• We are now running on a new, and hopefully much-improved, server. In addition we are also on new forum software. Any move entails a lot of technical details and I suspect we will encounter a few issues as the new server goes live. Please be patient with us. It will be worth it! :) Please help by posting all issues here.
  • The forum will be down for about an hour this weekend for maintenance. I apologize for the inconvenience.
  • If you are having trouble seeing the forum then you may need to clear your browser's DNS cache. Click here for instructions on how to do that
  • Please review the Forum Rules frequently as we are constantly trying to improve the forum for our members and visitors.

Well it finally happened

skidmark

Campaign Veteran
Joined
Jan 15, 2007
Messages
10,444
Location
Valhalla
imported post

Let's see if we can sort this out.

You were minding your own business when an ODU cop came over and asked to chat with you. You chatted with him. He asked you for ID.

Problem point #1 & #2-

A) You believed you needed to stay there and respond to the cop's request to ID yourself.This seems to be, up to this point, a "consensual encounter"- the cop wants to talk to you and asks who you are. He has no "official" reason to stop/detain/arrest/seize you and is counting on you cooperating out of fear/ignorance/bad judgement. Walk away. If you feel like it, say something to the effect that you do not wish to talk with him.

(He will bluster and tell you you need to answer him, that you need to present ID, that you better do as he says. Ask him if you are being detained. If the answer is "No" then walk away. Go back to talking with your friends may not be the best thing to do, as opposed to walking across the street or otherwise away from him.)

B) You believed that you needed to present some paperwork in order to ID yourself. All you needed to do was state your name and city/county of residence. Sorry you were not aware of that before your encounter.

In your willingness to provide paperwork, you did the "up against the wall" posture to allow the ODU cop to put hands on you and remove your personal property from your clothing.

Problem points #2 & #3 - by assuming a submissive posture you indicated to the cop that you A) had been through the arrest drill before, and/or B) you were willing to go through the arrest drill and/or C) you were willing to allow him to violate not only your person and your dignity but your rights as he saw fit. If you must (required by law, not the cop's whimsical desire) produce paperwork, tell the cop you will be reaching for it - do not let them take it as that will constitute a search that you consented to. That means he can then continue to search other parts of your clothing as well. Why let him, even if you "have nothing to hide"?

"Tool cop" tells you to sit on the curb. You asked if you were being detained but when told "No" you hung around without sitting down so "Tool cop" uses his "command voice" to order you to sit on the curb.

Problem points #4 & #5 - A) you were told you were not being detained but chose to remain there. (Does this begin to sound repetitious?) Instead, walk away or -- B) "Tool cop) uses his "command voice" and actually detains/seizes you.

You get into a "discussion" with "Tool cop" about his legal authority to detain/seize you and his possible violation of your rights.

Problem point #6 - "Never argue the law on the street - that's what courts are for." Sort of like "Never try to teach a pig so sing - you will get dirty and annoy the pig." Well, you both got dirty and annoyed the cop.

Now that you are de facto detained/seized the cops have the authority to take your ID and copy it down so that they can enter it into their field notes, then transfer it into their database of known/suspected troublemakers, and use it against you in the future as "evidence" of being an uncooperative and suspicious/dangerous (gun-toting) person, worthy of keeping an eye on.

The ODU cops finish with you, and you went back to your friends and hung around to see what would happen next.

Could be problem point #7 - cops have a tendency to view that behavior as taunting - daring them to do something else. They wanted to roust you and convince you that it would not be healthy for you to be in "their" neighborhood. Sometimes a strategic retreat is the better part of both valor and safety.

I'm not pointing all this out to chew you out or beat up on you about how you did or did not "blow" this encounter. There's just no absolute single way to respond when dealing with cops. I just figured you might want to look at some specific acts that might have contributed to the escalation of your encounter.

About the only thing we more-experienced folks can say is that if you ask if you are being detained and are told "No", the best thing is to walk away right then and there. (BTW, experience isthe stuffyou get right after something happens when you needed to know that stuff before or asthe eventwas happening. Some of us get experience first-hand and some of us get it vicariously watching stuff happen to others.)

Now - what can you do (besides learn from the encounter)? My own opinion is that you have almost no leg to stand on in filing a complaint because you engaged voluntarily in a "consensual encounter". The "Tool cop" who told you to sit on the curb based on his perception of need for "officer security" has a pretty good case on his side - he was dealing with an argumentative armed citizen who may (don't know as I didn't see the encounter & you don't mention it) have been exhibiting some pre-attack indicators -- waving of hands/arms, increased rate of breath with breathing being shallow, increasing volume of voice, eyes focusing (looking at) elsewhere than on his face, etc. (All of this is from his point of view, of course. How you saw/described things would be different.)

