More vague requirements for "probable cause" when it comes to rape arrests?

[HerNameIsNicole]

California:

sorry in advance for the length =/

It's been two years since this event, and i feel traumatized by it, and for good reason.

I was hanging out with a girl I met on the internet (yeah yeah...i know...) and during our fourth visit together, we got physical. Clothes came off and we kissed and groped...basically everything but intercourse or oral sex. Anyway, after like 2 hours of this we stopped. She immediately began acting distant and ran outside to "smoke a cigarette". I followed her out shortly to find her on the phone in the BACK seat of her car, telling someone that I had basically tricked her into letting me put my penis in her. For some reason she was not trying to leave. She even left her purse in my house. She just went outside to make that phone call. I made my presence known and stated firmly that I never put anything in her but my fingers and that she needed to leave my house and never come back. She started out very apologetic and said there had been a misunderstanding, but when I called her crazy, her demeanor changed entirely. She did this "talk to the hand" type thing in my face, then stormed inside for her purse, stormed back out to her car without a word, and drove off.

10 minutes later, what seemed like at least ten officers were at my front door. I explained the situation to them as I just described it, allowed them to search my room and take what they needed, and volunteered to submit to whatever questioning and medical exams they needed as well. I basically said I would comply in any way possible. The police acted friendly and understanding and talked me out into the street from my house, then put cuffs on me as they continued telling me that I wasn't under arrest. Then they told me to sit in the police car while they made a couple calls or something, but that I still wasn't under arrest. I learned later that they brought the girl back from around the corner, and according to the police report they then shined the lights on me in the back of the patrol car and the now CRYING girl said that I was the one who had raped her. I also learned through the report that while the girl says I was screaming and cursing at her, a neighbor who witnessed the argument and who was interviewed BEFORE the arrest was made stated that what he saw was a "calm conversation", which is the truth of the matter. Despite the lack of evidence and conflicting witness statement, I was placed under arrest. Only time in my life I've been in jail. I was in jail for almost a week, because arraignment can take 72 hours, and the weekend didn't count. During that time I was placed on suicide watch for 24 hours and had to deal with being transferred to and from another jail 45 minutes away, TWICE, chained to what I can only imagine were actual rapists. In the end, the DA never filed the charges, so I was released. The police never did an investigation into my claims that the girl filed a false police report. The police themselves refused to even file a complaint that I was arrested without probable cause.

So what are some opinions on this situation? I'd really like to have some GOOD feedback that isn't just personal opinion about what the police should and shouldn't do. Was this overkill and bad policing, or are the police basically obligated to behave this way when it comes to rape?

On a side note, what I PERSONALLY learned from this situation other than don't hang out with weird girls from the internet......if you're in an argument with someone who potentially has that much power to ruin your life, don't call them crazy.

 

[BOR]

I was in jail for almost a week, because arraignment can take 72 hours, and the weekend didn't count.

Funny, you were arrested without a warrant, and the US SC has ruled, if still held in custody on a non warrant arrest, an Arraignment/Probable cause hearing must be within 48 hours, weekends notwithstanding??

There may have been a PC hearing without you? Somewhere in the back of my mind I remember this for CA??

To comment on the actual PC of arrest, facially it may seem weak from a readers standpoint maybe, but we were not the police effecting the arrest based on her field testimony.

 

[xylene]

This isn't a criminal court drama

There may be near zero forensics involved.

Even if you did not engage in vaginal penetration, the prosecution may argue a sex crime occurred.

 

[HerNameIsNicole]

Funny, you were arrested without a warrant, and the US SC has ruled, if still held in custody on a non warrant arrest, an Arraignment/Probable cause hearing must be within 48 hours, weekends notwithstanding??

There may have been a PC hearing without you? Somewhere in the back of my mind I remember this for CA??

To comment on the actual PC of arrest, facially it may seem weak from a readers standpoint maybe, but we were not the police effecting the arrest based on her field testimony.

I think you are correct. What I am finding makes it look like a judge can rule on probable cause without my presence, so that must be what they did.

I do also see that I should have been in front of a judge MYSELF within 48 hours, however that 48 hours does NOT include weekends, while the 48 hours for probable cause does.

Checking my records, I see that I was arrested on a Friday at 1am (Thursday night) and released the following Tuesday, which I believe was at 4am. So not including weekends, it looks like I was released only 51 hours after my initial arrest. It certainly felt like I was in jail for years =/, not that I'm saying that matters.

