Suspicionless stops

It's that time of year again, when local law enforcement suckles at the overtime teats supplied by NDOT. Reno just had a suspicionless stop Saturday night.

I'm going to relate my most recent experience with one such stop. How is this NV OC related? Well from now on I'll be OC'ing in my vehicle during the peak times these crimes occur. It is also a reminder to record everything because you may be dealing with career criminals masquerading as incompetent law enforcement. Now on with my story...




Driving home from a fantastic day of dirt riding, I got a bad feeling about the short return trip. It was Superbowl Sunday and I was on the highway the local law enforcement use to set up their DUI checkpoints on days like Memorial day. It has been some time since my previous (unpleasant) encounter with them. (In a nutshell, they are illegal and I think any person conducting such a stop and detainment should suffer severe consequences.)

There was no checkpoint on the main highway. However, on the road to my house I soon saw a DUI Checkpoint Ahead sign. Aw @#$!, here it comes, I thought. They had a big trailer, lots of police officers, a sheriff's deputy, lots of lights, and a side area with a canopy, more cops, and more lights. I cracked my window down a few inches.

The first police officer went into his spiel which ended with him asking me to lower my window. I remained silent. He told me to lower my window. I lowered it a fraction of an inch.

- Sir, please lower your window so I can hear you.
- I can hear you just fine.
- How much have you been drinking tonight?
- (silence)
- Lower your window so I can hear you.
- No.
- No?!
- How much have you been drinking tonight?
- No questions.
- No questions?! Alright, pull over there.

So I pulled over into the double secret probation area. He demanded my papers. I handed my license through the window crack.

- I have to get the registration and insurance proof from the glove compartment.
- OK, fine.

Uh huh, he can hear just fine now. Because he wanted to smell my breath not hear the words I wasn't speaking.

- Keep your hands on the steering wheel.

Fine with me. I had a gun and he'd $#!& bricks if he saw it. Just kidding, I had two guns. Other officers and the deputy shined flashlights into my truck interior looking for an excuse to screw me over. They also looked at my my motorcycle and gear in the back. I listened to the cop talk to the supervisor as he presented him my papers. The word uncooperative was repeated and there was mention of my window.

I was ordered out of my vehicle. I thought of my gun. Naaah. I locked the doors and shut my door quickly. On the way to the sidewalk I put my hands in my pockets because it was cold. They didn't like that so I put my hands in my armpits. I had five cops arranged around me in a semi-circle. None were within reach. All were within reach of ASP or Taser. They had Glocks.

The supervisor was an older guy with a greying cop mustache. He started asking questions. I think the first one was, what's the problem. I remained silent. He brought out a penlight and said something about following it with my eyes. I never looked at it. This angered supervisor cop. He mentioned some other tests then said I'd probably not do them. Well, someone's finally catching on! No wonder he's big man on campus. Then, he says, mostly to himself:

- OK, I can smell alcohol on your breath.

F---- ay. Either he's supercop and could smell the last drink I had, a margarita at Xmas (how many weeks does it take to metabolize tequila anyway) or he's a corrupt son of a b---- who invented probable cause to adminster a blood-alcohol test. Alex, I'll take corrupt swine for one thousand! I couldn't help but smirk when he said that.

Supervisor cop went into his bad cop routine about the breathalyzer. He went on and on about how it was required by the NRS and how he would enjoy taking me to jail to adminster the test.

- If you refuse I will take you to jail and I will take that to jail and that to jail (pointing to truck and bike)

I think he expected me to say, sir, yes, sir. I remained silent. Remaining silent is not refusing.

- Blow into this.

Wow, what a night of firsts. Out of the vehicle and now a breathalyzer (later edit: preliminary alcohol screening device). After I expelled my dirt-biking-depleted asthmatic lungs into the device, he looked at the reading. I couldn't see it but I knew it was zero or as close to zero as the minimum bidder equipment can register for someone who's been drinking water from a Camelbak all day.

Supervisor cop just deflated when he looked at it. It was like I told him his puppy had died. Then he perked up, back into the bad cop routine again.

- What's your problem? We're just trying to do our jobs and we don't need you making it hard for us.
- Perhaps you should seek a new line of work.
- If you have a problem with what we're doing why don't you write a letter to the editor of the Reno-Gazette Journal?
- Really? Are they the ones who set up this checkpoint?

Supervisor cop then turned his attention to my paperwork. If he couldn't get me for DUI then by god he was going to get me for not having my papers in order!

- Do you still live at (address) ?
- All of the information I gave you is current and correct.
- <agitated> Is this your current address?
- The address shown on my license, registration, and insurance ... is ... my ... current ... address.

After a while...

- OK, get back in your car and don't ever let me see you here again. I should arrest you for obstruction.
- In order for me to leave I'm going to have to put my hand in my pocket to get my car key. You said to keep my hands out of my pockets.

