NationStates Jolt Archive

It got raised in another thread about entrapment, and I felt I should create a thread to address some myths about the police, and what they "can't" do. So, with that in mind:

]myth #1: If you ask a police officer if he is a cop he must answer truthfully


I love this one because, despite its idiocy, people still believe it. Some will swear to you that a police officer MUST answer truthfully if you ask him if he is, in fact, a cop.

It's COMPLETELY untrue. Totally. An undercover officer is under no obligation to tell you he's a cop if he asks. If it were true, the entire nature of undercover police work would crash to a halt. The idea that years of work, months of dangerous undercover work can come to a crashing halt if someone utters "hey, you're not a cop, are you?" is ludicrus, and yet, some people believe it.

myth #2: City traffic police can't follow you across city lines because it is out of their jurisdiction

Under normal patrols, city police can not leave the city lines when they're driving around. However "long arm" statutes allow them to pursue suspects beyond city limits once a legitimate pursuit has begun. Once those lights come on, he can still follow you past his jurisdictional lines. The same can also be said for pulling into private property etc

myth #3: you don't have to follow stop signs in parking lots because they are private territories and the police can't enforce traffic laws on private property

Parking lots exist in a public/private entity, in which while private property are given a "right of way" to the public. Since public has the right of way, public traffic laws apply, including stop signs.

myth #4: If someone offers to sell you drugs, ask to see the drugs first. Because posession is illegal, police are not allowed to have drugs on their person

Posession is illegal, HOWEVER, law specifically makes exceptions for under cover police in the capacity of their jobs. A police officer, in the capacity of their under cover operation are allowed to handle, posess, buy, sell, and consume illegal substances, as such, if someone has drugs on him, it might still be a cop

myth #5: if a cop offers to buy drugs from you/sell drugs to you, it is entrapment. Police must wait for you to come to them and ask to buy drugs from them/sell drugs to them

Untrue. The law of entrapment says that the police must not use undue influence to coerce or manipulate someone into committing a crime. however a mere offer is not manipulation. Police are free to approach you and ask to buy drugs, or offer to sell drugs to you. They do not need to wait for you to approach them.

Rule of thumb seems to be: don't talk to cops if you're possibly in violation of any kind of law. :p

As for cops selling you drugs, I know they can do that with impunity - they can even ask you to buy *them* drugs for their own use, and then charge you with trafficking, just for doing them that favor. :p

myth #3: you don't have to follow stop signs in parking lots because they are private territories and the police can't enforce traffic laws on private property

Parking lots exist in a public/private entity, in which while private property are given a "right of way" to the public. Since public has the right of way, public traffic laws apply, including stop signs.



I found this one out the sucky way. Dukes of Hazzard antics went unappreciated.

One other possible myth maybe someone knows - only a DOT cop can ticket you if you're in a truck, aside from speeding violations.

I know a guy who's a delivery driver, and never keeps track of his stops (which isn't legal, I guess) but he says that the locals can't even inspect his stuff. I hope for his sake that that's true. :p

I found this one out the sucky way. Dukes of Hazzard antics went unappreciated.

In a parking lot? :p

My DMV road test, way back when, never even left the mall parking-lot, so I always assumed the feds could get me there.

One other possible myth maybe someone knows - only a DOT cop can ticket you if you're in a truck, aside from speeding violations.

I know a guy who's a delivery driver, and never keeps track of his stops (which isn't legal, I guess) but he says that the locals can't even inspect his stuff. I hope for his sake that that's true. :p

He wishes. A regular cop needs probable cause to force him to open up, but remember that that is probable cause for suspicion that a crime is being comitted.

DOT can demand inspection whenever they like, it's part of their charter. But if your suspension is crushed flat against your tires, any cop can demand you stop and call for a weigh station.

6. When two police officers work together, they are required, by law, to take on dynamically opposed personalities, one taking a benefactor personality, the other becoming sadistic.

In a parking lot? :p

.
It had just rained, I wanted to see if I could do the stuff I had figured out how to do on dirt on wet asphalt. Specifically a reverse 180 because I was racing a friend out of the parking lot who was already facing the right way.

It was a sub-par reverse 180, never had the nerve to try it again (I swear to god that cop was hiding in a pocket dimension, he freakin' came out of nowhere) and now don't have a car that I would even dare try it in.

myth #5: if a cop offers to buy drugs from you/sell drugs to you, it is entrapment. Police must wait for you to come to them and ask to buy drugs from them/sell drugs to them

Untrue. The law of entrapment says that the police must not use undue influence to coerce or manipulate someone into committing a crime. however a mere offer is not manipulation. Police are free to approach you and ask to buy drugs, or offer to sell drugs to you. They do not need to wait for you to approach them.That sounds an awful lot like entrapment to me. If it's the cop that starts it then the Cop is, in fact, setting up the crime. I'm sure there is some legal loophole but it still smells of entrapment to me.


