Witness for Prosecutor

[EastCoastGirl]

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

Can I be made to be a witness for the state prosecution against a (drunk boyfriend) who vandalized my car?
I did not call the police (someone else did after the fact). I told the police that I did not want him arrested and I was NOT going to press charges. Then the police became badgering and said I was not cooperating. They made an arrest anyway. (said it was out of my hands)...now I am considered a witness for the state against him. Do I get any say in this? It was my car and on private property...does that matter?

 

[HighwayMan]

You can be subpoened to appear in court. Of course, they can't force you to say much of anything on the stand.

Did your boyfriend live with you at the time or in the past? Any children in common? The police might have considered it a domestic violence situation which is a "must arrest" in most jurisdictions.

 

[EastCoastGirl]

No, never lived together, no children. This happened within a 4 month relationship. Yes, I guess they did consider it DV because they tacked on a protective order...even though I told the police that I have never been hit or threatened and I'm not fearful of him. The drunken frackus to my car was enough then?

If I get called to the stand, how do I get away with not saying much of anything? I doubt a blank stare will go over well.

 

[EastCoastGirl]

I meant to thank you for your response in my previous post...appreciate your time.

 

[dave33]

Well, who ever made the statement is claiming they actually saw the crime occur. The police must also be under the impression that you are also a witness.They use some really dishonorable techniques to get the statement they want.Their methods are becoming more of a disgrace and helping nobody. The fact that it is your car and on private property does not legally matter. It sounds ridiculous but that's the way the new laws are developing. What was the statement youi gave the police? Did you get manipulated into saying something you did not want to ? Did they threaten to arrest you for obstruction of justice if you refused to give a statement? You have the right to not give a statement. If you already said he did the damage than he's in trouble. If not than you could always be a witness for the defense. Better yet (if true) you can claim you were told that you would go to jail unless you gave them the statement they wanted.I would personally not work or testify for the police in such matters. If they do get the conviction, do you get restitution? In other words, what's your benefit?Talk to your boyfriends lawyer and see what suggestions he has. goodluck.

 

[HighwayMan]

It sounds ridiculous but that's the way the new laws are developing.

What new laws are you referring to?

 

[CdwJava]

If subpoenaed, you must attend court or risk jail yourself. If ordered to testify you must answer the questions put to you at trial or you might also face jail.

Simply put, go to court and testify truthfully.

- Carl

 

[Shadowbunny]

They use some really dishonorable techniques to get the statement they want.Their methods are becoming more of a disgrace and helping nobody. QUOTE]

Dave33, your posts indicate you think every LEO is dishonest, and your own past seems to have left you bitter and with an axe to grind. Isn't it possible that the LEOs get tired of responding to legitimate calls only to have the girlfriend/wife/SO refuse to cooperate because "they're in looooovvvveeee"? And this frustration may make their requests for cooperation heavy-handed, but who can blame them? They're out enforcing the laws, but are thwarted by these ill-placed gestures of loyalty. You're making it sound as if they routinely use waterboarding to get cooperation.

 

[dave33]

Highwayman, What I meant was the general direction of the higher courts ruling. An example would be the access the police have to search a vehicle. How warrants are needed less and less. The rubber stamp judges, not to mention the ridiculous "patriot act". Basically the police are given more latitude and as a result it infringes on our rights.I think a lot of laws, especially the newer ones are constitutionally questionable.I feel alot of them are politically motivated. Shadowbunny,I truly have no axe to grind with leo. Years ago in my past I was arrested and have no ill will towards the honorable officers. The fact is in my past experience they broke more laws securing the arrest than the person being accused of the crime. Although I am aware of the fact that in certain areas they have a dangerous job. It just really seems to me that to protect and serve is all but forgotten. They have also gotten very proficient at doctoring reports to leave no room for a defense. Guilty pleas are extorted by over charging people to basically force them to plead guilty. A good example would be in my state R.I. the past A.G. "Jeffrey Pine" had a drug task force. It was proven they were a criminal organization. Planting evidence, stealing assault etc... They set several innocent people up and got them arrested. After an investigation it was proven they were all innocent, but the officers were so good at deception and working the system they all were forced to plead guilty. It basically came down to their word against the officers. The cops knew this and got the plea. The only reason they got caught is because of video tape. Just like Mr. King. How many innocent people are in jail? I honestly think thoudands, as a direct result of the way police conduct themselves. I'll stop now, but could go on and on and on...

