Yeah, idk what in fuck people are wanting. Apparently matching uniforms and giant lettering saying "POLICE" - often on both front and back side of their bodies - does not count as identification. And it is making the people wearing black clothing and full face masks VERY upset because it's much harder to BURN BUILDINGS TO THE GROUND if you can't blame the police for stopping you.
.
Never fear, though. Any second someone is going to come by and tell me all the ways these people are justified for destroying public and private property, why the police are evil Nazi bastards, and why the media is justified in playing cut-off videos out of context to deliberately push a narrative.
Yeah, it's not about who they are arresting, it's how they're doing it. No officer name, no agency name, no badge number, no explanation of charges, no Miranda rights, just an unmarked van and some dude in fatigues snatches someone. Arrest people the correct way.
I wouldn't mark my vehicle if I saw other marked vehicles being targeted and burned.
They are not obligated to wear name tapes or show their faces.
They are not city police, they are homeland security, border patrol, and other federal agencies acting with the lawful authority of the federal government and charged with enforcing federal law, defending federal property, and protecting law-abiding civilians since the local authorities are either hamstrung by the city and state, or otherwise incapable of taking care of the community. Likely because they've been injured or their vehicle was lit on fire.
The charges and reading of rights can wait, up to 96 hours with a judge's approval, though from what my folks have told me (they live in the area), it's largely been catch and release meant to discourage unlawful conduct and apprehension of actual criminals caught in the act.
I've seen some of the videos before. I have never once in my life heard of it being a requirement for a police officer of any kind to only make an arrest if they're in an official vehicle.
.
The federal police similarily to my knowledge are not obligated to talk to any of the random jackasses screaming "use your words" as far as I know.
.
And they may well read the suspect the Miranda rights when in the van? Which could arguably be for the safety of both the suspect as well as the arresting officers, given the hostility of the crowds
Welp once again I was typing my reply back when the last comment made was by jasonmon. But I see other people have replied during the in-between, So apologies if my comment is redundant
It's not so much the vehicle, it's the lack of Miranda Rights and the reason for detention. Both of those, even at the federal level, are required, as there is no judge saying they can wantonly detain anyone. For the judges approval thing, it has to be a specific person.
Not immediately, and not when the safety of the officer and suspect are at risk. It can be done in the van, at the station, or otherwise when conditions allow.
Granted I'm not a police officer or lawyer so my knowledge is extremely limited at the best of times, but the police actually seem to have a bit of a grace period where they don't have to read someone their Miranda rights until they're being interrogated or under arrest.
.
Also many of the videos I've seen have been cut off. We literally have no idea what the person being arrested was doing before the video started in about 90% of the videos I've seen.
.
The police officer may well have just seen them try to rape someone, chased them for 11 blocks, and then the person just plays innocent when the camera turns on.
.
Context is always important
Context is always important. And I think it's only a movie thing about Miranda rights somehow forcing charges to be dropped? Not reading someone their rights will not get an officer in trouble.
,
For the record, I only put up the link for people who didn't know what the meme was referencing. Personally, I think this is a dangerous, dynamic set of situations and they each need to be unwound on a case by case basis.
,
I live very close to Portland and have a bunch of friends who've hung out there during this craziness. No one I know has seen anything remarkable one way or the other. I kinda want to go but, with my luck I'd have something completely insane happen lol
Again, I'm basing this off the very little I've read about the American legal system. Idk why I feel the need to keep saying that - no one on here has mistaken me for a lawyer in my life - but there you go.
.
My understanding is that, if you are in their custody, they MUST read you the rights.
.
NOT reading the rights won't automatically get the case dropped, but it is a violation of their rights, and any information gained becomes tainted and essentially unusable in most situations. Which is the exact opposite of what you want in a trial scenario.
.
Not to mention, depending on how long the person was in custody without being mirandized/given access to a lawyer/etc, I'm fairly sure it could potentially lead to some sort of repercussions for the officers or Department itself.
But yeah, I figured that's what you were doing jasonmon haha.
.
I'm a little triggered on this subject after seeing example after example of the media twisting the narrative.
.