Bottom line seems to be you had a learning experience. Hope you can profit from it in the future.

stay safe.

skidmark
 

Citizen

Founder's Club Member
Joined
Nov 15, 2006
Messages
18,269
Location
Fairfax Co., VA
imported post

t33j wrote:
SNIP If they had reasonable suspicion to begin with why tell me I was not under detention from the beginning?
Good point. I imagine a very sneaky cop might do that, knowing he needs you in a cooperative frame of mind--to get more info. Then make the seizure if you decide to walk away. But, I think you have a good point.Keep thinking.

I wonder if the second cop did not know the first cop lacked reasonable suspicion. How does it shift the dynamics if we let the first cop have no RAS (reasonable articulable suspicion), and the bossy cop didn't know about it.

But, the gun non-seizure certainly proves he didn't consider you dangerous. So, he contradicted himself that he made you sit for his safety. Maybe he just doesn't like standing contact-ees. Makes him nervous or something, maybe. (chuckle) Maybe he didn't feel like running if you took off.

The more I think about it, the more I think they knew all along you were just one of those open carry guys and were just out to ID you. It would have been too easy to claim officer safety, disarm you, and run the serial number to see if it was stolen.

Anybody else got any ideas?
 

Citizen

Founder's Club Member
Joined
Nov 15, 2006
Messages
18,269
Location
Fairfax Co., VA
imported post

skidmark wrote:
SNIP Now - what can you do (besides learn from the encounter)? My own opinion is that you have almost no leg to stand on in filing a complaint because you engaged voluntarily in a "consensual encounter". The "Tool cop" who told you to sit on the curb based on his perception of need for "officer security" has a pretty good case on his side - he was dealing with an argumentative armed citizen who may (don't know as I didn't see the encounter & you don't mention it) have been exhibiting some pre-attack indicators -- waving of hands/arms, increased rate of breath with breathing being shallow, increasing volume of voice, eyes focusing (looking at) elsewhere than on his face, etc. (All of this is from his point of view, of course. How you saw/described things would be different.)
Oh, I don't know, Skidmark. Wouldn't you say bossy cop needed RAS of a crime before he had authority to take it to an involuntary level, as in seize the OCer?
 

t33j

Regular Member
Joined
Dec 28, 2009
Messages
1,384
Location
King George, VA
imported post

If the 2nd cop assumed the 1st had RAS then I would have already been detained no? 15 seconds pass between when he (cop 2) tells me I'm not being detained, and when he tells me he has enough reasonable suspicion to detain me. I wasn't doing anything in those 15 seconds except sitting on the curb and complaining that I thought he didn't have RAS (assuming I was being detained at that point). He would have to have been lying to me the first time I asked.

I'm pretty sure I was not coming across as dangerous. I felt calm and had my arms crossed at my chest in an effort to keep my hands away from my side. I was checking out their name tags but other than that I was making eye contact. Naturally, cops 2 and 3 were giving me the hard stare the whole time.


Skid:
Yes, I was not sure what information I was required to provide. I attempted find out a while back but couldn't find an answer that satisfied me. Do you have a cite?
 

richarcm

Regular Member
Joined
Jul 1, 2008
Messages
1,182
Location
Richmond, VA
imported post

Yeah it seems that the turning point was letting him take your ID. I've always rehearsed in my head that if a cop ever questions me that I will pretend that I didn't drive and thus didn't have a need to have my ID on me. Once you let him take that and asked if you were being detained and he said no....you were still in a position where he forced you to remain because he was taking notes from the license.

I'm glad nothing horrible happened from this. Because I too have never had to experience anything significant with an officer I do thank you for sharing. These things are good to read so I can learn from everyone ELSES mistakes. :dude:
 

NovaCop

New member
Joined
Dec 6, 2009
Messages
471
Location
, ,
imported post

Citizen wrote:
t33j wrote:
SNIP If they had reasonable suspicion to begin with why tell me I was not under detention from the beginning?
Good point. I imagine a very sneaky cop might do that, knowing he needs you in a cooperative frame of mind--to get more info. Then make the seizure if you decide to walk away. But, I think you have a good point.Keep thinking.

I wonder if the second cop did not know the first cop lacked reasonable suspicion. How does it shift the dynamics if we let the first cop have no RAS (reasonable articulable suspicion), and the bossy cop didn't know about it.

