Citizen
Founder's Club Member
imported post
Mainsail wrote:
If he doesn't have genuine reasonable suspicion, he'd better care whether he has my consent.
That's the whole point of expressing the refused consent. From that instant forward, if he does not have reasonable suspicion and detains me further, his personnel file is in jeopardy. If he is working from some personal bias,is in error on his law,is making up the law as he goes along, is enforcing his personal opinion, it doesn't matter.
Its really all aboutleveraging your negotiating position. Maximizing your defenses. Setting up the situation so you can push back that much harder once you areout of their hands.
As long as I refuse consent to the encounter, I don't have to ask if I am free to go.I don't have to establish by further questions during the encounter whether he has reasonable suspicion.It ispre-arranged thatif he does not have reasonable suspicion and I refuse consent, I amautomatically free to go. Its his failure to do so that gets him in trouble. Also, if he doesn't let me go the instant I refuse, I can immediately assume that I am being detained without asking even one more question.No haggling later over whether my ID in his handsconstitutes a detention, no haggling later over whether he and hisbuddypositioned themselves to block my exit, no haggling over whether he phrased his inquiries as requests but used an authoritative tone ofvoice. Those pointsall become moot. Consent was expressly refused.
Itthen becomes just a matter of finding outwhether reasonable suspicion exists(ed). Either during the detention or after the detention when I FOIA the 911 call and dispatcher traffic.
None of this is to say that you can't ask whether you're being detained, what the reasonable suspicion is, whether you're free to go. I'm sayingfirst refuse consent to the encounter. Ask all the questions you can. But do it after refusing consent to theencounter. No matter what else happens after that during the encounter, if you refused consent, and it turns out he did not have reasonable suspicion to justify a detention, you're on solid ground with a complaint.
Mainsail wrote:
If he doesn't have genuine reasonable suspicion, he'd better care whether he has my consent.
That's the whole point of expressing the refused consent. From that instant forward, if he does not have reasonable suspicion and detains me further, his personnel file is in jeopardy. If he is working from some personal bias,is in error on his law,is making up the law as he goes along, is enforcing his personal opinion, it doesn't matter.
Its really all aboutleveraging your negotiating position. Maximizing your defenses. Setting up the situation so you can push back that much harder once you areout of their hands.
As long as I refuse consent to the encounter, I don't have to ask if I am free to go.I don't have to establish by further questions during the encounter whether he has reasonable suspicion.It ispre-arranged thatif he does not have reasonable suspicion and I refuse consent, I amautomatically free to go. Its his failure to do so that gets him in trouble. Also, if he doesn't let me go the instant I refuse, I can immediately assume that I am being detained without asking even one more question.No haggling later over whether my ID in his handsconstitutes a detention, no haggling later over whether he and hisbuddypositioned themselves to block my exit, no haggling over whether he phrased his inquiries as requests but used an authoritative tone ofvoice. Those pointsall become moot. Consent was expressly refused.
Itthen becomes just a matter of finding outwhether reasonable suspicion exists(ed). Either during the detention or after the detention when I FOIA the 911 call and dispatcher traffic.
None of this is to say that you can't ask whether you're being detained, what the reasonable suspicion is, whether you're free to go. I'm sayingfirst refuse consent to the encounter. Ask all the questions you can. But do it after refusing consent to theencounter. No matter what else happens after that during the encounter, if you refused consent, and it turns out he did not have reasonable suspicion to justify a detention, you're on solid ground with a complaint.