And I was gone, my property intact but my freedom diminished.

questions

Note this wasn't a NRS 171.123 stop nor was it a legal 484B.570 stop. But by SCOTUS definition it was a seizure.

What would happen if I decline to pull over to the secondary inspection area?

What would happen if I decline to produce license, registration, and proof of insurance?

What would happen if I decline to exit my vehicle at the secondary?

Do they have pc's available at county lockup? I think it would take a while to get all the illegal charges eventually dropped.

OK, get back in your car and don't ever let me see you here again.

Click to expand...

Right then and there, the idea of making multiple passes through the checkpoint would have become "Plan Alpha".

http://www.roadblock.org/federal/caseUSsitz.htm


Michigan Department of State Police v. Rick Sitz (496 US 444)

Conclusion:

In a 6-to-3 decision, the Court held that the roadblocks did not violate the Fourth Amendment. The Court noted that "no one can seriously dispute the magnitude of the drunken driving problem or the States' interest in eradicating it." The Court then found that "the weight bearing on the other scale--the measure of the intrusion on motorists stopped briefly at sobriety checkpoints--is slight." The Court also found that empirical evidence supported the effectiveness of the program.

Click to expand...

Thanks for the post, and sticking up.

The suprise of the Kohl's girl cashier two days ago after declining to give her my zip code doesn't compare.

Maybe the days of checkpoints are numbered. Every intersection will eventually become a checkpoint. Technology will advance it to that point. We already have some police departments who have cameras in their car that scan your plate for outstanding issues. It won't take long for facial recognition, iris recognition, infrared temperature scans, etc., etc. to make it's way into police cars and the camera's being installed at every traffic light intersection.

Good Job. I like hearing stories like this.

Yard Sale said:

- OK, I can smell alcohol on your breath.

Click to expand...

Great encounter, Yard Sale!

If CriminalCop smelled any alcohol, it was probably blowing over from one of the cops standing nearby.

We had a court decision over here recently arising from a buncha cops raiding a pool hall under the camoflage of an alcohol beverage control board regulatory inspection. The raiders found three patrons with drugs. (Sit down for this next part, and hang onto to something so you don't fall out of the chair laughing) The three patrons with drugs were: two police informants, and one undercover cop. No other drugs found.

Regarding breathylizers: I guess it behooves us all to learn whether we can refuse consent to a breathylizer, and the consequences of refusing.

I quite using the government's spin-jargon for these encounters some time ago. I never call these things "checkpoints" anymore; no sense validating the government twisting words. I always call them what they are--roadblocks. Suspicionless roadblocks.

Suggested script:

Cop: "Why won't you cooperate?"

Me: "Oh, I'm sorry, Officer. I am a patriotic American. I will cooperate to the full extent required by our laws."

Cop: "That's better. Is this your current address?"

Me: <silence>

My wife had four family members killed by a drunk. Her, Grandmother, Grandfather, Mother, and Aunt. They were on their way to a family reunion. All had the same last name and the drunk killed four of them. As you might guess we appreciate the DUI stops. With that said I would like to think I am no more willing to see my rights or freedom diminish any more than you do. I have been stopped a few times over the years and it took about 30 seconds to answer the few questions and on our way. It would appear once you started with your window rights it aggravated the cop. Judging from your information he went from professional to I am going to jack this uncooperative civilian up. If a cop had used the trumped up statement of I can smell alcohol on your breath on me when I had not been drinking, I am not sure how I would have reacted however he absolutely would have know I was not happy about it. Trying not to be critical of your actions what was the point of not doing what was asked at the beginning? I am assuming you had two firearms in your vehicle? I guess no one would know for sure however I wonder how it would have turned out if you had rolled down the window at first and answered the questions. Correct me if I am wrong however it would appear from some of the first statements, you had decided what your actions were going to be if you did come across a DUI check. If this is correct would it be safe to say you encountered a much bigger jerk cop than you planed on?

28kfps said:

As you might guess we appreciate the DUI stops.

Click to expand...

With all due respect these stops may be doing your family a disservice.

The debate regarding saturation patrols versus checkpoints favors saturation patrols being more effective, both in terms of number of arrests and cost. The FBI compared saturation patrols vs. checkpoints in Ohio, Missouri, and Tennessee. The study showed that, “Overall, measured in arrests per hour, a dedicated saturation patrol is the most effective method of apprehending offenders.”[16] Another survey found that "States with infrequent checkpoints claimed a lack of funding and police resources for not conducting more checkpoints, preferred saturation patrols over checkpoints because they were more 'productive,' and used large number of police officers at checkpoints."[17]

# Greene, Jeffrey W., 2003. Battling DUI: A Comparative Analysis of Checkpoints and Saturation Patrols. FBI Law Enforcement Bulletin, 72: 1-6.
# ^ Fell, J.C., Ferguson, S.A., Williams, A.F., 2003. Why are sobriety checkpoints not widely adopted as an enforcement strategy in the United States? Accident Analysis and Prevention, 35: 897-902.