6. When two police officers work together, they are required, by law, to take on dynamically opposed personalities, one taking a benefactor personality, the other becoming sadistic.

The good cop bad cop routine? Just for show.

The good cop bad cop routine? Just for show.

It was a joke.

It had just rained, I wanted to see if I could do the stuff I had figured out how to do on dirt on wet asphalt. Specifically a reverse 180 because I was racing a friend out of the parking lot who was already facing the right way.

It was a sub-par reverse 180, never had the nerve to try it again (I swear to god that cop was hiding in a pocket dimension, he freakin' came out of nowhere) and now don't have a car that I would even dare try it in.

That sucks. Parking lots are the places you take kids to teach them how to drive, test your breaks, and stuff like that, so you'd think the cop would go easy like they usually do when they see parents practicing there. At least you got to try a trick most people don't get to. :p

That sounds an awful lot like entrapment to me. If it's the cop that starts it then the Cop is, in fact, setting up the crime. I'm sure there is some legal loophole but it still smells of entrapment to me.


As was mentioned in another thread, merely providing the opportunity to commit a crime is not entrapment. Merely offering you the chance to commit a crime is not entrapment. Entrapment is about getting someone to do something they would not otherwise normally do.

If all I do is come up to you and go "want some drugs?" and you say yes, you can't claim you were entrapped, because all I did was make a simple offer, so you can't say that you wouldn't normally do it.

Which is why I put it there as a popular myth, because so many people are SO convinced that if the police come up to you, it's entrapment, when that's not what entrapment means. Entrapment means that the police got you to do something you wouldn't NORMALLY do were it not for them. If all they do is offer you drugs, and you accept, you can't really claim you weren't the type to normally buy drugs, because you did, in fact, buy them.

That sucks. Parking lots are the places you take kids to teach them how to drive, test your breaks, and stuff like that, so you'd think the cop would go easy like they usually do when they see parents practicing there. At least you got to try a trick most people don't get to. :p
Well, it was a small town at a time when high school students were still in oversized American cars from the 70s and 60s. I was driving a Malibu Classic (the granny version, not the hot rod version), some dude had a Falcon (the hot rod version), another had a hot rodded Nova, there where a pair of Impalas, one of the ugliest notchback Mustangs I have ever seen (it had box flares that would make a poser in an Impreza seem tame), a few others. Those where just the guys I knew personally (except for the Impala guys, they just weirded me out because they followed each other around a lot). And at the time it was undeveloped, so there was a lot of car shenanigans going on. I almost took out the guy in the Nova once trying to pass him on the inside goofing off. In retrospect it's a wonder I'm alive...

On topic, I had a friend who actually was entrapped. The undercover cop was around her for over a year and kept trying to get her to buy him acid. For like a year she kept telling him to fuck off and buy his own acid and that she wasn't a dealer, which was true. She didn't deal. She used, and she'd help people she liked, but she didn't really like this guy and he was pushy. Finally she decided, "Whatever, if it will shut you the fuck up." And, turns out, he was a cop. But they were able to make the case for entrapment because she had told him no so many times that it was clear she wouldn't have done it if he had not pressured her.

It had just rained, I wanted to see if I could do the stuff I had figured out how to do on dirt on wet asphalt. Specifically a reverse 180 because I was racing a friend out of the parking lot who was already facing the right way.

It was a sub-par reverse 180, never had the nerve to try it again (I swear to god that cop was hiding in a pocket dimension, he freakin' came out of nowhere) and now don't have a car that I would even dare try it in.I can' t imagine Veronica would appreciate the attempt.

As was mentioned in another thread, merely providing the opportunity to commit a crime is not entrapment. Merely offering you the chance to commit a crime is not entrapment. Entrapment is about getting someone to do something they would not otherwise normally do.

If all I do is come up to you and go "want some drugs?" and you say yes, you can't claim you were entrapped, because all I did was make a simple offer, so you can't say that you wouldn't normally do it.

Which is why I put it there as a popular myth, because so many people are SO convinced that if the police come up to you, it's entrapment, when that's not what entrapment means. Entrapment means that the police got you to do something you wouldn't NORMALLY do were it not for them. If all they do is offer you drugs, and you accept, you can't really claim you weren't the type to normally buy drugs, because you did, in fact, buy them.

You know, I'm a law abiding citizen, but this is the kind of shit that makes me distrust cops and not give them the benefit of the doubt. If I were on a jury, I'd vote to acquit every time in a situation like this, just to show my disapproval of a system that allows cops to invent crimes that would not have been committed otherwise.

