Woman calls 911....Get shot

Most CHL/LEO contacts are positive, how about yours? Bloopers are fun, but no names please, if it will cause a LEO problems!

Moderators: Keith B, carlson1


philip964
Senior Member
Posts in topic: 8
Posts: 7778
Joined: Wed Sep 30, 2009 12:30 pm

Re: Woman calls 911....Get shot

#106

Post by philip964 » Mon Dec 31, 2018 12:25 am

https://www.smh.com.au/national/nsw/us- ... iuPZ1wJEMs

As you might expect in gun free Australia, this is still big news. Australia only has 24 million people. One murder is a big deal down there, as it should be.


philip964
Senior Member
Posts in topic: 8
Posts: 7778
Joined: Wed Sep 30, 2009 12:30 pm

Re: Woman calls 911....Get shot

#107

Post by philip964 » Thu Feb 28, 2019 7:48 pm

https://news.yahoo.com/hearing-ex-minne ... 48527.html

Evidence issue of ex police officer refusing to testify.

User avatar

thatguyoverthere
Senior Member
Posts in topic: 1
Posts: 384
Joined: Tue Feb 17, 2015 11:51 pm
Location: Fannin County

Re: Woman calls 911....Get shot

#108

Post by thatguyoverthere » Thu Feb 28, 2019 9:28 pm

philip964 wrote:
Thu Feb 28, 2019 7:48 pm
https://news.yahoo.com/hearing-ex-minne ... 48527.html

Evidence issue of ex police officer refusing to testify.
From the referenced article:
"Prosecutors say investigators asked to arrange for a voluntary interview with Noor and that he declined through his attorney.
Defense attorneys say prosecutors aren't allowed to use that against Noor in court because he has a constitutional right not to make any self-incriminating statements.
But prosecutors argue that they can use a defendant's pre-arrest silence if the defendant was under no government-imposed compulsion to speak.
"In sum, the defendant had a choice on whether to tell his side of the story during a voluntary interview in a non-coercive setting," prosecutor Amy Sweasy wrote. "His decision not to do so is relevant."
So we have a right not to speak, but if we exercise that right, our silence can be used against us. I believe that this defendant needs to be held accountable for his action of killing an innocent person, but this tactic of trying to use a person's silence against them by a prosecutor is troubling to me.

User avatar

Jusme
Senior Member
Posts in topic: 4
Posts: 4759
Joined: Tue Jan 19, 2016 4:23 pm
Location: Johnson County, Texas

Re: Woman calls 911....Get shot

#109

Post by Jusme » Fri Mar 01, 2019 9:25 am

thatguyoverthere wrote:
Thu Feb 28, 2019 9:28 pm
philip964 wrote:
Thu Feb 28, 2019 7:48 pm
https://news.yahoo.com/hearing-ex-minne ... 48527.html

Evidence issue of ex police officer refusing to testify.
From the referenced article:
"Prosecutors say investigators asked to arrange for a voluntary interview with Noor and that he declined through his attorney.
Defense attorneys say prosecutors aren't allowed to use that against Noor in court because he has a constitutional right not to make any self-incriminating statements.
But prosecutors argue that they can use a defendant's pre-arrest silence if the defendant was under no government-imposed compulsion to speak.
"In sum, the defendant had a choice on whether to tell his side of the story during a voluntary interview in a non-coercive setting," prosecutor Amy Sweasy wrote. "His decision not to do so is relevant."
So we have a right not to speak, but if we exercise that right, our silence can be used against us. I believe that this defendant needs to be held accountable for his action of killing an innocent person, but this tactic of trying to use a person's silence against them by a prosecutor is troubling to me.

:iagree:

While they can use anything you say against you, the Fifth amendment protects you from being forced to provide testimony against yourself. Conversely, using your right to refuse to give statements, is also protected. It sounds like they are trying to do an end around on the Fifth amendment.
This guy needs to be prosecuted, in my opinion, but not at the expense of Constitutional rights. If they are able to do that, in this case, then it can be done to anyone. JMHO
Take away the Second first, and the First is gone in a second :rules: :patriot:


srothstein
Senior Member
Posts in topic: 9
Posts: 4070
Joined: Sat Dec 16, 2006 8:27 pm
Location: Luling, TX

Re: Woman calls 911....Get shot

#110

Post by srothstein » Sun Mar 03, 2019 11:57 am

I beg to differ. Your lack of making a statement or cooperating in an investigation has always been legal to use in court, as far as I know. The Fifth Amendment forbids the government from compelling you to testify against yourself but I find nothing in the Constitution about them not introducing the lack of cooperation into any case.

We have a cultural thought process that says we should not do so and that doing so makes you guilty. After all, an innocent person would cooperate. This is why we always see statements from corporations and politicians that they are cooperating with the police.It is also why we see it as being used "against" them.