Click to expand...

HandyHamlet said:

http://www.roadblock.org/federal/caseUSsitz.htm


Michigan Department of State Police v. Rick Sitz (496 US 444)

Click to expand...

Conclusion:

In a 6-to-3 decision, the Court held that the roadblocks did not violate the Fourth Amendment. The Court noted that "no one can seriously dispute the magnitude of the drunken driving problem or the States' interest in eradicating it." The Court then found that "the weight bearing on the other scale--the measure of the intrusion on motorists stopped briefly at sobriety checkpoints--is slight." The Court also found that empirical evidence supported the effectiveness of the program.


I don't care what any govt agency or even the highest court in the lands says, just because they make it legal does not make it "lawful" or constitutional! Remember people just because SCOTUS can rule something or interpret something anyway they want does not "make it so!" We are not bound to obey any law or SCOTUS court ruling or any inferior court ruling that is in-congruent to our Constitution, Bill of Rights or all of our un-alienable RIGHTS. The more of us who stand together on this the faster we will become free and the quicker the tyrannts will fall!!! As for these damn gestapo checkpoints just continually "parott" repeatedly 'am I free to go or are you detaining me?" Do you have RAS? As for a "bottom up solution lets give'em hell at these checkpoints and stand our ground! maybe the cops will eventually get a clue about only enforcing things that are constitutional. Bottom line is that LEO's are really REO's Revenue Enforcement Officers! Very few truly are Peace Officers to the best of their ability

Unlawful

28kfps said:

My wife had four family members killed by a drunk. Her, Grandmother, Grandfather, Mother, and Aunt. They were on their way to a family reunion. All had the same last name and the drunk killed four of them. As you might guess we appreciate the DUI stops. With that said I would like to think I am no more willing to see my rights or freedom diminish any more than you do. I have been stopped a few times over the years and it took about 30 seconds to answer the few questions and on our way. It would appear once you started with your window rights it aggravated the cop. Judging from your information he went from professional to I am going to jack this uncooperative civilian up. If a cop had used the trumped up statement of I can smell alcohol on your breath on me when I had not been drinking, I am not sure how I would have reacted however he absolutely would have know I was not happy about it. Trying not to be critical of your actions what was the point of not doing what was asked at the beginning? I am assuming you had two firearms in your vehicle? I guess no one would know for sure however I wonder how it would have turned out if you had rolled down the window at first and answered the questions. Correct me if I am wrong however it would appear from some of the first statements, you had decided what your actions were going to be if you did come across a DUI check. If this is correct would it be safe to say you encountered a much bigger jerk cop than you planed on?

Click to expand...

I am really sorry for your loss and even more so for your wife in grieving. I'd like to say that it is the principle that strongly matters here, innocent until proven guilty. without probable cause there is no lawful means for LEO to detain you. Should we just go along with what we're told, just co-operate because we don't have anything to hide, no! What Yard Sale did was the right thing anyone in a free society should do morally and lawfully! was what the drunk driver did terrible, yes absoulutely and he shoud be punished harshly perhaps capital punishment, but to infringe upon someone who is innocent and not supicious and doing anything wrong is no justification whatsoever in a free society for any reason just as it is better that 10 bad guys go free than for one innocent person to be detained, arrested, imprisoned, or executed.

Citizen said:

Regarding breathylizers: I guess it behooves us all to learn whether we can refuse consent to a breathylizer, and the consequences of refusing.

Click to expand...

In Iowa, I was charged with OWI. I was reported to the University of Iowa police by a passer by who saw that i was sleeping in a parked car with the engine running in a covered, open air parking garage.

The officer, when questioned at a motion to suppress, testified that he opened the door to my car without a warrant because he needed to check my welfare. He felt that my immediate safety was of such urgent concern that he did not have time to obtain a warrant. When asked if I appeared to be in distress, he said "He appeared to be sleeping." when asked if He could see that I was breathing, he replied that I was. he also testified that I "looked comfortable." he was asked if I was visibly breathing which he stated that he could tell that I was breathing. he was asked if I was , pale, blue in color, sweaty or if I had vomited. the officer clearly stated no to all of those. He testified that at the time, it was about -10oF. When asked if someone sleeping in a car with the heater on would be unreasonable he replied "no, as long as I was okay, and that is what he had to determine." He was asked if there was any evidence from outside the vehicle that a crime had been committed. He testified that I was legally parked, he could see a current ticket for the garage, and the car was in good working order. He could smell no alcohol, or see any alcoholic beverage containers at the scene. he was asked if any attempt was made to wake me to obtain consent to contact me,, he stated that he tapped on my window. He was then asked how long I was given to respond before he opened the door. He stated that approximately 10 seconds had elapsed.

