N.J. troopers arrest woman for remaining silent during traffic stop

[MrMike]

I'm a tad conflicted on this one. However I do think she should have complied with a response.

Her response was to invoke her 5th Amend Rights...
That legally should end any and all conversation.

She did not have a 5th Amendment right, if not under Miranda, to talk to the police. She had to give up her license and registration on request. She has to reply to questions in relation to the stop.

Obviously you should do some research or have some training before you make another uninformed statement.

The very second a Police Officer activates his lights to pull you over, your Amend Rights attach.
The Officer reading your rights is a formality and he can choose when to read them to you, you don't have yo have permission from the Police to exercise your Rights...
She submitted her required documentation upon request and at that point fulfilled her legal obligation.
It's utterly stupid to suggest that she has to answer questions related to the stop and no precedent supports such nonsense.

I just ran a man over in my car a mile back and the police don't know that I did it so they are stopping the nearest car they come across.
In your world, if they ask me was I involved in the hit and run a mile back; I'm obligated to give them a full confession...lol.

No, I said I was a little conflicted on this one. However, I think she should have said something. Even answering the officer's question with a "no" would have been something and probably eliminated the other part. Do I think she should be arrested for not saying anything? Nope...but that doesn't mean she couldn't have just made the whole thing a non-issue by simply answering "no".

So, that's my uninformed opinion.

 

[MrMike]

I'm a tad conflicted on this one. However I do think she should have complied with a response.

Her response was to invoke her 5th Amend Rights...
That legally should end any and all conversation.

She did not have a 5th Amendment right, if not under Miranda, to talk to the police. She had to give up her license and registration on request. She has to reply to questions in relation to the stop.

Why when the question is an obvious ploy to get her to admit she broke some law?

You never answer that question, "Do you know why I pulled you over?" Doing so is admitting guilt. Not answering that question in no way hampers the officers ability to issue a ticket, warning, summons or arrest that person for outstanding warrants.

Easiest answer for her to provide is: "no"

case closed...

 

[JakeStarkey]

Or "please tell me."

 

[rightwinger]

Another good one is the officer pulls you over and asks....Have you been drinking?

Knowing that honesty is the best policy and that the officer will give you a break if you tell the truth...you reply, Yes officer, but I only had two drinks

So this is the part where the officer lets you go right?

No, this is the part where you take a breathalyzer. When you blow a .08 you get arrested. When your lawyer asks if the officer had seen anything in your driving that indicates you were drunk, he replies ....No, but the driver admitted to drinking

 

[MikeK]

Easiest answer for her to provide is: "no"

case closed...

The case is closed for you but not for everyone. Some people are not so submissively inclined and prefer to stand on principle, the principle being the citizen's right to remain silent if approached and questioned by police -- whether while walking on the street or driving on a road or highway.

The woman in the topic example is a lawyer. I personally believe her refusal to answer any questions, however benign and apparently casual, was a practical test of her understanding of the Common Law and if or how much its protections have deteriorated. For this she has my sincere compliments and admiration.

What the outcome of her test will be is as yet unknown. What we do know is the NJ judiciary wishes to dismiss all charges against this woman but she is not compliant with that wish. She obviously wants to go to court with it -- and if I'm right she might be holding out for a nice settlement offer.

 

[MrMike]

Easiest answer for her to provide is: "no"

case closed...

The case is closed for you but not for everyone. Some people are not so submissively inclined and prefer to stand on principle, the principle being the citizen's right to remain silent if approached and questioned by police -- whether while walking on the street or driving on a road or highway.

The woman in the topic example is a lawyer. I personally believe her refusal to answer any questions, however benign and apparently casual, was a practical test of her understanding of the Common Law and if or how much its protections have deteriorated. For this she has my sincere compliments and admiration.

What the outcome of her test will be is as yet unknown. What we do know is the NJ judiciary wishes to dismiss all charges against this woman but she is not compliant with that wish. She obviously wants to go to court with it -- and if I'm right she might be holding out for a nice settlement offer.

Being a lawyer and officer of the court she should have known better. Obviously she's just out for attention.

 

[MikeK]

I love it when I watch "Cops" and some guy gets pulled over for a tail light or some crap. The cop politely asks if he can search the car and the guy says OK. Of course they find guns or drugs and arrest him

Why would anyone consent to a search if they have drugs in the car?

I have the same question.

 

[MikeK]

Being a lawyer and officer of the court she should have known better. Obviously she's just out for attention.

Or a new Cadillac. And don't think that is not well within her reach.

 

[Skull Pilot]

I'm a tad conflicted on this one. However I do think she should have complied with a response.

Her response was to invoke her 5th Amend Rights...
That legally should end any and all conversation.