But, the gun non-seizure certainly proves he didn't consider you dangerous. So, he contradicted himself that he made you sit for his safety. Maybe he just doesn't like standing contact-ees. Makes him nervous or something, maybe. (chuckle) Maybe he didn't feel like running if you took off.

The more I think about it, the more I think they knew all along you were just one of those open carry guys and were just out to ID you. It would have been too easy to claim officer safety, disarm you, and run the serial number to see if it was stolen.

Anybody else got any ideas?
wow citizen, I actually agree with you on this one (even though you didn't cite anything in this thread).

Cop's point of view- For the most part, it's always best to attempt to get a consensual encounter with a suspect or citizen even when you have RAS. Why? Because some people will take the friendly encounter and admit things they normally wouldn't. Also, you may want to obtain a consent search on someone or their property, which you lose when you detain them. Keep the RAS in your back pocket until it's your last resort to force someone to stay. It's true that it's a little sneaky, but it does catch real criminals.

In this case (given what was said was what actually occurred), it seems like the first officer saw the gun and decided that he would attempt a consensual encounter in order to get information for an information card (for their database). Ok, not a horrible idea. The second officer must not have communicated with the first and for whatever reason treated the guy with the gun as though they had RAS. This showed poor communication and poor teamwork (1st officer should have ran the show, 2nd did not fully know what was going on and should have sat back and watched the 1st officer's back- academy 101). I think the 2nd cop was just confused or lacks training. If he thought they had RAS and told you to sit down and you did not, he should have forced you down.

It seems that everything was legal until the 2nd officer ordered you to sit on the curb. That would result in you believing you are no longer free to go. However, like mentioned above, if there was more of a back story to this that you did not know about, there is a small chance they had RAS (legitimate person calls 911 and believes they saw you do something, etc, and you match the description, etc.). It's true that the officer does not need to tell you about the RAS. In fact, some people get surprised with the RAS at court or when they read the report.

If you want to FOIA everything and obtain a lawyer, that's your decision. If I were you, I'd ask to speak with their Sgt, or even Chief. Explain what occurred and your dissatisfaction and see if he takes it serious. He should have a talk with his staff to go over procedures. I know my department takes complaints seriously and will send a letter back to you detailing their findings and what they did to correct the issue (if they are found to be wrong).

My .02.
 

SouthernBoy

Regular Member
Joined
May 12, 2007
Messages
5,837
Location
Western Prince William County, Virginia, USA
imported post

Gentlemen, please excuse my ignorance with my question here but I really would like to ask it.

These were OCU police according to the OP's story. And according to his story, he was not on ODU property at the time of this event. So how is it that:

1) OCU police have any sort of authority over anyone outside of university property?
2) If they do have such authority, at what point does it end (in terms of property lines)?


Again, this just seems so strange to me that any college or university police can do something like this outside of school property.
 

peter nap

Accomplished Advocate
Joined
Oct 16, 2007
Messages
13,551
Location
Valhalla
imported post

SouthernBoy wrote:
Gentlemen, please excuse my ignorance with my question here but I really would like to ask it.

These were OCU police according to the OP's story. And according to his story, he was not on ODU property at the time of this event. So how is it that:

1) OCU police have any sort of authority over anyone outside of university property?
2) If they do have such authority, at what point does it end (in terms of property lines)?


Again, this just seems so strange to me that any college or university police can do something like this outside of school property.
Most colleges have a cooperative agreement withthe locality for at least the immediate areas areas around campus. This makes them multi-jurisdictional and either department can respond.
 

skidmark

Campaign Veteran
Joined
Jan 15, 2007
Messages
10,444
Location
Valhalla
imported post

Citizen wrote:
skidmark wrote:
SNIP Now - what can you do (besides learn from the encounter)? My own opinion is that you have almost no leg to stand on in filing a complaint because you engaged voluntarily in a "consensual encounter". The "Tool cop" who told you to sit on the curb based on his perception of need for "officer security" has a pretty good case on his side - he was dealing with an argumentative armed citizen who may (don't know as I didn't see the encounter & you don't mention it) have been exhibiting some pre-attack indicators -- waving of hands/arms, increased rate of breath with breathing being shallow, increasing volume of voice, eyes focusing (looking at) elsewhere than on his face, etc. (All of this is from his point of view, of course. How you saw/described things would be different.)
Oh, I don't know, Skidmark. Wouldn't you say bossy cop needed RAS of a crime before he had authority to take it to an involuntary level, as in seize the OCer?