But haven't we here almost always advised to not cooperate and say nothing if you were involved in a shooting? Why would we advise that at the same time even if we think it was a justified shooting and you handled things right? This is what is known as cognitive dissonance - behaving differently than you think. Maybe we should either rethink our advice, or even better yet, work on breaking this cultural belief that saying nothing indicates guilt. Who cares if you cooperated or made a statement or not. The police should do their job and build a case properly.
Steve Rothstein

User avatar

WildBill
Senior Member
Posts in topic: 3
Posts: 16701
Joined: Tue Jul 03, 2007 12:53 pm
Location: Houston

Re: Woman calls 911....Get shot

#111

Post by WildBill » Sun Mar 03, 2019 1:26 pm

srothstein wrote:
Sun Mar 03, 2019 11:57 am
I beg to differ. Your lack of making a statement or cooperating in an investigation has always been legal to use in court, as far as I know. The Fifth Amendment forbids the government from compelling you to testify against yourself but I find nothing in the Constitution about them not introducing the lack of cooperation into any case.
I am not a lawyer and I'm stepping way outside of my expertise, but I would think that introducing this type "evidence" would be irrelevant and prejudicial and the defense would object to that line of questioning.
NRA Endowment Member


talltex
Senior Member
Posts in topic: 5
Posts: 764
Joined: Fri Oct 21, 2011 9:40 pm
Location: Waco area

Re: Woman calls 911....Get shot

#112

Post by talltex » Sun Mar 03, 2019 1:49 pm

I don't have an issue with someone being investigated or charged refusing to make a statement or testify. I do have an issue with the other officers in the department stonewalling the DA's office and refusing to cooperate or speak to them.
"I looked out under the sun and saw that the race is not always to the swift, nor the battle to the strong" Ecclesiastes 9:11

"The race may not always go to the swift or the battle to the strong, but that's the way the smart money bets" Damon Runyon


srothstein
Senior Member
Posts in topic: 9
Posts: 4070
Joined: Sat Dec 16, 2006 8:27 pm
Location: Luling, TX

Re: Woman calls 911....Get shot

#113

Post by srothstein » Sun Mar 03, 2019 3:01 pm

WildBill wrote:
Sun Mar 03, 2019 1:26 pm
srothstein wrote:
Sun Mar 03, 2019 11:57 am
I beg to differ. Your lack of making a statement or cooperating in an investigation has always been legal to use in court, as far as I know. The Fifth Amendment forbids the government from compelling you to testify against yourself but I find nothing in the Constitution about them not introducing the lack of cooperation into any case.
I am not a lawyer and I'm stepping way outside of my expertise, but I would think that introducing this type "evidence" would be irrelevant and prejudicial and the defense would object to that line of questioning.
I certainly can agree that the defense lawyer should object on those grounds. I was just pointing out that it would not be on the grounds of having a right for that to not be introduced.

And hopefully, we can work on it not being prejudicial because everyone would say "So what?"
Steve Rothstein


srothstein
Senior Member
Posts in topic: 9
Posts: 4070
Joined: Sat Dec 16, 2006 8:27 pm
Location: Luling, TX

Re: Woman calls 911....Get shot

#114

Post by srothstein » Sun Mar 03, 2019 3:02 pm

talltex wrote:
Sun Mar 03, 2019 1:49 pm
I don't have an issue with someone being investigated or charged refusing to make a statement or testify. I do have an issue with the other officers in the department stonewalling the DA's office and refusing to cooperate or speak to them.
I agree with this also. The other officers not involved should be compelled to make statements. One of the interesting sidenotes about the Fifth is that it stops you from being compelled to testify against yourself. It does not stop you from being compelled to testify against anyone else.
Steve Rothstein


philip964
Senior Member
Posts in topic: 8
Posts: 7778
Joined: Wed Sep 30, 2009 12:30 pm

Re: Woman calls 911....Get shot

#115

Post by philip964 » Sun Mar 03, 2019 5:31 pm

From the juries I have been on if the defendant is planning not to testify, then this comes out in the jury selection process. You are usually asked if this would affect your decision on guilt or innocence, after being told about the right not to testify. If you feel it would affect your decision you are excused from the case.


crazy2medic
Senior Member
Posts in topic: 3
Posts: 1202
Joined: Sun Nov 08, 2015 9:59 am

Re: Woman calls 911....Get shot

#116

Post by crazy2medic » Mon Mar 04, 2019 8:32 am

srothstein wrote:
Sun Mar 03, 2019 3:02 pm
talltex wrote:
Sun Mar 03, 2019 1:49 pm
I don't have an issue with someone being investigated or charged refusing to make a statement or testify. I do have an issue with the other officers in the department stonewalling the DA's office and refusing to cooperate or speak to them.
I agree with this also. The other officers not involved should be compelled to make statements. One of the interesting sidenotes about the Fifth is that it stops you from being compelled to testify against yourself. It does not stop you from being compelled to testify against anyone else.
I Agree and had I been officer Noor's partner I would be none too happy about him putting a round past my head!
Government, like fire is a dangerous servant and a fearful master
If you ain't paranoid you ain't paying attention

Post Reply

Return to “LEO Contacts & Bloopers”