2 men attempt strongarm robbery on CCW

say the person was attacking you (or put you in imminent fear) and you acted to defend yourself.
Click to expand...

It should be "fear of imminent harm". Believing that you are about to become afraid, might not cut it.
 
Goofy, you are right. I shortened it up because I thought everyone would understand. I should have been more clear.

Imminent fear of death, serious physical injury, or sexual assault are the only imminent fears that justify lethal force in most areas.
 
Can someone tell me the address to the facebook pages? I havent read all of this thread but id sure like to read what the fool said! Ya,you cant carry a gun in a place where alcohol is served so a concealed hand gun permit is almost worthless but unless your walking down a gang banging street full of immature punky thugs I could understand.The worst places you can be at are truckstops,wow! As a truck driver I am confronted by atleast 3-4 shady looking people a night when Im out 4 days a week,yeah it gets me worried that my life is in danger so I do carry,Yes a person is allowed by law to carry a cmv at any time,That question will never end!,I still cant figure out if cops can wear their guns in a holster on their hip then why cant we with proper endorsement/license? I call BS :barf::barf::barf:
 
Can what you say be used against you if you have not been marandized?
Click to expand...

Just a little more clarification on this comment. Miranda only applies to "custodial interrogation." This doesn't always have to be a formal arrest such as when you are told you are under arrest and the handcuffs are placed on you. If a reasonable person would have believed that they were in police custody, then Miranda would apply. Examples of this may include when the officer directs your movements, takes you to the police department, interrogates you for hours, does not let you leave, etc. It is a very fact specific situation and is entirely based on what the officer says and does. In the absence of "custody", a police officer can ask you anything and everything, no matter how incriminating, without Miranda. There have been many cases where a guy, not in custody, has confessed to a murder at a police department, and was ruled not in custody so the confession was good.

One thing to consider here, just food for thought, when it comes to talking to police. I do agree that you should have a lawyer but I suggest you get one very quickly and talk it over with him or her immediately. A police detective who can't get information from you to assist in his investigation may have to stick you in jail overnight until he has more facts. A simple analogy is the person who won't do field sobriety tests or answer questions related to the DWI stop. In the vast majority of the cases, the person is going to spend the night in jail. This may be perfectly okay with you but I thought I would mention it. Probable cause for arrest is a very low standard of proof as compared to any eventual prosecution.
 
bds32 said:
Just a little more clarification on this comment. Miranda only applies to "custodial interrogation." This doesn't always have to be a formal arrest such as when you are told you are under arrest and the handcuffs are placed on you. If a reasonable person would have believed that they were in police custody, then Miranda would apply. Examples of this may include when the officer directs your movements, takes you to the police department, interrogates you for hours, does not let you leave, etc. It is a very fact specific situation and is entirely based on what the officer says and does. In the absence of "custody", a police officer can ask you anything and everything, no matter how incriminating, without Miranda. There have been many cases where a guy, not in custody, has confessed to a murder at a police department, and was ruled not in custody so the confession was good.

One thing to consider here, just food for thought, when it comes to talking to police. I do agree that you should have a lawyer but I suggest you get one very quickly and talk it over with him or her immediately. A police detective who can't get information from you to assist in his investigation may have to stick you in jail overnight until he has more facts. A simple analogy is the person who won't do field sobriety tests or answer questions related to the DWI stop. In the vast majority of the cases, the person is going to spend the night in jail. This may be perfectly okay with you but I thought I would mention it. Probable cause for arrest is a very low standard of proof as compared to any eventual prosecution.
Click to expand...

So in summary, unless the officer places you under arrest, the miranda rights don't have to be told to you? They can say or do anything to get what they want then arrest you? I'm a bit confused or I didn't fully understand your post. This is something I know absolutely nothing about. Could you explain it to me?
 
So in summary, unless the officer places you under arrest, the miranda rights don't have to be told to you?
Click to expand...

that is not true. It can be complicated, and the decision can be made by a judge at the time of trial give or take a little time. It is in the Officer's best interest(in my opinion) to read the Miranda rights sooner than later when making an arrest, planning on making an arrest, and/or when he knows an arrest is going to be made(example only: they just caught up to and captured a perp after a felony car chase).