Nope! See my comment - argumentative and potentially dangerous armed citizen = seizure to place in a position/posture that reduces the person's ability to initiate an attack. Officer safety, as "Tool Cop" said.

stay safe.

skidmark



ETA -- I should have written this as part of my original response. Sorry for the mental lapse.

There is no question in my mind that the cop was WRONG, WRONG, WRONG in his behavior, and that in additio he had at best a very shakey legal leg to stand on.

But the OP engaged in a consensual contact and then refused to "respect my authoritay!" which requires (as in his pride and street cred are in jeopardy if he does not) the cop to assert control over the situation and the OP.

QUESTION: If it is protected political speech to flip the bird to a cop, is it also protected political speech to suggest to him he commit a sex act on an inclined plane with a fried pastry as you walk away after being told you are not being detained/under arrest?:uhoh:

stay safe.
 

t33j

Regular Member
Joined
Dec 28, 2009
Messages
1,384
Location
King George, VA
imported post

SouthernBoy wrote:
Gentlemen, please excuse my ignorance with my question here but I really would like to ask it.

These were OCU police according to the OP's story. And according to his story, he was not on ODU property at the time of this event. So how is it that:

1) OCU police have any sort of authority over anyone outside of university property?
2) If they do have such authority, at what point does it end (in terms of property lines)?


Again, this just seems so strange to me that any college or university police can do something like this outside of school property.
~1 mile from campus boundaries. Which is not clearly defined by the way.
http://www.odu.edu/ao/president/blog/index.php?todo=details&id=20689
 

wylde007

Regular Member
Joined
Jan 23, 2009
Messages
3,035
Location
Va Beach, Occupied VA
imported post

I'm going to guess the OP was at Borjo's across from the University Bookstore. I teach at the Health Sciences Building one (1) block away.

Between the Bookstore and the Health Sciences building is a parking garage on the west side of Monarch Way. On the east side of Monarch Way near W 45th is The Boar's Nest. About 200' north of that near W 46th Street is the University Police Office.

While they are ODU police, they drive State vehicles and have full arrest authority, as far as I am aware.

However, they do not have the authority to Terry someone who is not breaking the law. The OP should have walked away... except I get the sneaky suspicion he would have been further bullied for exercising his 2nd and subsequent 4th Amendment rights.
 

skidmark

Campaign Veteran
Joined
Jan 15, 2007
Messages
10,444
Location
Valhalla
imported post

t33j wrote:
If the 2nd cop assumed the 1st had RAS then I would have already been detained no? 15 seconds pass between when he (cop 2) tells me I'm not being detained, and when he tells me he has enough reasonable suspicion to detain me. I wasn't doing anything in those 15 seconds except sitting on the curb and complaining that I thought he didn't have RAS (assuming I was being detained at that point). He would have to have been lying to me the first time I asked.
sitting on the curb running your mouth (from the cop's perspective) is an indicator of concern for officer safety. You got seized to control your behavior and prevent you from easily attacking the cop(s).
I'm pretty sure I was not coming across as dangerous. I felt calm and had my arms crossed at my chest in an effort to keep my hands away from my side. I was checking out their name tags but other than that I was making eye contact. Naturally, cops 2 and 3 were giving me the hard stare the whole time.
Arms crossed is a threatening display of power. Just ask any cop.

Skid:
Yes, I was not sure what information I was required to provide. I attempted find out a while back but couldn't find an answer that satisfied me. Do you have a cite?
I don't have a cite handy because there is nothing in statute and case law eludes me at the moment. GOOGLE "stop and identify law" or wait for Citizen or User to give the case law. My mind is pretty much toast at the moment on getting citations.

stay safe.

skidmark
 

fully_armed_biker

Regular Member
Joined
Aug 27, 2009
Messages
463
Location
Portsmouth, Virginia, USA
imported post

NovaCop10 wrote:
Citizen wrote:
t33j wrote:
SNIP If they had reasonable suspicion to begin with why tell me I was not under detention from the beginning?
Good point. I imagine a very sneaky cop might do that, knowing he needs you in a cooperative frame of mind--to get more info. Then make the seizure if you decide to walk away. But, I think you have a good point.Keep thinking.

I wonder if the second cop did not know the first cop lacked reasonable suspicion. How does it shift the dynamics if we let the first cop have no RAS (reasonable articulable suspicion), and the bossy cop didn't know about it.

But, the gun non-seizure certainly proves he didn't consider you dangerous. So, he contradicted himself that he made you sit for his safety. Maybe he just doesn't like standing contact-ees. Makes him nervous or something, maybe. (chuckle) Maybe he didn't feel like running if you took off.

