SNIP Three other S's come in and start harrassing me as well. Asked me to go outside so as not to make a scene and I refused. I just sat right where I was. I asked why they needed to see my ID and they said "because we don't know who you are". I said my name is Thomas Brewster now you know who I am. I even compared them asking for my ID to Nazi Germany (let me see your papers now). That still didn't deter them.So they bullied me for at least five minutes before I gave them my ID. The whole time they were saying that I wasn't being detained and I said that they didn't have the right to ID me then. I'm not sure how I would be free to go when I'm surrounded by four cops and they have my ID. It's not like I could leave without it. So now I'm not sure where to start to get some things changed here. I would appreciate some citations of codes for the ID issue. Any help would be appreciated. I can email the recording to whoever wants to hear it.
I haven't listened to your recording. Just based on the written report, you were detained. They were lying. Even without the ID in the cops hands, you were detained.
Surrounded by four cops? Bullied?
Here are some quotes from
US vs Mendenhall:
We conclude that a person has been "seized" within the meaning of the Fourth Amendment only if, in view of all of the circumstances surrounding the incident, a reasonable person would have believed that he was not free to leave. Examples of circumstances that might indicate a seizure, even where the person did not attempt to leave, would be the threatening presence of several officers, the display of a weapon by an officer, some physical touching of the person of the citizen, or the use of language or tone of voice indicating that compliance with the officer's request might be compelled. (bold emphasis by Citizen)
http://www.law.cornell.edu/supct/html/historics/USSC_CR_0446_0544_ZO.html
This encounter would be fun to make a formal written complain about. Lots of angles to hammer.
First contradiction. The first cop felt the need to call for help for a consensual encounter? Uh, huh. Suuuuuure he did. He was
counting on the "persuasiveness" of more cops.
Next contradiction. The non-consensual nature of the encounter was established very early, when the OCer said "This conversation is over." Plainly he did not consent. He had just refused the cops ID demand/request, too. No doubt about it, this was not a consensual encounter. Any extension by the cops was necessarily non-consensual, meaning a detention in this case. What is the cop gonna say? That by getting some of his buddies to crowd around that suddenly the OCer would change his refused consent?
By the way, there are court cases about the voluntariness of consent. I've never kept links to them; but Google Scholar would probably turn up something. Even if someone could argue that the OCer "consented" to the second half of the encounter, I'm betting the "consent" would not hold up to any standard of voluntariness, thus the alleged "consent" would not be valid.
Once the detention is established, in this case the non-consensual nature of the encounter, lots of things change.
There is no law authorizing an ID document demand in the OCer's state as far as I know. So, you got them on making an extra-legal demand; just double-check the statutes to make sure. The steady pressuring makes it a demand from a practical, if not legal, stand point. And, maybe a legal standpoint at that.
Also, the cop said carrying a gun was his RAS. Use that. Tough for him if he told you the wrong RAS or lied to you about it. It was his RAS at inception. Hammer it home as "no RAS."
Probably more angles here if we think about it.