Honestly, they may have put Tuesday on the paperwork because that's when I was supposed to have an arraignment but found out that the DA hadn't filed. It may have actually been Wednesday at 4am that I was released. I'd have to do a lot more checking to recall for sure.

Anyway, I'm way more focused on whether it was lawful and ethical to arrest in that situation. Seriously, I'm including everything pertinent that I can think of from the police report. That's why I even included that she was crying and that I told the officers that we were being physical but not having sex. I'm sure those things helped sway their opinion, but I just do not see how a person could have really believed it was a good idea to place me in jail given ALL the details present at the time, especially given my mid-20s age with no criminal record.

 

[HerNameIsNicole]

This isn't a criminal court drama

There may be near zero forensics involved.

Even if you did not engage in vaginal penetration, the prosecution may argue a sex crime occurred.

No offense, but I didn't say there should be forensics involved before an arrest. I'm also not saying that the prosecution doesn't have the right to argue what they want to argue. I'm just talking about what the police had to go on at THAT time, and whether that should have been enough to make a reasonable person think that I had more likely than not raped someone.

 

[CdwJava]

Then they told me to sit in the police car while they made a couple calls or something, but that I still wasn't under arrest. I learned later that they brought the girl back from around the corner, and according to the police report they then shined the lights on me in the back of the patrol car and the now CRYING girl said that I was the one who had raped her.

Until that point you had effectively been detained and were being held for an in-field identification by the victim.

I also learned through the report that while the girl says I was screaming and cursing at her, a neighbor who witnessed the argument and who was interviewed BEFORE the arrest was made stated that what he saw was a "calm conversation", which is the truth of the matter.

That ought to help the defense side of things a little. But, it doesn't address the rape, only her characterization of the "conversation" afterwards.

Despite the lack of evidence and conflicting witness statement, I was placed under arrest.

Her statement is evidence. And the witness statement says nothing about any rape allegation, only about the witness's characterization of the discussion or conversation he or she heard.

In the end, the DA never filed the charges, so I was released.

That must have been at least a minor relief.

The police never did an investigation into my claims that the girl filed a false police report. The police themselves refused to even file a complaint that I was arrested without probable cause.

Probable cause is minimal. It requires only that there exist the reasonable articulable belief that a crime has occurred and that the person to be arrested committed the crime. The police had a hysterical girl that was, I imagine, at least initially believable in her statements and identified you as her attacker. So, you were arrested.

Absent her admission of lying to the police, just how would you expect the police to PROVE beyond a reasonable doubt that she lied? They could neither prove nor disprove a rape, and likewise they could not prove or disprove any lie she might have told. Therefore, no criminal charges.

You, however, are free to consult an attorney and look into suing her for the suffering she caused. Keep in mind that you may have to pony up cash up front, and that if she has no assets even if you were to win an award, you may not collect.

So what are some opinions on this situation? I'd really like to have some GOOD feedback that isn't just personal opinion about what the police should and shouldn't do. Was this overkill and bad policing, or are the police basically obligated to behave this way when it comes to rape?

I don't see anything that leaps out as bad. They had a victim that alleged a serious crime, they acted on that claim and made an arrest based upon probable cause, and the DA saw he or she could not make a case beyond a reasonable doubt and dropped the matter.

As frustrating and horrible that your experience was, there may be very little recourse except for trying to sue her. But, with only the two of you, it makes it very difficult to for either of you to show what happened when you were alone.

This is an excellent example of why real dating is far better than hooking up on the web.

 

[tranquility]

At the very least, when the girl said you were the guy, there was probable cause.


The only thing I see is that the OP was arrested before the girl pointed him out because of being handcuffed and sitting in the back of a police car. However, it seems the OP admitted putting his fingers in the woman so there may have been PC at that moment.

Of course, the police would have had to get a warrant if the OP just didn't let them in to search (or, even open the door to them) and also might not have developed PC without the OP's statement. What have we learned today class?

Admittedly, maybe the DA felt the OP was telling the truth because of all his cooperation. Maybe.

 

[HerNameIsNicole]

Until that point you had effectively been detained and were being held for an in-field identification by the victim.


That ought to help the defense side of things a little. But, it doesn't address the rape, only her characterization of the "conversation" afterwards.


Her statement is evidence. And the witness statement says nothing about any rape allegation, only about the witness's characterization of the discussion or conversation he or she heard.


That must have been at least a minor relief.


Probable cause is minimal. It requires only that there exist the reasonable articulable belief that a crime has occurred and that the person to be arrested committed the crime. The police had a hysterical girl that was, I imagine, at least initially believable in her statements and identified you as her attacker. So, you were arrested.

