This girl feels like she has been treated unfairly?

[kahala]

What is the name of your state (only U.S. law)? Arizona

I hope you can help me, please let me know if I was treated poorly and not within my legal rights as a U.S. citizen. About two months ago, while staying at a hotel, I was handcuffed and detained by police. They search me and my belongings and also my vehicle without giving me any reason or my consent to do so. I asked repeatedly what I was being charged with and received no answer. Each time I asked, they ignored me. At the precinct my Miranda rights were read to me and once again I asked what my charges were, and receiving no answer from them. As I was leaving the next day, documents were given to me titled “Interview”. It was what I had told the officer and what questions were asked of me. My report reads the statements I made were during an interview, not an interrogation. There are a total of 4 interviews and none of which mention any charges. The question asked to me was whether or not I knew an acquaintance of mine had been arrested? I said yes, I knew of that. I then asked is that why I am here, is that why I am in custody? Their answer was yes, we want to ask you a few questions. I was told I was being transferred to the central intake jail and will have an opportunity to see a judge. In the four different interviews that took place while in custody, I still never learned what the charges were. When I did find out about the charges, it was 12 hours later... just before seeing a judge at the jailhouse court. Can any of the interviews be dismissed or not used as evidence due to the fact that I was never informed of why they wanted to talk to me or what the questions were regarding? How can I know if I am incriminating myself, if I don't know what the charges are? The detectives were rude, loud, I was nervous and scared. I went along with them.
I searched something on the Internet and it told me that during an Interview, the officer or detective must tell me I can leave at any time. This never happened, and the report shows that to be a fact.
If you have any questions, please let me know. I don't want to go to jail; I am a mother and have a son who is three years old. I do admit that knowing the person they spoke of probably wasn't a good idea, but I tried to be honest with them and polite.

Thanks, Morgan

 

[outonbail]

What are your charges?

Everything you said after they read you your Miranda rights, will be admissible.

Never volunteer any information and never speak after you have been read your rights.
Remember, everything you say will be used against you. So why would you say anything?

 

[The Occultist]

I searched something on the Internet and it told me that during an Interview, the officer or detective must tell me I can leave at any time.

I've not heard of this in AZ. I could be mistaken (and if that's the case somebody will correct me rather quickly), but I believe this to be one of those annoying situations where you have to know enough about the law to know that you have to ASK if you are allowed to leave; if you do not ask, they do not need to tell you.

 

[racer72]

I searched something on the Internet and it told me that during an Interview, the officer or detective must tell me I can leave at any time.

This would only apply if you were not arrested. When your Miranda rights were given, you were under arrest.

 

[tranquility]

When your Miranda rights were given, you were under arrest.

While Miranda must be given when a person under arrest is interrogated if his statement is to be admissable, there are a lot of times Miranda is read to someone not under arrest. Almost all the tests for admission will be facts and circumstances tests. Reading a person Miranda rights will tend to make the other facts less necessary, shows a certain level of consent and adds to knowledge that a reasonable person should feel free to leave if he wanted.

I think that is where the OP's error lies too:

I searched something on the Internet and it told me that during an Interview, the officer or detective must tell me I can leave at any time.

This is not so silly as others are saying. I bet there is a case somewhere where a detective telling a person they could leave is enough for a reasonable person to believe they were free to leave--thus, not being under arrest which would then require Miranda if there is to be an interrogation and our goal it to get the statements into evidence.

From that the misunderstanding became that's what the police *have* to do. In reality, it would just be one of the facts and circumstances (aka totality of the circumstances) which will indicate the voluntariness of the statement and if it is going to get into evidence. It's more of a 5th amendment and not a 4th amendment question.

The reason that is important is that she was at least detained almost immedieately. We don't know the reasonable suspicion or probable cause to get to that. When they put her in handcuffs and drove her to the station without consent, she was arrested to the point where Miranda would be required to get her statement in. The police did that. So, if we assume the police had enough probable cause (before the statements) to arrest and then followed through properly on the arrest, or, the reasonable suspicion necessary to detain and the questioning as part of a reasonable investigation and the Miranda was just as written above.

