is there anything i can do about this..?

he didnt try to give a breathalizer tet or anything i was just walking home and he stopped and asked where i was goin and for my age. i said im 18 and im going home and i mntioned it was 1 block away. he then searched me for no reason and then said i smel alcohol on you and he said get into the back of my car and i then ran..

Midwest_Worker:

Does the law say that you can not have ANY alcohol in your system?

From the OP:  "...i said im 18"

Midwest_Worker:

First of all, you'll notice that "evading arrest" is the *only* thing the OP has been charged with. What was the OP originally being arrested for?

That's all that matters at this point.  There is no way to know if the officer had any intention of arresting the OP or if he would have just let him go on his way.  It doesn't matter at this point. 

The kid needs an attorney. 

blake g.:

I was just walking  down the sidewalk and im 6'1 and i dont think a kid is going to be as big as me..

Really now?  Just as an FYI, my kid was 6'3" at age 14.  Four years younger than you.

And the reason questions are asked is because of one-word responses such as the one you gave on this thread at 12:06pm.  "Yes."

I don't play Twenty Questions, so that's about when I call it a day.

But, good luck!

Midwest_Worker:

Did the officer even try to find out whether the OP had enough alcohol in the OP's system in order to be legally intoxicated? Did the officer try to administer a breathalyzer test?

He might have planned to do those things, but since the suspect ran, he didn't get the chance.

The first problem I see with your comments is that you are assuming things that aren't known, including that the cop didn't have reasonable suspicion for the stop, didn't have cause for a warrantless search, etc. We don't have much in the way of facts and what we do have is biased — the version from the defendant's point-of-view.

The second problem I see is in your implication that running would be a great idea. You suggested that he should run because he might be beaten or killed while in custody. On that theory, everyone should run and evade cops at every encounter with one, whether local law enforcement or the feds. Maybe they should have run from you, too. Maybe you and your fed colleagues have beaten or killed the suspects you arrested, too? My guess (and certainly my hope) is that you didn't. And the fact is, the vast majority of cops don't do that either. Most people arrested are not beaten or killed. The supposed red flags you mentioned are a weak basis for your claim the kid was in any physical danger. 

You qualified your comment by saying if he didn't get caught, it would be a great idea, but of course that's true with any crime, isn't it? It's great to commit a crime if you can get away with it, right? I'm just glad that most people don't subscribe to that philosophy. 

"The second problem I see is in your implication that running would be a great idea. You suggested that he should run because he might be beaten or killed while in custody. On that theory, everyone should run and evade cops at every encounter with one, whether local law enforcement or the feds. Maybe they should have run from you, too. Maybe you and your fed colleagues have beaten or killed the suspects you arrested, too? My guess (and certainly my hope) is that you didn't."

I was a Census worker, enforcing Census law. I made sure that people complied with the Census, which is mandatory. I did not kill anybody. :)

And no, you should not run during *every* encounter with cops, just as you should not run during *every* encounter with a civilian. But we teach children (and adults, for that matter) to run whenever they encounter a *suspicious*, *strangely-behaving* stranger who is a *civilian*. Why should that lesson not apply to suspicious, strangely-behaving strangers who are gun-toting cops?

If a person knows that he has committed a crime, he may have a reasonable belief that police may find out about it and that they may go after him for it. So, if such a person is stopped by police, he should not run. He should assume that they have caught up to him for that crime.

However, a person who has not committed any crimes, has a reasonable belief that police will not go after him. So, if a person who knows he has not broken any laws, is questioned by police, that person should be on guard for suspicious behavior on the part of the police.

For example, if a person does not drink alcohol because he has health problems, and the police say that they smell alcohol on that person's breath, that's the time to run. :)

Midwest_Worker:

I was a Census worker, enforcing Census law.

That's hilarious. A census work is data collector, not "law enforcement." You were not authorized to carry a weapon and make arrests for criminal violations of the law. Prior to law school, I was a revenue officer for the IRS. It was enforcement in the sense that my job was seizing assets from taxpayers who refused to pay their delinquent taxes. But that position, too, was not "law enforcement." Revenue officers are not authorized to carry firearms and are not authorized to make arrests for criminal violations of the tax law. That is the job of the special agent. 

.

Midwest_Worker:

I was a Census worker, enforcing Census law

"I worked for the "feds" in enforcing federal law. So, I'm not some hippy, liberal, hate-all-authority type."

And all along I was thinking that you were maybe a Federal Marshall or something.  Give me a break.  Exactly what federal laws do census workers enforce?

Midwest_Worker:

But we teach children (and adults, for that matter) to run whenever they encounter a *suspicious*, *strangely-behaving* stranger who is a *civilian*. Why should that lesson not apply to suspicious, strangely-behaving strangers who are gun-toting cops?

Because law abiding citizens also teach their children to trust and respect law enforcement officials. 

Midwest_Worker:

However, a person who has not committed any crimes, has a reasonable belief that police will not go after him. So, if a person who knows he has not broken any laws, is questioned by police, that person should be on guard for suspicious behavior on the part of the police.

How do you KNOW that the OP hadn't commited a crime?  Right, you have no way of knowing and the OP hasn't denied that he had alcohol on his breath or indicated how he was acting at the tme of the original stop.

Thank you for the laugh anyway.

You think when stopped by the police, and you are innocent of any crime, your best bet is to run?

Those are your words here.

Next you very very misleadingly state you used to work for the Feds.  That was about the time I dismissed ALL your posts.

I, as others have already stated, disagree with you completely.

In my humble opinion, advising an 18 year old boy, when stopped by police, and is innocent of any crime, he should run from the police, that's just terrible advise!

I would say they are going to assume he's guilty of something for sure!