Absent her admission of lying to the police, just how would you expect the police to PROVE beyond a reasonable doubt that she lied? They could neither prove nor disprove a rape, and likewise they could not prove or disprove any lie she might have told. Therefore, no criminal charges.

You, however, are free to consult an attorney and look into suing her for the suffering she caused. Keep in mind that you may have to pony up cash up front, and that if she has no assets even if you were to win an award, you may not collect.


I don't see anything that leaps out as bad. They had a victim that alleged a serious crime, they acted on that claim and made an arrest based upon probable cause, and the DA saw he or she could not make a case beyond a reasonable doubt and dropped the matter.

As frustrating and horrible that your experience was, there may be very little recourse except for trying to sue her. But, with only the two of you, it makes it very difficult to for either of you to show what happened when you were alone.

This is an excellent example of why real dating is far better than hooking up on the web.

"That ought to help the defense side of things a little. But, it doesn't address the rape, only her characterization of the "conversation" afterwards."

"Her statement is evidence. And the witness statement says nothing about any rape allegation, only about the witness's characterization of the discussion or conversation he or she heard."

Hmmm, I understand what you're saying here, definitely. What about the fact that FOUR roommates who were renting the house with me were all home and stated they heard nothing unusual coming from my room, while the girl states that she was crying and telling me to stop even as we were physical on my bed? This is ALSO all in the police report as being heard before the arrest was made. Four people who didn't even know I had a visitor, let alone that anything abnormal was going on in my room...should have been SOME sign to the police, no? I literally shared my wall with one roommate, and another's door was but 7 feet from my own. Granted you could just say "well maybe she was WHISPERING to stop and it was a SOFT crying", but that's starting to stretch common sense to fit the accusation.

"That must have been at least a minor relief."

HAHAHA, well that made me smile. I thought my life was OVER while I sat in that jail. I didn't have enough to make bail, and I figured if a trial was announced, I could spend months to years there while it panned out, meanwhile suffering through everything that comes with a stay in jail with rapists, and being left with no home, job or possessions when I finally got out.

"Absent her admission of lying to the police, just how would you expect the police to PROVE beyond a reasonable doubt that she lied?"

There are other ways, such as if she had done the same thing to other men in the past and those men could be found, or going through e-mails to see if she admitted to a friend that it didn't really happen. I'm not saying that it would have been cost-effective for the city to go all out on this girl, but wouldn't it be prudent to at least scare her a bit with some sort of official filing, just so she doesn't do it again in the future? I'm sure any cost of a cursory investigation into a false police report is going to be less than the cost if she continues to put anyone in jail who calls her crazy.

It just seems like a lot of police have the (realistic) view that most people would commit crimes if laws and police weren't there to stop them. This situation tells this girl and others like her that laws and police AREN'T there to stop them.

Anyway, there's no way I am going to sue her. I've gotten on with my life in that respect, and I'm fairly certain she has no assets to speak of anyway. On top of that, I have passed the two year mark, and I believe the statute to sue has run out. When I first got out of jail, I made a half-hearted attempt to sue her, but her family refused any certified mail sent to the house and I decided it just was not worth it, especially with her dad texting me threats that he'd beat me up if he ever met me.

 

[HerNameIsNicole]

At the very least, when the girl said you were the guy, there was probable cause.


The only thing I see is that the OP was arrested before the girl pointed him out because of being handcuffed and sitting in the back of a police car. However, it seems the OP admitted putting his fingers in the woman so there may have been PC at that moment.

Of course, the police would have had to get a warrant if the OP just didn't let them in to search (or, even open the door to them) and also might not have developed PC without the OP's statement. What have we learned today class?

Admittedly, maybe the DA felt the OP was telling the truth because of all his cooperation. Maybe.

"Admittedly, maybe the DA felt the OP was telling the truth because of all his cooperation. Maybe."

I really think it was just lack of evidence. I think it was supremely stupid of me to walk outside and give so much to the police to help them develop probable cause. I really didn't know my rights when it comes to felony accusations and arrests, but then I suppose most people who aren't felons wouldn't...

 

[tranquility]

To arrest someone inside a home the police need a warrant or probable cause combined with exigent circumstances. However, if the police are already inside based on consent, they can arrest then. Even if another person let them into the house (consent), if you are in your room with the door closed, same issue.

Even if you just open the door but stay inside, you can be arrested if the police say they are arresting you before they enter the house.

