Just got through watching cops.

[stebbinsd]

What is the name of your state (only U.S. law)? I don't know, cuz it was on TV.

I just watched a segment of Cops on G4. The cops entered a hotel room rented by a husband and wife couple. The woman was recently on probation for drug charges, but recently got off of it.

The cops did a search of their hotel room and found some coke underneath their bed. The cops then asked them who they belonged to. After several minutes of the couple swearing that they didn't know who's they were, the cops asked that if they were to fingerprint the coke pipe, it wouldn't match any of their fingers. The couple immediately agreed; in fact, they begged the cops to fingerprint the pipe, but the cops never did. Instead, they arrested both of them because neither would confess.

Okay, wtf is with that? First of all, they couple agreed to juxtapose their fingerprints to those on the pipe. Second, how can you be arrested for not confessing? Isn't it in the Bill of Rights (I forget which amendment) that no one may be forced into confession?

Please tell me how the cops were authorized to make that arrest on those terms? It might have helped if you saw that episode.

 

[justalayman]

Instead, they arrested both of them because neither would confess.

No, they were arrested because they were in possession of drug paraphernalia.

Okay, wtf is with that? First of all, they couple agreed to juxtapose their fingerprints to those on the pipe.

The cops were merely trying to get one to roll on the other. Since neither would, they arrest both and let the courts settle it.

Second, how can you be arrested for not confessing?

they weren't. They were arrested for possession of drug paraphernalia.

Isn't it in the Bill of Rights (I forget which amendment) that no one may be forced into confession?

they didn't confess. The cops wanted one person to rat out the other. That is not a forced confession.

Please tell me how the cops were authorized to make that arrest on those terms?

they found paraphernalia, which is apparently illegal in whatever state the were in.

the only real question is; did the police have the legal right to enter the premises and search it. With no other info, no way to tell.

 

[stebbinsd]

If they arrested the couple because of possession of drugs, why didn't they say so? His exact words were, and I quote, "If one of you wants to man up and say 'pipe's mine. Dope's mine," that's fine, but if neither of you want to come clean, we'll take you both to jail."

They then handcuffed them both, and said "You're lying."

If they were under arrest for possession of drugs, then the cops should have said so. They made it seem as if they were arresting them for not confessing.

 

[justalayman]

"If one of you wants to man up and say 'pipe's mine. Dope's mine," that's fine, but if neither of you want to come clean, we'll take you both to jail."

they wanted one to confess to the drugs. It makes it easier to prosecute. Since neither would confess or rat on the other, they were both arrested for possession.

simple as that.

 

[The Occultist]

If they arrested the couple because of possession of drugs, why didn't they say so?

It doesn't matter what they say; all that matters is what ends up on the paperwork.

Also, I wouldn't accept legal lessons, one way or another, from episodes of Cops.

 

[racer72]

If they were under arrest for possession of drugs, then the cops should have said so. They made it seem as if they were arresting them for not confessing.

The police don't have to tell you why you are being arrested. If they do it's just a courtesy.

 

[tranquility]

The police don't have to tell you why you are being arrested. If they do it's just a courtesy.

Actually, I believe they do. I don't have a citation at hand, but I'm pretty sure. They don't have to give the whole listing, just one thing for which they believe they have probable cause to arrest you for. Everyone does. Even in a citizen's arrest.

 

[cyjeff]

Agreed.

Police cannot arrest you without probable cause. They must make you aware of that probable cause.

They must do so in a timely manner. They do NOT have to do it at the moment the cuffs go on.

For instance, you could separate two people fighting in the street. Handcuff them both and sit them in the car. Then interview the witnesses before they wander off.

Then charge the two people fighting... even though an hour may have passed.

 

[tranquility]

In the instance you cite, I would say there was a detention and then a reasonable investigation before arrest.

 

[Zigner]

COPS is HEAVILY edited. The 3 minute segment you watched could easily have taken 30-45 minutes in real time.

 

[CdwJava]

Actually, I believe they do. I don't have a citation at hand, but I'm pretty sure. They don't have to give the whole listing, just one thing for which they believe they have probable cause to arrest you for. Everyone does. Even in a citizen's arrest.

They don't have to tell you that moment (and on camera) but a person does have a legal right to be informed of the charges for which they are being arrested ... most often, that occurs at the jail. It's easier than arguing in the field.

- Carl

 

[CdwJava]

COPS is HEAVILY edited. The 3 minute segment you watched could easily have taken 30-45 minutes in real time.

When I was in Sacramento, we had Cops ride with us for 8 weeks ... they had two camera crews ride for 8 weeks with the Sac. PD and the Sac. S.O. and as I recall, they said it generally took two crews one week to get enough footage for a single show ... plus, the agency involved gets to approve or reject the footage to be aired (or so I was told at the time).

Since a search of a hotel room (from discovery, to entry, to end of the search) would likely take far longer than a 7 or 8 minute segment, I suspect that some 15-30 minutes of the incident was edited out.

- Carl

 

[tranquility]

They don't have to tell you that moment (and on camera) but a person does have a legal right to be informed of the charges for which they are being arrested

When I looked through a few of my resources, I only found the California statute and a few CA cases requiring notification. So, it may not apply in the OPs mystery state.

 

[CdwJava]

Gotta love the state of Mystery!


- Carl

 

[ReformedMan]

Gotta love the state of Mystery!


- Carl

Sure beats the state of misery!