bloody clothing needs no warrant. Doctors primary concern is the patient, and to some extent must stick to Doctor patient privileges. I have been going to doctors as far back as I can remember, way before they found the heart condition. They always drew blood, even for injuries, YMMV.

skidmark · Oct 11, 2012

As previously stated, we are in agreement that doctors usually draw blood for medical diagnostic testing even when you come in to get a speck of dirt out of your eye. For the patient that is openly bleeding, there will be bloody waste but that blood is contaminated and unfit for analysis for BAC. Further, as you point out, the cops would need a court order to have it presented for analysis - at which point the lab would most likely tell them it is contaminated.

Bringing this back to the original point of the thread - refusing to be tested for BAC, like other instances of not talking to/with the cops, carries consequences. For me the point is balancing those known and possible consequences against those coming from not talking to/with the cops. Being old enough to see past the immediate future, I am more inclined to suffer a few days in jail* with my mouth shut than to suffer years in prison because I opened my mouth - and I'm a good guy!

stay safe.

* - based on my personal health, being detained in jail carries an actual risk of serious injury/death unless I can be given at least certain of my daily meds. In other words, deciding to do something that may cause me to go to jail is not just big talk on my part.

sudden valley gunner · Oct 11, 2012

You know what cop unions and their lawyers advise cops? To not say a single thing without their attorney. There was a link to that at one time here in Washington. I have week google fu.

sharkey · Oct 11, 2012

sudden valley gunner said:
You know what cop unions and their lawyers advise cops? To not say a single thing without their attorney. There was a link to that at one time here in Washington. I have week google fu.

http://www.policechiefmagazine.org/...on=display_arch&article_id=699&issue_id=92005

Scroll about halfway down.

5. Ideally, the officer should be provided with some recovery time before detailed interviewing begins. This can range from a few hours to overnight. Officers who have been afforded this opportunity are likely to provide a more coherent and accurate statements. Providing a secure setting, insulated from the press and curious officers, is desirable during the interview process

ETA: NM, that was kind of off base. Not WA specific nor about attorneys. My bad.

skidmark · Oct 11, 2012

What the cops are telling themselves, based on the most current research. (OIS = Officer Involved Shooting)

What's good for the cops ought to be good for us - but don't hold your breath.

stay safe.

http://www.forcescience.org/fsinews/2011/12/force-science-ews-193/ Readers react to court’s limitation on lawyer aid after an OIS

http://www.forcescience.org/fsinews...too-much-from-a-police-attorney-after-an-ois/ How much help is too much from a police attorney after an OIS?

http://www.forcescience.org/fsinews...ience-based-trio-share-their-recommendations/ What’s next after a shooting? Force Science-based trio share their recommendations I. What’s next after a shooting? Force Science-based trio share their recommendations
After an OIS:
• What 12 questions should an officer answer at the scene?
• Besides wound treatment, what critical benefits does he or she gain from prompt transport to a medical facility?
• What does an agency gain by encouraging an officer to have independent legal counsel before a detailed statement is taken?
• What question do cops most want answered when the smoke clears?

The unintended consequences of remaining silent

Vitaeus

Regular Member

Citizen

Founder's Club Member

Freedom1Man

Regular Member

sudden valley gunner

Regular Member

Yard Sale

Regular Member

Ca Patriot

Regular Member

Gunslinger

Regular Member

WalkingWolf

Regular Member

EMNofSeattle

Regular Member

Fallschirjmäger

Active member

Ca Patriot

Regular Member

OC for ME

Regular Member

LV XD9

Regular Member

skidmark

Campaign Veteran

WalkingWolf

Regular Member

skidmark

Campaign Veteran

sudden valley gunner

Regular Member

sharkey

Regular Member

skidmark

Campaign Veteran