She did not have a 5th Amendment right, if not under Miranda, to talk to the police. She had to give up her license and registration on request. She has to reply to questions in relation to the stop.

Why when the question is an obvious ploy to get her to admit she broke some law?

You never answer that question, "Do you know why I pulled you over?" Doing so is admitting guilt. Not answering that question in no way hampers the officers ability to issue a ticket, warning, summons or arrest that person for outstanding warrants.

Easiest answer for her to provide is: "no"

case closed...

Or "please tell me."

Or she doesn't have to say anything

 

[rightwinger]

I'm a tad conflicted on this one. However I do think she should have complied with a response.

Her response was to invoke her 5th Amend Rights...
That legally should end any and all conversation.

She did not have a 5th Amendment right, if not under Miranda, to talk to the police. She had to give up her license and registration on request. She has to reply to questions in relation to the stop.

Why when the question is an obvious ploy to get her to admit she broke some law?

You never answer that question, "Do you know why I pulled you over?" Doing so is admitting guilt. Not answering that question in no way hampers the officers ability to issue a ticket, warning, summons or arrest that person for outstanding warrants.

Easiest answer for her to provide is: "no"

case closed...

She may very well know why she was stopped, so saying "no" would be a lie
If she says she was stopped for running a red light or speeding, it could amount to a confession of guilt on her part

So refusing to answer a probing question may be the best response

 

[HUGGY]

If she produced valid documentation as requested she has fulfilled the minimum requirements. At that time the officer can issue her a ticket for any minor traffic infractions and contact should be legally ended. She is not legally obliged to submit to any bullying or detainment if there is not probable cause. The officer just likes to abuse his authority and has become used to getting his way. I commend the attorney for standing firm on her constitutional right to remain silent.

 

[JQPublic1]

Meh the cops and the attorney were stupid

The attorney wasn't stupid, she is considerably richer because of stupid cops.

 

[SassyIrishLass]

Meh the cops and the attorney were stupid

The attorney wasn't stupid, she is considerably richer because of stupid cops.

It was stupid, just answer the fucking questions

 

[rightwinger]

Not providing evidence to support your arrest is not obstruction

 

[rightwinger]

Lawyer busted for staying quiet during traffic stop files lawsuit

In New Jersey, obstruction is getting in the way of law enforcement through "flight, intimidation, force, violence, or physical interference or obstacle, or by means of any independently unlawful act," according to NJ.com.

A supervisor then watched dashboard camera footage and let Musarra go without charges, admitting "a mistake was made, and to chalk it up to training, and that (Stazzone) was just a rookie," NJ.com reported.

Musarra was not charged, and the supervisor, Trooper James Butler, apologized.

The state is seeking to have the case dismissed, claiming that the troopers "acted in good faith and without fraud or malice." Note: Ignorance of the law is no excuse

 

[JQPublic1]

Meh the cops and the attorney were stupid

The attorney wasn't stupid, she is considerably richer because of stupid cops.

It was stupid, just answer the fucking questions

Why? Because a public servant, whose salary you pay, demands it? All the fuck head is going to do is use anything you say against you..even before he reads your rights to you. You don't have to be nice to cops. Just give them your identification, take your ticket and go to court if you think you're right.

 

[SassyIrishLass]

Meh the cops and the attorney were stupid

The attorney wasn't stupid, she is considerably richer because of stupid cops.

It was stupid, just answer the fucking questions

Why? Because a public servant, whose salary you pay, demands it? All the fuck head is going to do is use anything you say against you..even before he reads your rights to you. You don't have to be nice to cops. Just give them your identification, take your ticket and go to court if you think you're right.

Meh, scram, pal I really don't give a shit

 

[JQPublic1]

Meh the cops and the attorney were stupid

The attorney wasn't stupid, she is considerably richer because of stupid cops.

It was stupid, just answer the fucking questions

Why? Because a public servant, whose salary you pay, demands it? All the fuck head is going to do is use anything you say against you..even before he reads your rights to you. You don't have to be nice to cops. Just give them your identification, take your ticket and go to court if you think you're right.

Meh, scram, pal I really don't give a shit

I'm not going anywhere. However, I do give a shit. Some cops seem to think we should be subservient to them when it should be the other way around. If EWE want to be a dyed in the wool sheep, be my guest.

 

[MikeK]

It was stupid, just answer the fucking questions

Spoken like a true friend of the Black & Tan. Down the Rebels!

 

[SassyIrishLass]

It was stupid, just answer the fucking questions

Spoken like a true friend of the Black & Tan. Down the Rebels!

WTF are you blabbering about? This was stupid on the woman's part and waste of everybody's time.

By the way my ancestors were Sinn Fein...that's a rebel, some fat cow getting pulled over and acting like a dope isn't