Unbelievable!!

[ccga3359]

In Canada we do not have the Miranda rights. We can be arrested and held without to police needing to tell us what we have be charged with. No I do not know this by personal experience . But as CS said it is very advisable to follow the instructions of a police officer and not be confrontational. This could lead to further charges or resons to be held. In Canada you'd be facing Obstructing Justice if you do not cooperate. Although not doubt embarrassing to Brad, and I understand him being PO'd, the officer had just cause to investigate Brad. Personally I'd rather be investigated and released than allow criminal the opportunity to escape justice.

[The Supreme Canuck]

In Canada we do not have the Miranda rights.

True. But there are still rights that need to be read - just a different name. Same sort of thing as pleading the Fifth. We don't have a Fifth Amendment, but the principle of not incriminating yourself holds here as well. And, yes, they do need to tell you why you are under arrest.

Also, while they would charge you with obstructing justice or resisting arrest, the charge would not hold up in court as the arrest would be unlawful. You would be exonerated and could sue the department.

Edit: Here we are, from the Canadian Department of Justice website:

If the accused is arrested by the police, certain procedures must be followed to protect his or her rights. When the police arrest or detain an individual, they must tell the person that he or she has the right to consult a lawyer without delay and explain the reasons for the arrest and the specific charge if one is being made.

Anyone arrested and held in custody has the right to appear before a justice of the peace or judge as soon as possible (usually within 24 hours unless released sooner by the police) to have pre-trial release or bail determined. Bail hearings are sometimes referred to as “show-cause” hearings because the prosecutor usually must show why the accused should remain in custody. However, in certain situations the accused must show why he or she should be released. If a judge decides on release, the accused may be released with or without conditions. Release on bail will only be refused if there are very strong reasons for doing so.

Anyone accused of a crime also has the right to stand trial within “a reasonable time.”

[The Supreme Canuck]

Doesn't have to be. What you may have seen on US TV, or what is true in Canada isn't what is true in real life in the US. A US police officer does not have to say "You're under arrest" for you to be under arrest. When the police officer told him that he had to go with the police officer, that is legally the same as being placed under arrest. The officer does not have to read you your rights the instant you are arrested.

Well, then. Things are definitely different up here. The officer is required to tell you that you are under arrest, why you are under arrest, read you your rights, and then touch you to signify you are detained. I withdraw my comment, then, as it seems I was wrong about US law - I assumed the procedures in both countries came originally from the British common law that both nations' legal systems are based on.

[ChromeScholar]

Oh, don't get me wrong, Tattoobradley could have shut his mouth and drove away when the security guards first approached him. He was under no obligation to do anything they said. They are just private citizens as far as the law is concerned. If they prevented him from leaving, they opened themselves up to civil, and possibly criminal liability. The police officer is a whole different ball of wax. If a cop says "come with me", you better go with him. If a cop asks you who you are, you're better off telling him.

Now once a cop starts asking you questions other than "Who are you, where do you live, when were you born, and (possibly) what are you doing in this area?", you may be better off asking for a lawyer. Make no mistake about it, though. If a cop pulls you over, you are in a custodial situation. If you try to drive away, you will end up in cuffs in the back of his squad car.

[The Supreme Canuck]

Oh, I agree that it's easier to do what the officer wants. I even agree that you're in custody. I just dispute that the detainment is legal - if it wasn't up to snuff, I'd fight it.

[ChromeScholar]

So would I, just not right then. I'd fight it later, with a lawyer. The likely result of fighting it at that moment would be, at best, a set of matching metal cuffs, and at worst, a face full of pepper spray.

[Rusty]

As a retired US police officer I have to agree with ChromeScholar.
Just don't argue with the police. It's not worth the aggravation.

[Tattoo Bradley]

I knew the best thing to do was follow the cop. I know better than to argue with them. As far as the flashlight cops, we would have no doubt left. BUT, they did indeed prevent us from leaving. The had had our vehicle surround from all sides. Heck they even tried to make the driver turn the engine off. He refused and the rental cop could do no more than get all puffy and tell him the cop would be along shortly. I'm still boiling about it.

[ccga3359]

I'm still boiling about it.

All in all, not a stellar time in Texas?

[Tattoo Bradley]

All in all, not a stellar time in Texas?

I suppose so! LoL.

My class went well last week. Have another one this week. That's all that matters really. I'm also having lunch with Zardoz tomorrow at O'Neil's. Definitely looking forward to that.