• 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.

Stop and ID

Citizen

Founder's Club Member
Joined
Nov 15, 2006
Messages
18,269
Location
Fairfax Co., VA
SNIP Here's one thing that you didn't consider... you don't know what information/suspicion the LEO has. They might have enough to Terry stop you without you knowing it. The information might even be wrong, but a detention would still be legal.

Bwahahahahahahahahaha! Suuuuuure. You're not LEO229. Hahahahahahahaahaa!

Lemme see. You (the mythical NovaCop10), said to the effect you and LEO229 would share attitudes because you are both cops. (Hahahahahahaaa! I'll go along that you are both cops. You are both one and the same cop.) However, reviewing my recent post, I see nowhere that I mentioned attitudes. I wrote about argument tactics and other characteristics. So, just like your postings under username LEO229, you make a straw statement and then explain how it isn't really an indicator, apparently thinking nobody would notice. (This is a real clue, folks, to his opinion of readers).

And, like LEO229, or, like your usual self I should say, you went off on another totally unrelated tangent: quoted above. Whether a cop has genuine RAS or not has nothing to do with the subject--politely, verbally refusing consent to an identity demand while complying. Such police demand is just as lacking in authority with RAS as it is without RAS. But, nice try on shifting the argument. More evasion.

And, like yourself, you used another straw argument when claiming you never said cops got authority to demand identity. It is a straw argument, because I never said you made the claim. More evasion.

Like your old self you seem to have a real problem acknowleging there is a difference between a request and a demand. Even in your evasive post, excerpted in the quote above, you carefully avoid saying police do not have authority to make identity demands during detentions, and have no power to enforce the demand. My, my, my. You carefully say a citizen doesn't have to give information, but (haha) that is not the same thing as saying police lack authority to make the demand in the first place.

Yep, you're LEO229. No other cop before or since has spent so much energy on evasions and misdirections. Especially on this exact subject. Yep, you're LEO229.
 
Last edited:

Citizen

Founder's Club Member
Joined
Nov 15, 2006
Messages
18,269
Location
Fairfax Co., VA
SNIP Here's one thing that you didn't consider... you don't know what information/suspicion the LEO has. They might have enough to Terry stop you without you knowing it.

Oh, by the way. It seems I do take that into account. Been writing on it for the last say, two years. Every time I see a member write to the effect that if the LEO ain't got RAS, the citizen can walk away. Here is my latest:

"...Terry gives the initial hint. Whether RAS existed is the privilege of the courts to decide. Notice the use of the past tense--"existed." This means after the encounter. Nowhere have I read that the courts have extended their power and privilege to rule on RAS to a citizen so he can determine RAS and walk away if he is not satisfied about the officers RAS.

I have no information that a cop is required to give you his RAS.

I have no information that a cop cannot give you only part of his RAS to see if you will admit to something.

I have lots of information that cops lie to detainees. Google "permissible deception" for whether it is legal for cops to lie to people they are investigating. I have no information that says a cop cannot lie to you about his RAS.

There are rafts of court opinions that discuss various sets of circumstances and whether a given set of facts amounted to RAS. Care to try to out-guess an LEO, a professional, about what circumstances amount to RAS?..."

http://forum.opencarry.org/forums/showthread.php?75703-OC-incident-in-KC&p=1313823#post1313823

Check the post time. Compare to your little attack on me. I posted that cautionary information just ten minutes before your first outburst against me in this exchange. Ironic isn't it?

But, just to keep things on track, whether the cop has geniune RAS has nothing to do with lacking authority to make an identity demand, and no authority to enforce the demand.
 
Last edited:

peter nap

Accomplished Advocate
Joined
Oct 16, 2007
Messages
13,551
Location
Valhalla
Bwahahahahahahahahaha! Suuuuuure. You're not LEO229. Hahahahahahahaahaa!

Lemme see. You (the mythical NovaCop10), said to the effect you and LEO229 would share attitudes because you are both cops. (Hahahahahahaaa! I'll go along that you are both cops. You are both one and the same cop.) However, reviewing my recent post, I see nowhere that I mentioned attitudes. I wrote about argument tactics and other characteristics. So, just like your postings under username LEO229, you make a straw statement and then explain how it isn't really an indicator, apparently thinking nobody would notice. (This is a real clue, folks, to his opinion of readers).

And, like LEO229, or, like your usual self I should say, you went off on another totally unrelated tangent: quoted above. Whether a cop has genuine RAS or not has nothing to do with the subject--politely, verbally refusing consent to an identity demand while complying. Such police demand is just as lacking with RAS as it is without RAS. But, nice try on shifting the argument. More evasion.

And, like yourself, you used another straw argument when claiming you never said cops got authority to demand identity. It is a straw argument, because I never said you made the claim. More evasion.