The judge concluded that his demand for a breath sample was based on my failure to pass a field sobriety test, and that the evidence gathered from the field sobriety test was unlawfully obtained because the same standard of proof must exist to suggest that my health and well being is in danger to invoke the "community care taking exception to the fourth amendment," that must also exist to suggest that a crime had been, was being, or would be committed unless he took action. The judge said, no such indication existed that I was in any immediate danger and that I was unable to care for myself. She suppressed all evidence gathered as a result of the warrant-less entry into my vehicle and dismissed the charge.

Unfortunately, in Iowa, there is criminal court, and administrative court. In administrative court, the officer was found to have probable cause enter my vehicle. They concluded that my refusal to submit a breath sample violated my licence agreement and that my license was revoked for 1 year. I appealed the decision citing that a criminal court judge had ruled that the entry into my vehicle was in violation of my fourth amendment rights. I received a letter stating that the administrative court was not bound to the ruling of the criminal court. They claimed to have reviewed the evidence on record and upheld the revocation.

Just an aside, in Nevada, if you refuse to give a breath sample, the police may use necessary force to restrain you to gather a blood sample. If it is found that the police did not have probable cause to suggest that you where over the legal BAC, that evidence will be suppressed. It also takes a preponderance of evidence to amount to probable cause. Basically, more than one indication. the "Strong odor of an alcoholic beverage" is not enough. They must have something else. Slurred speech, nystagmus, inability to balance etc. A field sobriety test is not mandatory, nor is it required that you speak. A police officer can not effectively determine if you have any of these things if you refuse and STFU.

Please keep in mind that IANAL, and this information is based on only a rudimentary knowledge of DUI statutes and police procedures.

NewZealandAmerican said:

I don't care what any govt agency or even the highest court in the lands says, just because they make it legal does not make it "lawful" or constitutional!

Click to expand...

I agree 100%.

Yard Sale said:

- OK, get back in your car and don't ever let me see you here again. I should arrest you for obstruction.

Click to expand...

"Gee, Detective Fosdick, I live on this street, and if YOU hadn't put up the obstruction, I'd already be home and we never would have met. If you don't ever want to see me here again, you don't want to come back. "

28kfps said:

As you might guess we appreciate the DUI stops.

Click to expand...

Why? Have you ever stood around and watched one of these circuses? You get a bunch of cops standing around, checking paperwork. Few arrests are made for DUI at these checkpoints for anything involving alcohol, but they write a bunch of citations for no insurance, expired registration, etc -- things which make money for the local government.

Meanwhile, those cops are NOT out on the road, where they could be spotting impaired drivers (pretty much ANYONE can drive stop-and-crawl through the traffic jam). They are pinned to one location for several hours, while the drunks are taking an alternate route to the crash site.

The issue isn't alcohol, it's IMPAIRED DRIVING, and that's not happening at the checkpoint . . .where the cops are . . .

http://www.ktvn.com/global/story.asp?s=11949192

linked article said:

The Sparks Police Department says except for one man who refused to talk to them, everyone was very cooperative and polite.

Click to expand...

No mention of the false imprisonment, threat of kidnapping, and falsified evidence. Just that everybody else were good little sheep.

And they will be up to it again Saturday:

http://www.rgj.com/article/20101214...kpoint-scheduled-for-Saturday-night-in-Sparks

I have spoken to an attorney who advised me to let them kidnap me if they try this again. I have rigged my vehicle with a camera pointing at the driver's window, a camera pointing out the windshield, a voice recorder for my pocket, and a handheld digital camera if I want to take pictures. I also have a notebook to take down names, numbers, descriptions, etc.

I have read the relevant statutes and it's clear I don't have to submit to a BAC test without reasonable suspicion of driving impaired. I have researched case law about what constitutes RAS. I don't have to follow unlawful orders, which is the worrisome grey area. There are a lot of statues about obedience and obstruction. Pull over, maybe a lawful order. Papers please... hmmm?

One worry is they assault me to obtain my blood and when it comes back 0% BAC, they falsify the evidence. Can I get blood drawn at a private lab on a Saturday night?

Idaho now also has this blood test thing. I think they can actually do it in the field. I'm not sure how they can do that without your permission. Seems like a really bad thing to me.

carracer said:

Idaho now also has this blood test thing. I think they can actually do it in the field. I'm not sure how they can do that without your permission. Seems like a really bad thing to me.

Click to expand...

Four burly men hold you down so somebody else can stick a needle in your arm. They actually killed somebody doing this.