When I was 17 years old, my High School cross country team had a dinner at the end of the season.  This was years ago, and we were all looking for a pay phone for rides home.  Since we ran together every day, we all ran in a group across up and down and across the street looking for a pay phone.  

Guess what?  Somebody called the cops.  Several actually.  We were completely innocent of anything but looking for a pay phone.

But even at 17 years old, when the cop said stop, we did.  And nobody did anything but answer his questions.  I don't think he wanted to be the guy that took the entire boys cross country team into jail, on their last dinner out.

But had we all run off, I don't think it would have gone so nice.  He even apologized, and then told us a bunch of kids running around are going to look suspicious.  We said we understood, and were on our way.

So, Midwest_worker, do you think we should have all made a run for it?

I think we made the right move.

"You think when stopped by the police, and you are innocent of any crime, your best bet is to run?"

No. You try to find out what the police want. But, if you sense that they are trying to pin something on you, then you run. If you don't even touch alcohol, and if they say that they smell alcohol on your breath, then that's a pretty good sign that they're trying to frame you for something.

"Next you very very misleadingly state you used to work for the Feds. That was about the time I dismissed ALL your posts."

I DID work for the Feds, jerk. The Census Bureau is a Federal agency, and my paychecks came from the US Treasury. Lying about working for the Feds is a serious offense. I certainly would not have claimed to have worked for the Feds, if it were not true.

"He even apologized, and then told us a bunch of kids running around are going to look suspicious. We said we understood, and were on our way."

The cop explained why he stopped you, and, when he could find no actual wrongdoing, he let you go. He did not try to "invent" charges.

"And all along I was thinking that you were maybe a Federal Marshall or something. Give me a break. Exactly what federal laws do census workers enforce?"

Contrary to popular belief, participation in the Census is mandatory, not voluntary. Some people were trying to avoid the census. I had to remind them, in a firm way, that participating in the Census was mandatory and that failure to do so carried a maximum $5000 fine.

I dealt with one woman who had given one Census worker after another a hard time. I argued with her for quite a while and wore her down. She relented and participated.

Then there was the guy who unleashed his attack dog on me and told me that I would be bitten. I managed to dodge the dog and avoid being bitten. The guy then locked the dog up and participated.

Other Census workers in the United States have had guns pointed at them.

"Because law abiding citizens also teach their children to trust and respect law enforcement officials."

Children should be taught which behaviors are proper behaviors for authority figures, and which behaviors are not. Are you going to teach your children that they should not allow adults to touch them inappropriately, UNLESS the adults are police officers?

"That's hilarious. A census work is data collector, not "law enforcement."  "

Tell that to the Census workers who have been attacked in the line of duty, myself included.

"Revenue officers are not authorized to carry firearms and are not authorized to make arrests for criminal violations of the tax law."

If the law required asset seizure, and you were seizing assets, then you were enforcing the law. According to our Constitution, the entire executive branch is law enforcement.

Midwest_Worker:

I DID work for the Feds, jerk.

I'm sorry, but there is the answer right there regarding your post.

You might just as well name the legal firm you work for, regarding something, implying you are a lawyer.

Because THAT you DID exactly that.

And calling someone "a jerk", for telling you it's bad advise to tell someone to run from the police when they are stopped by them.

I think we've seen your kind on this forum before.

Midwest_Worker:

Lying about working for the Feds is a serious offense

Are you for real? Noone said anything about lieing.  What you did was misrepresent yourself.

This is not rocket science.

and I'm not arguing with you.  I'm stating complete facts regarding your posts.

It would seem pointless to respond to you any longer.

By all means, if the police try to pull you over, and you are guilty, race away!  

Good luck with that idea

I hope it works out for you.

"You might just as well name the legal firm you work for, regarding something, implying you are a lawyer."

Saying that I worked for the Feds, when I did work for the Feds, is the same as saying that I am a lawyer, when I'm not a lawyer? Really?

Actually, impersonating a lawyer is a criminal offense. I certainly will not be doing that.

"And calling someone "a jerk", for telling you it's bad advise to tell someone to run from the police when they are stopped by them."

I called you a jerk because you alleged that I was not telling the truth when I said that I had worked for the Feds. I would not call you a jerk for disagreeing with my advice to run if the police are behaving strangely. I believe that, on the issue of the police, reasonable people can disagree.

"Are you for real? Noone said anything about lieing. What you did was misrepresent yourself."

First of all, lying and misrepresenting are the same thing. Second of all, do you know how many Federal agencies there are? I worked for one of MANY agencies. It's not my fault that you read my post and assumed that I was Jack Bauer. Maybe you've been watching too many tv shows.

"By all means, if the police try to pull you over, and you are guilty, race away!"

I think you're trying to say,

"By all means, if the police try to pull you over, and you are NOT guilty, race away!"

And that's not what I said, actually. I said that, if the police are acting very strangely, you might want to flee. If the police have a good reason to stop you, they will tell you what it is. If the police are stopping you because they're bored and they want to go on a fishing expedition, it's not a good idea to stick around.

Let's use my Census work as an example. If I knock on a door, a woman answers, and I ask her, "How many people live in this house? Can you please give me their names?", that's normal, proper procedure. However, if I ask her, "How big are your breasts?", then she can reasonably assume that I may be a rapist, and she can flee or shut the door into my face.

Don't run from police ALL the time. Just be on alert for bad behavior. That's all.

PS: I'll bet that, if YOU were a Census worker, and YOU had to face an attack dog, you would probably defecate into your pants. :)

miswest_worker,

I'm not engaging you any longer

I merely found you rather entertaining!

however

You have gone way far and away from the original posters post

And I don't think you are playing with the full 52 card deck

Good luck