There are times when an Officer might also say something on another interaction such as: "You are not under arrest. I am just detaining you until I have a better understanding of what exactly is going on. What is going on here tonight?" Just because an individual has not been read his miranda rights at this point, that doesn't mean what this individual says up until he/she is arrested can't be used against them in a court of law. However, a Judge has the final say on this if the issue comes up. Sometimes people are detained in cuffs too for the safety of the Officer(s). This doesn't necessarily mean the cuffed individual is going to be arrested.
 
40caljustice, I'm not a lawyer, let's get that out of the way early. I'm reaching back to an undergrad criminal law course from a couple decades ago, and various reading on the subject.

Look up "excited utterances."

Note CaptCharlie's point about letting guys stew in the car; no questions have been asked; no questions are being asked. If the suspect chooses to blurt something out, his lawyer may have a lot of trouble getting any such statement thrown out.

Those are just two examples where Miranda may not be determined to apply. I'm sure there are others, but again, I am not an attorney.
 
no comment on postings...I hope this guy finds justice and is locked up now that the law knows his name a little more

of course that is if he breaks the law again:rolleyes:
 
Ok so I don't have to say anything whatsoever to a police officer? I know it's better to cooperate and I will given the circumstances but this is a handy little bit of info. And anything I say before and after arrest can be used. Heck, that means if I'm in a tight spot I'm not saying anything before or after arrest. Give them the basics then it's "I don't know". Don't get me wrong. I've never been in any trouble to amount to anything but if something happens I'm just gonna keep quiet and lawyer up. U never know what can happen. Thanks fellas. Ill look into it some more. Might ask some LEO family and friends.
 
40cal

You can also say, "I would like to exercise my right to remain silent at least until I speak with my lawyer."

I am not even getting into whether this is best option. I am just saying if this is done much of what you say will be reversed. Interrogations at police stations stop when people 'lawyer up' BUT you would be amazed how many cops keep asking questions after a suspect exercises his rights to remain silent and to legally access a lawyer. Officers can sometimes get upset as well and a little aggressive(an example is the recent open carry activist in Philly who recorded his altercation with a uniformed officer in Philly while he was legally open carrying - this thread was on the firing line but I can't remember which one). Don't get me wrong, it is understandable for a LEO to get upset with some of the crimes they deal with on a day to day and week to week basis.

You seem to be interested in this stuff even though its prevebntative and you oprobably won't need it. That is a good thing and at least half the battle

all the best
 
Ok so I don't have to say anything whatsoever to a police officer?
Click to expand...
I think that's probably overstating things a bit, but there certainly isn't much that you are required to tell them.
 
Interesting case in why we need CCW permits, and why we need to have the weapon on us and ready at all times.

I will show this all to my wife. While my wife supports me carrying, there's a part of her that does not truly believe it is necessary.
 
If you've ever thought of using a gun to defend yourself (and we all have on this forum), you need to think how you are going to handle it afterward. For me, I'm going to tell the officer responding to the scene the basics of what happened. I will tell an investigating detective one time what happened. I will then assert my Fifth Amendment right to remain silent. By this point, I figure they are looking for inconsistencies and it's quite possible for a truthful person to relate inconsistent details under stress. Everybody has to decide for themselves the course to take.
 
The case to know inside and out on how to respond after a CCW incident is Harold Fish of New Mexico as mentioned earlier. The bottom line is that you need to talk to an experienced self defense lawyer first before you make any formal statements to an LEO. Even experienced lawyers involved in these incidents need to get their own lawyer otherwise they have a fool for a client. No matter what you state on your own, it can be construed in manners in which you can't foresee at the time of the statement.

This case is what not to do after a CCW incident by sounding off on an online blog. These are all public forums subject to legal discovery and can and have been used against people. If you need to vent, do it to your lawyer and him alone.
 
UPDATE: Billy Blackburn Jr., one of the alleged strongarm robbers in the video that started this post, ended up robbed and shot in the neck and leg himself while attempting to buy drugs. Suprisingly, it also happened at a gas station and was once again captured on video.

http://www.whiotv.com/news/news/local/video-shows-suspect-gas-station-double-shooting/nLdzq/

I thought it was an interesting update to the original story and goes to highlight how video plays an increasing omnipresent role in our society. You can't count on being fortunate enough to have your fight captured on video; but you should never assume it wasn't.
 
What is really troubling about this whole thing is the attitude of the perps and their friends.

They seem to be offended that someone would resist and are enraged when they do.

We really do live in a parallel universe.

Geetarman:D
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top