Talking is never a good idea. If the police think you did something, you are not going to get out of it by talking. They will be looking more for incriminating statements and disbelieve exculpatory ones. (As, EVERYONE says they didn't do it.)

 

[CdwJava]

Hmmm, I understand what you're saying here, definitely. What about the fact that FOUR roommates who were renting the house with me were all home and stated they heard nothing unusual coming from my room, while the girl states that she was crying and telling me to stop even as we were physical on my bed? This is ALSO all in the police report as being heard before the arrest was made. Four people who didn't even know I had a visitor, let alone that anything abnormal was going on in my room...should have been SOME sign to the police, no? I literally shared my wall with one roommate, and another's door was but 7 feet from my own. Granted you could just say "well maybe she was WHISPERING to stop and it was a SOFT crying", but that's starting to stretch common sense to fit the accusation.

And all of this is likely what okayed into the DA's decision to drop the case.

But, rape does not have to be loud, it does not have to involve loud protestations to stop, and can be accomplished in close quarters (I could tell you some true horror stories).

But, the evidence required to establish the probable cause necessary for an arrest is relatively necessary.

There are other ways, such as if she had done the same thing to other men in the past and those men could be found, or going through e-mails to see if she admitted to a friend that it didn't really happen. I'm not saying that it would have been cost-effective for the city to go all out on this girl, but wouldn't it be prudent to at least scare her a bit with some sort of official filing, just so she doesn't do it again in the future?

They may have tried to scare her. You do not know.

These other ways you speak of are rarely conclusive and still leave a huge hole for reasonable doubt. And I would hate to try and argue the probable cause necessary to seek a search warrant of a possible rape victim's ISP for damning emails. And, that could backfire ... She could just as easily have told all her friends that you raped her.

It is extremely rare that the state will prosecute for a false arrest. Part of the reasoning is the chilling effect it might have on true crime reports. Since the state could not prove that the crime occurred, they are not all that likely to try and prove it did NOT occur. The same lack of evidence will hurt both ways.

 

[CdwJava]

The only thing I see is that the OP was arrested before the girl pointed him out because of being handcuffed and sitting in the back of a police car.

Maybe arrested for purposes of Miranda ... But, certainly not for all purposes. While the force used was equivalent to an arrest, a release at that point would not have required documentation pursuant to PC 849(b) as to the police this was essentially a secure detention.

 

[CdwJava]

To arrest someone inside a home the police need a warrant or probable cause combined with exigent circumstances. However, if the police are already inside based on consent, they can arrest then. Even if another person let them into the house (consent), if you are in your room with the door closed, same issue.

Even if you just open the door but stay inside, you can be arrested if the police say they are arresting you before they enter the house.

Talking is never a good idea. If the police think you did something, you are not going to get out of it by talking. They will be looking more for incriminating statements and disbelieve exculpatory ones. (As, EVERYONE says they didn't do it.)

While talking may not always be a good idea, I have known a great many situations where the defendant's explanations effectively exonerated them. Granted that may be the exception rather than the rule, but it does happen with some frequency where we go to the scene thinkin gone thing only to be convinced of something entirely different after speaking with the other party.

It is a balancing act and likely best to keep quiet, but, it is sometimes in your best interest to talk.

 

[tranquility]

Maybe arrested for purposes of Miranda ... But, certainly not for all purposes. While the force used was equivalent to an arrest, a release at that point would not have required documentation pursuant to PC 849(b) as to the police this was essentially a secure detention.

No. It is not just custody for Miranda, but an arrest under the fourth amendment--absent "some reasonable justification." And, with 10 cops (Exaggeration, I know.), unlikely.

See:
New York v. Quarles 467 U.S. 649
Unites States v. Purry 545 F.2nd 217
for the handcuffs.

People v. Natale 77 Cal.App.3rd 568
United States v. Parr 843 F.2nd 1228
United States v. Ricardo D. 912 F.2nd 337
for the locked police car.

Both together? Read the cases before we try to come up with what a reasonable justification would be with a large show of force (which could be an arrest too) and a cooperative suspect.

 

[tranquility]

No amount of talking can reduce probable cause. If there is probable cause is there in the first place an arrest can be made. If not, talking can provide it.

Now, if your talking about garnering the goodwill of the man who happens to be wearing the badge in front of you, that's one thing. But in court, a whole other matter. (The place where exonerations happen.)

When the cops are talking about a felony where you would have to register for the rest of your life? Um...I'm not going to try and convince anyone.

Of course CdwJava is a cop. Ask ANY criminal defense attorney what to do when arrested or when contacted by the cops they will tell you TO REMAIN SILENT.