Since we don't know the predicate facts, we can only surmise the reasons for the contact. Heck, this may be some Patriot Act deal or something. But, assuming they started out good, everything else seems all legal like to me.

 

[kahala]

This would only apply if you were not arrested. When your Miranda rights were given, you were under arrest.

I appreciate your help, the one thing that keeps coming back to me is the Not telling me why I was arrested. He's how it goes, for the most part to the letter.
The two officers start by telling me that they just want to talk with me for a few minutes, but before they do, they want to read me my rights. They ask? Do I understand what was read to me? I reply okay-- is that a Yes? Yes it is..
Then the officers introduce themselves to me. next they ask me about my name and birthdate and where I live. After this:
The officer says to me, okay- well- the reason I am talking with you is you know ( Alex ) has been arrested, right?
My Answer: Yeah
He was arrested because he broke into a house and took some things. I am trying to locate the stuff he had taken from this house.- So I wannta ask you if you have any of that, or if you have had any of that at any time?
I ask: Is that why--is that why I am in custody or under arrest or whatever?
Officer: Well Yes
My reply: Because I spoke to a dectective already.
Officer: Well they went home early last night and I haven't spoken to you yet, so I would like to. I would like to know if you had or have now, any stuff now?
I told the detective that I was scared of the whole sitiation and didn't want to talk about it, so I don't wanna.
Officer: Okay
Me: I'm just-I'm sorry , like I don't - I don't know right now. you know the thing is...
officer: Okay, so you don;t wanna tlalk.
My Reply: No, I don't think so..
Uh .You have to tell me if you want to or not.
My reply: Cause I- No - not about that case at least. I mean I would like to know why I am in here?
Officer: Well what do-- what do you wanna talk to...
My Reply: I have a right to know..
Officer: Why did they tell you that were were being arrested? what did the dectectives...
My Reply: They didn't
Dectective: They didn't tell you why you were being arrested?
My Reply: No and I asked?...
Detective: THis detective just told you why you were here. You asked him a question and he said Yes.

The detectives continue questioning me and I repeatedly ask why am I here? No answer given to me, by the detectivies.

ok, about half way through this interview, the detective finally says to me:
Well here's the deal, right now you are under arrest for possession and trafficking of stolen property, okay? ....Because I have probable casue to believe that you had some of the peroerty form those burglariers, okay?
So here's your chance to tell me your side of the story, whether yes you did.,.,. or no you didn't and why?

Is this not telling me,,, honestly fair? They can do that to me?

 

[tranquility]

Well here's the deal, right now you are under arrest for possession and trafficking of stolen property, okay? ....Because I have probable casue to believe that you had some of the peroerty form those burglariers, okay?
So here's your chance to tell me your side of the story, whether yes you did.,.,. or no you didn't and why?

Is this not telling me,,, honestly fair? They can do that to me?

Unless you're not telling us something which developed the arrest, the police felt they had at least a reasonable suspicion on their arrival based on the statements of the other person arrested. It seemed they did everything right here from that point forward. All they needed was to know if you knew about the stolen property, they probably developed enough from your statements, and felt they had probable cause to arrest for possession of stolen property. Using the vernacular or factual statement of what happened is fine. The purpose of being notified of what you are being arrested for does not require precise legal jargon. At some point, they did precisely notify the OP of the charges for which she was arrested.

 

[gr8rn]

sounds like he made it clear why you were there, Alex was arrested for burglary and you were brought in for questioning regarding receiving stolen property. Now, did you or did you not receive stolen property? (that is what they were asking), I am not a law inforcement person or a lawyer or a burglar, but I know enough to know that is why you were being questioned and from the sounds of it, you DID receive stolen property. You have to consider that Alex is sitting in a jail cell and the police are trying to recover the stolen property and (perhaps) he has told them he gave some or all of the property to you which would make you guilty of-----receiving stolen propertyl=.