Like your old self you seem to have a real problem acknowleging there is a difference between a request and a demand. Even in your evasive post, excerpted in the quote above, you carefully avoid saying police do not have authority to make identity demands during detentions, and have no power to enforce the demand. My, my, my. You carefully say a citizen doesn't have to give information, but (haha) that is not the same thing as saying police lack authority to make the demand in the first place.

Yep, you're LEO229. No other cop before or since has spent so much energy on evasions and misdirections. Especially on this exact subject. Yep, you're LEO229.

Well, let's see if he is.
Novacop, you did some research on LEO229 lately. What was the REAL reason Leo229 was removed as a Moderator? It's floating around in the threads and I'm sure you saw it.

If you don't want to repeat it....you're 229. Not being argumentative and evasive...the single act that did him in.
 

Citizen

Founder's Club Member
Joined
Nov 15, 2006
Messages
18,269
Location
Fairfax Co., VA
Oh Citizen,...Why play word games?

So, after all that go-round, we're still waiting for whether Mr. Liberty-minded, freedom-loving, OC supporter, NovaCop229 is going to give us tactical advice on how OCers can best exercise their rights on this matter.

< crickets >

Bwahahahahahaahahahaahaaa!

You'd think that would be the main focus of discussion from somebody who genuinely wanted to help. And, what an opportunity for expert advice, him being a cop, understanding cops, and being very familiar with the dynamics of encounters, and all.
 

TFred

Regular Member
Joined
Oct 13, 2008
Messages
7,750
Location
Most historic town in, Virginia, USA
What a coincidence...

Interesting, after bantering this subject about the past few days, this article appears in Saturday's Free Lance-Star. I suppose this newspaper gets it "right" about the same amount of time as most other newspapers, which, sadly, is not as often as it should be...

According to the report, this story has two major problems. First, the initial report came out as a man with a gun, and near a school, which come to find out later, "the initial caller wasn't sure he'd seen a gun."

Second, in black-and-white for all to read: "Calverley (the deputy) told Latson (the suspect) he was under arrest for refusing to provide his identity."

I suppose this incident probably does involve a RAS, given the man-with-a-gun call. But if I remember right, everything I've read here recently seemed to say you only have to identify yourself after you've been arrested. I wonder what this initial charge was?

Unfortunately for both us who are interested in the identification part of the story, as well as for the defendant, this particular event then quickly went way south and quite past the point of no return. The identification part of the story will likely be ignored, even though one could make the case that it started the whole rest of the story.

Something doesn't add up here.

TFred


Wounding charges advance in Stafford
July 24, 2010 12:35 am

BY KEITH EPPS

As far as anyone knows, Reginald "Neli" Latson had committed no crime when he ran into Stafford Deputy Thomas Calverley May 24.

By the time that encounter was over, Calverley was in a lot of pain and the 18-year-old Latson was in a lot of trouble.

Latson is charged with malicious wounding on a law enforcement officer and assault on a law enforcement officer.

Judge Sarah Deneke sent the charges to a Stafford grand jury following a preliminary hearing yesterday in Stafford General District Court.

Latson's case has received national attention in part because his mother, Lisa Alexander, has launched an Internet campaign accusing Stafford authorities of racial profiling and insensitivity.

Alexander said her son has Asperger's syndrome, a form of autism, and should be home receiving care instead of being locked up in the Rappahannock Regional Jail under no bond. Two attempts at securing a bond for Latson have failed.

Alexander has also accused Calverley of instigating the altercation by using racial slurs and other comments.

Stafford officials deny the allegations and say Latson was arrested simply because of his actions.

No racial allegations or questions about autism were brought up in court yesterday.

According to police and testimony, the May 24 incident began at 8:37 a.m. when the Sheriff's Office got a call about a man sitting outside the Porter Library near Park Ridge Elementary School with a gun.

Schools in the area were locked down and a manhunt began. It wasn't until later that police learned that the initial caller wasn't sure he'd seen a gun.

Calverley, a school resource officer at North Stafford High School, said he saw a young men fitting the suspect's description coming out of the woods toward the high school about 20 minutes later.

Calverley testified that he drove up near Latson and said, "Hey, what's up man?" He said Latson responded that he had overslept, but later acknowledged that he wasn't a student at North Stafford.

After determining that the suspect had no weapon, Calverley said he asked the young man for his name. He said the suspect became agitated, cursed and accused the deputy of harassing him.

The two then got into a wrestling match after Calverley told Latson he was under arrest for refusing to provide his identity.

The wrestling match became increasingly physical, and Calverley estimated that he was punched in the head 25 times or more.

The deputy said he was dazed, but eventually was able to unleash his pepper spray. But he said the punches kept coming and the suspect got the spray away from him.

Calverley said he got the spray back and tossed it to the side. He was finally able to call for help, which came a short time later.

Before leaving the high school property, Calverley said, Latson cursed at him again and spit in his face.