The more I think about it, the more I think they knew all along you were just one of those open carry guys and were just out to ID you. It would have been too easy to claim officer safety, disarm you, and run the serial number to see if it was stolen.

Anybody else got any ideas?
wow citizen, I actually agree with you on this one (even though you didn't cite anything in this thread).

Cop's point of view- For the most part, it's always best to attempt to get a consensual encounter with a suspect or citizen even when you have RAS. Why? Because some people will take the friendly encounter and admit things they normally wouldn't. Also, you may want to obtain a consent search on someone or their property, which you lose when you detain them. Keep the RAS in your back pocket until it's your last resort to force someone to stay. It's true that it's a little sneaky, but it does catch real criminals.

In this case (given what was said was what actually occurred), it seems like the first officer saw the gun and decided that he would attempt a consensual encounter in order to get information for an information card (for their database). Ok, not a horrible idea. The second officer must not have communicated with the first and for whatever reason treated the guy with the gun as though they had RAS. This showed poor communication and poor teamwork (1st officer should have ran the show, 2nd did not fully know what was going on and should have sat back and watched the 1st officer's back- academy 101). I think the 2nd cop was just confused or lacks training. If he thought they had RAS and told you to sit down and you did not, he should have forced you down.

It seems that everything was legal until the 2nd officer ordered you to sit on the curb. That would result in you believing you are no longer free to go. However, like mentioned above, if there was more of a back story to this that you did not know about, there is a small chance they had RAS (legitimate person calls 911 and believes they saw you do something, etc, and you match the description, etc.). It's true that the officer does not need to tell you about the RAS. In fact, some people get surprised with the RAS at court or when they read the report.

If you want to FOIA everything and obtain a lawyer, that's your decision. If I were you, I'd ask to speak with their Sgt, or even Chief. Explain what occurred and your dissatisfaction and see if he takes it serious. He should have a talk with his staff to go over procedures. I know my department takes complaints seriously and will send a letter back to you detailing their findings and what they did to correct the issue (if they are found to be wrong).

My .02.
That must have been what it was; because, it couldn't be thathe was just an azzhat on a power trip...because that NEVER happens :banghead:.
 

GWRedDragon

Regular Member
Joined
Dec 10, 2008
Messages
252
Location
Arlington, Virginia, USA
imported post

fully_armed_biker wrote:
 That must have been what it was; because, it couldn't be that he was just an azzhat on a power trip...because that NEVER happens :banghead:.

Maybe so, but wouldn't it be better to withhold judgement until all the facts are in (eg. FOIA response, etc)? :uhoh:
 

fully_armed_biker

Regular Member
Joined
Aug 27, 2009
Messages
463
Location
Portsmouth, Virginia, USA
imported post

GWRedDragon wrote:
fully_armed_biker wrote:
That must have been what it was; because, it couldn't be thathe was just an azzhat on a power trip...because that NEVER happens :banghead:.

Maybe so, but wouldn't it be better to withhold judgement until all the facts are in (eg. FOIA response, etc)? :uhoh:
I completely agree....but, that goes both ways...doesn't it?
 

t33j

Regular Member
Joined
Dec 28, 2009
Messages
1,384
Location
King George, VA
imported post

I'm reading that Hiibel "merely established that states and localities have the power to require people to identify themselves..." Not that one must provide ID during a terry stop. Virginia has no stop and ID statue. Why would anyone have to provide even a name and place of residence.
 

TFred

Regular Member
Joined
Oct 13, 2008
Messages
7,750
Location
Most historic town in, Virginia, USA
imported post

t33j wrote:
I'm reading that Hiibel "merely established that states and localities have the power to require people to identify themselves..." Not that one must provide ID during a terry stop. Virginia has no stop and ID statue. Why would anyone have to provide even a name and place of residence.
It's been reported that there are some local ordinances requiring this in Virginia. I've never seen a list though. I tried to get one started a while back, but nobody played along.

TFred
 

t33j

Regular Member
Joined
Dec 28, 2009
Messages
1,384
Location
King George, VA
imported post

TFred wrote:
t33j wrote:
I'm reading that Hiibel "merely established that states and localities have the power to require people to identify themselves..." Not that one must provide ID during a terry stop. Virginia has no stop and ID statue. Why would anyone have to provide even a name and place of residence.
It's been reported that there are some local ordinances requiring this in Virginia.  I've never seen a list though.  I tried to get one started a while back, but nobody played along.

TFred

Well I guess I'm off to check on Norfolk.
 
Top