Leader

Collapse

Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

The myth that cops have to identify themselves...

Collapse

300x250 Mobile

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts
    Sgt York
    Forum Member

  • Sgt York
    replied
    I'm not a cop but this sounds like they're tryin to trick ya with the old 714: "Whenever in doubt about one of your friends affiliation with law enforcement, you must first find a neutral place, such as a park or gas station, and ask three times - 'Are you a police officer, deputy, state trooper, narcotics investigator, detective, or other such sworn officer of the law." If the answer is no, badda bing, if not it gets real complicated.

    According to jailhouse law, code P0 - T714.1.25.

    Disclaimer: The above comment is for comedy relief only, and is completely bogus!

    Leave a comment:

  • duke3478
    Some Pig

  • duke3478
    replied
    Originally posted by alanmoor View Post
    There's a lot of disinformation posted here. Cops are morally and legally bound by international law and all departmental code to be truthful. Please spread that word to your criminal friends.
    Exactly. Why dispel this myth? Or any myth? Let them believe what they want.

    I have them tell me all the time, "dude, you can't search my car!" as I walk directly towards their car to conduct a legal search, and as I conduct it. I love it. Let them believe what Jay-Z says, what YouTube says, whatever. The safer they feel, the easier the job gets.

    Leave a comment:


  • 11b101abn
    replied
    Originally posted by Smurfette_76 View Post
    No. We can lie to you all the way to trial. Period.
    Liar......................

























    Just had to.

    Leave a comment:

  • CruiserClass
    Forum Member

  • CruiserClass
    replied
    Not only do we have to identify ourselves as law enforcement officers if directly asked, we must also lift our right foot and let you examine our heel, as that is where we are all tattooed with our badge numbers. Its why almost every department has a general order against wearing flip-flops, even while off-duty.

    Leave a comment:

  • towncop
    Fidelity~Zeal~Obedience

  • towncop
    replied
    I love when people post questions like this on here and say "a friend" blah, blah, blah.

    Leave a comment:

  • mulligan3193
    Forum Member

  • mulligan3193
    replied
    A buddy of mine, while on the stand in his Vice days, responded to a defense attorney who asked,"Officer, did you lie to my client when he asked you if you were a police officer?"

    He said," Sir, I get paid to lie."

    The judge had to hold a piece of paper in front of his face for a minute to hide the laughter........

    Leave a comment:

  • alanmoor
    Forum Member

  • alanmoor
    replied
    There's a lot of disinformation posted here. Cops are morally and legally bound by international law and all departmental code to be truthful. Please spread that word to your criminal friends.

    Leave a comment:

  • ArkansasFan24
    Forum Member

  • ArkansasFan24
    replied
    Originally posted by JQC View Post
    Question came up at lunch today w/my co-workers. It's the same one that's been asked and debated about for ages - does an undercover cop have to identify themselves as a LEO if they are asked that question directly.

    Personally, I believe the answer is an undeniable NO. LEOs can lie about their occupation in any undercover situation. They don't have to skirt the question, or sneak around the answer... meaning they aren't bound to saying, "Do I look like a cop?" or, "What kind of question is that?".. They can tell a flat out lie, and the charges against the suspect will stick.

    Then I started looking on oyez.org for USSC case law to back that up, but I'm not finding it.

    Anyone know what appeals court rulings support this? I'm certain this has been pressed in the courts in every conceivable way and shot down each time but for whatever reason I can't find it...
    Sure. We can and do. It's misplaced confidence on your part to speak.

    Leave a comment:

  • yangsTa
    Infantryman

  • yangsTa
    replied
    Is this a trick question?

    Leave a comment:

  • In It To Win It
    Forum Member

  • In It To Win It
    replied
    Originally posted by HEDP View Post
    Think about this:



    If an undercover officer always had to identify themselves as cops, wouldn't that defeat the purpose of being undercover?





    /Thread

    .
    You must've just hit the "easy" button.

    Leave a comment:

  • willbird
    Forum Member

  • willbird
    replied
    Anybody who has ever read a book or two has read this fiction, that if a prostitute asks a prospective client "are you a police officer" and they say "no" then any resulting arrest is entrapment.

    Sounds great in a book, but we all know it is not true in real life.

    Detections of under cover cops is why some criminal clubs and organizations require that any prospects commit a crime with witness's to become full fledged members, up to and including murder. An undercover cop is not going to be able murder somebody to join an organization.

    Bill

    Leave a comment:

  • JQC
    Forum Member

  • JQC
    replied
    Originally posted by Smurfette_76 View Post
    Did you read the same thing I did? Your question was addressed in that article as well as more indepth responses regarding interview and interrogation.

    Perhaps the BEST answer, which you didn't accept in the beginning, is sheer common sense. If your "friends" don't understand that, then what can I say...we can explain it to you, but we can't understand it for you.
    I understand it. One of my co-workers happens to be quite stubborn, and claims that a friend of his who is an LEO in So Cal (who works narcotics) told him otherwise - and he is citing this, "friend" as an authority.

    The article you listed focused mostly on one distinction in the type of lies used to extract confessions. That wasn't what I was looking for. Misrepresentations during an interrogation/interview are different from misrepresenting your identity during the commission of the offense.

    Again, I understand (and agree with) the position that we all advocate... but was looking for judicial opinions beyond the obvious to back it up. I guess no such opinion exists.

    Leave a comment:

  • RoadKingTrooper
    Have gun......will travel

  • RoadKingTrooper
    replied
    Originally posted by Smurfette_76 View Post
    Did you read the same thing I did? Your question was addressed in that article as well as more indepth responses regarding interview and interrogation.

    Perhaps the BEST answer, which you didn't accept in the beginning, is sheer common sense. If your "friends" don't understand that, then what can I say...we can explain it to you, but we can't understand it for you.

    This is why I have dreams of her She can tell the the OP to **** off in the sweetest manner

    Leave a comment:

  • jannino
    Forum Member

  • jannino
    replied
    Originally posted by Dinosaur32 View Post
    The basic tenet is that Police Officers are under no legal obligation to speak the truth in dealing with citizens. The only limitations on the Police come into play if the Officer violates a right under the Constitution.
    +1 He sums it up perfectly.


    End of thread.

    Leave a comment:

  • mikeymedic
    Band-aid jockey

  • mikeymedic
    replied
    I'm not a cop...man that was easy. I will lie when you lie.

    Leave a comment:

MR300x250 Tablet

Collapse

What's Going On

Collapse

There are currently 2196 users online. 165 members and 2031 guests.

Most users ever online was 158,966 at 05:57 AM on 01-16-2021.

Welcome Ad

Collapse
Working...
X