Calverley said he spent four days in the hospital after the incident. Among his injuries were multiple fractures to his ankle, a large gash in the back of his head and multiple cuts and abrasions. He has been unable to return to work.

Latson was arrested about 45 minutes after the incident and has been in custody ever since.

As is customary in preliminary hearings, no evidence was put on by defense attorney John Mayoras. A grand jury will decide whether to indict Latson on Aug. 2.

Keith Epps: 540/374-5404
Email: kepps@freelancestar.com
 

Citizen

Founder's Club Member
Joined
Nov 15, 2006
Messages
18,269
Location
Fairfax Co., VA
Whatever became of the AG opinion that non-cooperation is not obstruction? I have this vague recollection that it might have been about a refusal to identify oneself and the AG's opinion that this did not constitute obstruction.

I've hunted my files and can't find it.

Anybody got it or know where to find it?
 

Citizen

Founder's Club Member
Joined
Nov 15, 2006
Messages
18,269
Location
Fairfax Co., VA
BINGO!! AG Opinion Says Police Cannot Arrest for Refusal to Identify

The wonders of the internet. I found it on the Attorney General's website. Here is an excerpt:

"Law-enforcement officer conducting lawful stop to investigate alleged criminal activity may not arrest for obstruction of justice suspect who refuses to identify himself to officer."

You can read the rest of the Attorney General's opinion, complete with his theory and cites, here:

http://www.vaag.com/Opinions/2002opns/02-082.pdf



Without a valid stop-and-identify law, the cop cannot arrest for refusing to identify. Based on the AG's opinion, the cop cannot arrest for obstruction for refusing to identify. If both are true, it would seem to throw the arrestee's fight possibly into the realm of using reasonable force to resist false arrest, a right citizens still retain as of a few years ago when Commonwealth vs Hill was written.


I wonder if the defense attorney knows all these angles.

I'm also very curious about the 4th Amendment angles. There is a number of ways the 4A issues could play out depending on the exact facts. Was the caller anonymous? Did the cop first pat-down the arrestee to see if he was armed (since there was no mention of a gun found on the arrestee, I assume the cop didn't see one when he rolled up)?
 
Last edited:

peter nap

Accomplished Advocate
Joined
Oct 16, 2007
Messages
13,551
Location
Valhalla
Unfortunately Citizen, I suspect he'll get a court appointed lawyer. Even when the CAL's are good defense attorney's, they tend to do the least amount possible because they're basically on minimum wage.

Justice for sale at EBAY rates. The reality of exercising your rights.
Plus, he hurt a cop. The Judge will look at that the same as hurting a member of the Judges family.


The wonders of the internet. I found it on the Attorney General's website. Here is an excerpt:

"Law-enforcement officer conducting lawful stop to investigate alleged criminal activity may not arrest for obstruction of justice suspect who refuses to identify himself to officer."

You can read the rest of the Attorney General's opinion, complete with his theory and cites, here:

http://www.vaag.com/Opinions/2002opns/02-082.pdf



Without a valid stop-and-identify law, the cop cannot arrest for refusing to identify. Based on the AG's opinion, the cop cannot arrest for obstruction for refusing to identify. If both are true, it would seem to throw the arrestee's fight possibly into the realm of using reasonable force to resist false arrest, a right citizens still retain as of a few years ago when Commonwealth vs Hill was written.


I wonder if the defense attorney knows all these angles.

I'm also very curious about the 4th Amendment angles. There is a number of ways the 4A issues could play out depending on the exact facts. Was the caller anonymous? Did the cop first pat-down the arrestee to see if he was armed (since there was no mention of a gun found on the arrestee, I assume the cop didn't see one when he rolled up)?
 

JamesCanby

Activist Member
Joined
Jul 2, 2010
Messages
1,480
Location
Alexandria, VA at www.NoVA-MDSelfDefense.com
I got this in this mornings feeds. It is the perfect example of an Officer who thought he was off camera, making an illegal demand then changing to... it was a request, when he was on camera.
Novacop will say that he is a small percentage and should be disciplined. That's Police code for "You got caught brother".:D
[video=youtube;qe9QNdcRplw]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qe9QNdcRplw&feature=player_embedded#![/video]

Typical of the "People's Republic of Maryland," and one of the reasons I moved out of the state. Just because one organization has a permit to hold a rally in a public space, does that mean that no other citizen can be in that space even if he/she is not interfering with the event?
 

Tess

Founder's Club Member
Joined
Jun 15, 2006
Messages
3,837
Location
Bryan, TX
Yep, you're LEO229. No other cop before or since has spent so much energy on evasions and misdirections. Especially on this exact subject. Yep, you're LEO229.