You know, I'm a law abiding citizen, but this is the kind of shit that makes me distrust cops and not give them the benefit of the doubt. If I were on a jury, I'd vote to acquit every time in a situation like this, just to show my disapproval of a system that allows cops to invent crimes that would not have been committed otherwise.
It's hard to say that it wouldn't have happened otherwise. Why would you pick up a hooker (Or a John) or buy drugs if you were not using/looking for it?

If they held a gun to your head, yeah, that's entrapment, but the examples of just asking...

I can' t imagine Veronica would appreciate the attempt.
That would definitely end badly.
You know, I'm a law abiding citizen, but this is the kind of shit that makes me distrust cops and not give them the benefit of the doubt. If I were on a jury, I'd vote to acquit every time in a situation like this, just to show my disapproval of a system that allows cops to invent crimes that would not have been committed otherwise.

Agreed.

It's hard to say that it wouldn't have happened otherwise. Why would you pick up a hooker (Or a John) or buy drugs if you were not using/looking for it?

If they held a gun to your head, yeah, that's entrapment, but the examples of just asking...

You'd support an undercover cop, going around offering kids drugs just to arrest them if they don't say no?

It's hard to say that it wouldn't have happened otherwise. Why would you pick up a hooker (Or a John) or buy drugs if you were not using/looking for it?

If they held a gun to your head, yeah, that's entrapment, but the examples of just asking...
Cops intrude on daily life enough as it is--they can damn well witness "crimes" like dealing and/or prostitution and then take people in if they want to without going out and instigating the crimes themselves. We're not talking about violent offenses here from the sound of it, after all.

You'd support an undercover cop, going around offering kids drugs just to arrest them if they don't say no?
Assuming they say yes, what are the chances that they were already using drugs in the first place verses being the very first time?

It got raised in another thread about entrapment, and I felt I should create a thread to address some myths about the police, and what they "can't" do. So, with that in mind:...

Are these universally true all around the world?

Cops intrude on daily life enough as it is--they can damn well witness "crimes" like dealing and/or prostitution and then take people in if they want to without going out and instigating the crimes themselves. We're not talking about violent offenses here from the sound of it, after all.
It's the very same tactic used by undercover cops to find child abusers and those who would prey on children online...

I'd rather they be proactive in that case rather than reactive.

It's the very same tactic used by undercover cops to find child abusers and those who would prey on children online...

I'd rather they be proactive in that case rather than reactive.

Holy false equivalency! Come on--you're smarter than that. Drug deals, at least from the purchasing side, generally involve adults (and shouldn't be illegal anyway), and so does prostitution. Cruising for kids online involves, except when there are cops setting up sting operations, someone below the age of consent. Big difference there.

Assuming they say yes, what are the chances that they were already using drugs in the first place verses being the very first time?

Why does it matter? Aren't there more important things cops should be worried about than who's getting high?

Holy false equivalency! Come on--you're smarter than that. Drug deals, at least from the purchasing side, generally involve adults (and shouldn't be illegal anyway), and so does prostitution. Cruising for kids online involves, except when there are cops setting up sting operations, someone below the age of consent. Big difference there.
It's not a false equivlency, it's the same tactic. You have a sting operation, said opertaion involves a police officer being undercover and posing as something he or she is not to see if the target takes the bait and commits a crime.

Now, you can argue that drug deals and prositution should be legal, but if you're claiming that doing so for drug deals constitutes illegal entrapment, then you are also concluding that setting a trap for pedros with the same tactic is also illegal entrapment.

Why does it matter? Aren't there more important things cops should be worried about than who's getting high?
That's an argument for another thread. It still is not entrapment.

It's not a false equivlency, it's the same tactic. You have a sting operation, said opertaion involves a police officer being undercover and posing as something he or she is not to see if the target takes the bait and commits a crime.

Now, you can argue that drug deals and prositution should be legal, but if you're claiming that doing so for drug deals constitutes illegal entrapment, then you are also concluding that setting a trap for pedros with the same tactic is also illegal entrapment.

You completely missed the point--setting up stings for pedophiles is different because it involves victims who are children. There's a different standard in place because minors cannot give consent to be in those relationships, and even then, I would be hesitant to convict someone if I felt, from the evidence, that the cops had instigated the action. The pedophile would have to be the first person to bring up the possibility of actual sex for me to be willing to convict, in other words.

But in the other cases, we're dealing with adults who, regardless of whether or not they have done illegal things in the past, were not actively seeking to do them until the cop approached them with the opportunity. That's manufacturing crimes in my book, making them up when they didn't exist before, and we've got enough shit to deal with in our fucked up world without making things worse intentionally.