 

[Shadowbunny]

Shadowbunny,I truly have no axe to grind with leo. Years ago in my past I was arrested and have no ill will towards the honorable officers. The fact is in my past experience they broke more laws securing the arrest than the person being accused of the crime. ..... They have also gotten very proficient at doctoring reports to leave no room for a defense. ...

So you believe that the majority of LEOs manufacture evidence, lie on reports, and browbeat suspects? What is this based on? As of 2007, there were 7.2 million people in the US on parole, probation, or incarcerated. If there are indeed "thousands" who were/are innocent, that would be just over 1%. If corruption is as rampant as you claim, wouldn't that figure be much, much higher?

(And as a personal aside, would you use some paragraph breaks in your posts? They're really hard to read; I have a feeling many people just pass right over them because of it.)

 

[dave33]

O.K. so let's say 100's of 1000's. The innocence project claims a much higher %. Those are cases when d.n.a. is available. Most cases this is not the situation. Also what you claim to be a meager 1% (which in reality is probably much higher) translates into over 7000 innocent people in jail. If you or a close family member was one of those people that # may seem a little more significant. Anyway the innocence project stats: The study of the 1st 70 cases. 30 included pros. misconduct. 30 included police misconduct which lead to wrongful convictions. Appr. 15 involved false witness testimony. 34% of police misconduct cases involved suppression of exculpatory evidence. 11% involved evidence fabrication. 37% of pros. misconduct involved suppression of exculpatory evidence. 25% involved knowing use of false testimony. They claim around 30% are wrongfully in jail. Look it up if you want. The cite is caught.net than click on "inmates" than click on "innocence project statistics". If you take thye time to read further it is hard to dispute. At least the d.n.a. is cold hard facts. Even the d.n.a. has a high rate of exoneration. One state "Illinois" after d.n.a. testing had a conviction error rate of 52% !!! I can confidently say police conduct, or misconduct has played a major role in the injustice system.

 

[Shadowbunny]

"...what you claim to be a meager 1%..."

Dave33, where did I use the word "meager"? That's your word, not mine. And my numbers were based off of YOUR posting that 1000s have been put in jail due to malfeasance.

And while I'm sure that caught.net is interesting reading, as it's an advocacy group, I'm not sure how accurate their numbers nor reports are. If you can provide references from a NEUTRAL source, I'd be more than happy to believe you.

I'm not saying that an innocent person has never been convicted, nor that all policemen are ethical. I was simply pointing out that you always seem to assume that the LEOs are dishonest. Haven't you ever met someone who was guilty as charged?

 

[dave33]

The way I used the word meager was a misinterpretation on my part. When I said 1000's,I meant a lot. That number did not convey the message as I had hoped. Anyway you never said nor implied meager, and for that I apologize. I do not like it when people put words in my mouth and try to show others the same consideration. The website itself is an advocacy group and so is the project, but feel the #'s are accurate. It is made clear that you or anyone can write a rebuttle and thus far nobody has. The innocence project declares facts. Although they may include an opinion the #'s are sound.At least I believe they are accurate. I have never seen a state or government agency conduct such a study, and I assume for good reason. Most likely outrage. Also I have met several people who wasguilty as charged. Also met people who should be locked up forever. On the flip side alot of people are locked up for arbitrary laws. Getting incarcerated sometimes has devastating effects that they simply do not deserve. Often times arguements with your spouse often times leads one person to jail. Automatic restraining order , can't see your kids, cannot even go into your own home regardless if you paid the mortgage for 20 years. Any waqy my point is the system is out of control and is becoming big business. Not to mention the most basic proven fact that the current justice system with it's present punishment(jail time) has proven time and time again to be a huge expense that does basically 0 to help a person change and become useful. Anyway, now I forgot the original question, but thanks for the opportunity to vent. Sorry about the rampage and my punctuation. Dave.

 

[HighwayMan]

An example would be the access the police have to search a vehicle.

You're grossly oversimplifying things.

And as far as your specific example about motor vehicles, there is an "auto exception" to the requirement/need to have a search warrant to search a motor vehicle. This is nothing new - it has been around a very long time.

 

[CdwJava]

A few points ... the USSC has recently made it MORE DIFFICULT for the police to search a vehicle (Arizona v. Gant), and the "Patriot Act" does virtually nothing to change what local law enforcement can or cannot do. I have yet to see any aspect invoked at the local level.

The automobile exception to a warrant requirement is limited, and a search STILL requires articulable probable cause as well as articulation as to the exigency that exists (i.e. as to why a warrant is not practical or necessary).


- Carl