I, too, believe Citizen is making a correct observation, based on responses on other threads. Not to mention the part about taking a phrase from a long post and twisting the thread.
 

suntzu

Regular Member
Joined
Jun 22, 2008
Messages
1,230
Location
The south land
And, while telling us that an ID request refusal would receive a polite, "well it is up to you...", he conveniently omits the reports we've received of cops whose standard reply is, "If you're not doing anything wrong, why do you object?" Christ! I recently had two Fairfax County cops pull a very similar one on me and I wasn't even the one being investigated. Correction. One cop asked why I objected. His partner lectured me about it! And, let me re-emphasize, I wasn't even the person being investigated!!



Hahahahhahahahaaa.

How did that work out for you Citizen? Did you surrender to their games and give in and ID yourself or did you hold fast?
 

Citizen

Founder's Club Member
Joined
Nov 15, 2006
Messages
18,269
Location
Fairfax Co., VA
How did that work out for you Citizen? Did you surrender to their games and give in and ID yourself or did you hold fast?

Held fast. I had the upper hand and knew it.

Besides, every Marine learns a little liturgy in boot camp. It went something like:

Drill Instructor: "ADVANCE!!"

Recruits: " (war cry) (advancing, bayonet forward)"

Drill Instructor: "RETREAT!"

Recruits: "STAND FAST!"

:)
 
Last edited:

conhntr

Regular Member
Joined
Mar 11, 2010
Messages
184
Location
, ,
I read the washington post and washigton times. Between the two i feal i get a decent look at the news. Nova229 is alot like the post its biased and ignores stories/facts inconvienant to them. However it helps me get a good idea of "thr other side" so im glad he is here. Justtake his opinoons with a huge grain of salt
 

Citizen

Founder's Club Member
Joined
Nov 15, 2006
Messages
18,269
Location
Fairfax Co., VA
The newspaper story said:
...The two then got into a wrestling match after Calverley told Latson he was under arrest for refusing to provide his identity...


I just checked Stafford County ordinances on MuniCode (linked at Stafford County's website). Skimming through their Code, I could not find any stop-and-identity ordinances.

Combined with the AG opinion I cited above, I think Latson has a reasonable hope of successfully defending the charges.
 

suntzu

Regular Member
Joined
Jun 22, 2008
Messages
1,230
Location
The south land
held fast. I had the upper hand and knew it.

Besides, every marine learns a little liturgy in boot camp. It went something like:

Drill instructor: "advance!!"

recruits: " (war cry) (advancing, bayonet forward)"

drill instructor: "retreat!"

recruits: "stand fast!":)

Well done Citizen!
 
Last edited:

suntzu

Regular Member
Joined
Jun 22, 2008
Messages
1,230
Location
The south land
I read the washington post and washigton times. Between the two i feal i get a decent look at the news. Nova229 is alot like the post its biased and ignores stories/facts inconvienant to them. However it helps me get a good idea of "thr other side" so im glad he is here. Justtake his opinoons with a huge grain of salt

I have read the posted opinions of the other side many times about the way they see most, if not all OC'ers--it has been quite an eye opening experience I must say. It reaffirms my belief that you should record the conversation where legal--and make sure to CYOA and when a viable option--file a formal complaint against any LEO who mistreats you, abuses your rights or commits what would constitute a crime under 18 USC 242.
 

Citizen

Founder's Club Member
Joined
Nov 15, 2006
Messages
18,269
Location
Fairfax Co., VA
I have read the posted opinions of the other side many times about the way they see most, if not all OC'ers--it has been quite an eye opening experience I must say. It reaffirms my belief that you should record the conversation where legal--and make sure to CYOA and when a viable option--file a formal complaint against any LEO who mistreats you, abuses your rights or commits what would constitute a crime under 18 USC 242.

While bearing in mind that we have reports of a number of positive encounters with police, so some do support us.
 
Last edited:

Citizen

Founder's Club Member
Joined
Nov 15, 2006
Messages
18,269
Location
Fairfax Co., VA
Well done Citizen!

Thank you.

But, HA! I saw your earlier comment before you changed it. Tsk, tsk. Changing a hallowed boot camp experience. :)

And what happened to the capital letters? I can tell you that those particular words, in that order, are SHOUTED!! :)
 

Thundar

Regular Member
Joined
Sep 12, 2007
Messages
4,946
Location
Newport News, Virginia, USA
I just checked Stafford County ordinances on MuniCode (linked at Stafford County's website). Skimming through their Code, I could not find any stop-and-identity ordinances.

Combined with the AG opinion I cited above, I think Latson has a reasonable hope of successfully defending the charges.

I couldn't fing it either.

If the victim was arested for a non-existant law, what common law right does the victim have in the Commonwealth to resist?

The press report says they got into a wrestling match, the deputy used mace but eventually it was taken away from him. The bit that will get the victim in a lot of trouble is the spitting in the face. Can't justify that as resisting an unlawful arrest.
 
Top