Either with wording (the protests only became violent AFTER the police showed up. That bank you see burning to the ground is nothing but peace), the lack of context (the videos), the lopsided coverage (omg the police teargassed some people? OUTRAGEOUS! that guy only had a fucking GUN). The fact that they outright tell you 90% of why they cover it this way is because they want to blame trump is one of the most disgusting things I've seen in a long time as well.
.
.
Not to mention the sheer hypocrisy and injustice being presented and being defended and EXCUSED because "George Floyd."
.
Like replacing one injustice with another is the answer. And people label anyone who questions that shit a racist - usually based on their skin color. And if that isn't the pot calling the kettle white, than idk what is
The Miranda rights do not have to be read to someone being arrested. It does have to be read if you're arrested and the police want to use anything you say or any evidence gathered based on what you tell them in a court of law. That being said if you are not arrested anything you say can be used against you. Being detained is not being arrested. Police can detain you for your or their safety. If they want to charge you with something, you do have to be arrested. nolo . com/legal-encyclopedia/police-questioning-miranda-warnings-29930.html
.
Never fear, though. Any second someone is going to come by and tell me all the ways these people are justified for destroying public and private property, why the police are evil Nazi bastards, and why the media is justified in playing cut-off videos out of context to deliberately push a narrative.
,
I think this is about literal unmarked vans containing federal agents who are detaining randos off the street and not informing them they're federal agents or why the people are being detained.
,
Here's the link :
https://usatoday.com/story/news/nation/2020/07/17/reports-federal-officers-detain-portland-protesters-unmarked-vans/5457471002/
They are not obligated to wear name tapes or show their faces.
They are not city police, they are homeland security, border patrol, and other federal agencies acting with the lawful authority of the federal government and charged with enforcing federal law, defending federal property, and protecting law-abiding civilians since the local authorities are either hamstrung by the city and state, or otherwise incapable of taking care of the community. Likely because they've been injured or their vehicle was lit on fire.
The charges and reading of rights can wait, up to 96 hours with a judge's approval, though from what my folks have told me (they live in the area), it's largely been catch and release meant to discourage unlawful conduct and apprehension of actual criminals caught in the act.
.
The federal police similarily to my knowledge are not obligated to talk to any of the random jackasses screaming "use your words" as far as I know.
.
And they may well read the suspect the Miranda rights when in the van? Which could arguably be for the safety of both the suspect as well as the arresting officers, given the hostility of the crowds
.
Also many of the videos I've seen have been cut off. We literally have no idea what the person being arrested was doing before the video started in about 90% of the videos I've seen.
.
The police officer may well have just seen them try to rape someone, chased them for 11 blocks, and then the person just plays innocent when the camera turns on.
.
Context is always important
,
For the record, I only put up the link for people who didn't know what the meme was referencing. Personally, I think this is a dangerous, dynamic set of situations and they each need to be unwound on a case by case basis.
,
I live very close to Portland and have a bunch of friends who've hung out there during this craziness. No one I know has seen anything remarkable one way or the other. I kinda want to go but, with my luck I'd have something completely insane happen lol
.
My understanding is that, if you are in their custody, they MUST read you the rights.
.
NOT reading the rights won't automatically get the case dropped, but it is a violation of their rights, and any information gained becomes tainted and essentially unusable in most situations. Which is the exact opposite of what you want in a trial scenario.
.
Not to mention, depending on how long the person was in custody without being mirandized/given access to a lawyer/etc, I'm fairly sure it could potentially lead to some sort of repercussions for the officers or Department itself.
.
I'm a little triggered on this subject after seeing example after example of the media twisting the narrative.
.
Either with wording (the protests only became violent AFTER the police showed up. That bank you see burning to the ground is nothing but peace), the lack of context (the videos), the lopsided coverage (omg the police teargassed some people? OUTRAGEOUS! that guy only had a fucking GUN). The fact that they outright tell you 90% of why they cover it this way is because they want to blame trump is one of the most disgusting things I've seen in a long time as well.
.
.
Not to mention the sheer hypocrisy and injustice being presented and being defended and EXCUSED because "George Floyd."
.
Like replacing one injustice with another is the answer. And people label anyone who questions that shit a racist - usually based on their skin color. And if that isn't the pot calling the kettle white, than idk what is