What are my rights?

BoatCop · Aug 25, 2016

weasle said:
I have heard from a friend and resident of Parker that many of these younger officers are trying to see who can get the most DUI's. May be a rumor or not, but it sounds like a lot of these young new officers are being over aggressive.They are really stepping up enforcement especially for this upcoming Labor Day Weekend. I believe they also received some grant money which is what's paying for this stepped up enforcement especially the patrols at night.

As far as boating is concerned, they are already 100% grant funded. There are grants from the State for highway DUI enforcement, but it has no affect on boat operations.

hallett21 said:
Wait I thought you can refuse breathalyzer but choose blood as an alternate. Refusal of both is what gets you in hot water with the DMV/Courts

If the officer says he wants a breath test and you refuse, it's still a refusal for drivers license or charging purposes. The fact that you wanted or consented to a blood test, has no bearing on the initial refusal. Reason being is that violators use that as a stalling technique. More time for the BAC to drop while they find and call in a phlebotomist. And a lot of times, they will then refuse the blood test, wasting more time as they draw up a search warrant and contact the Judge. As far as refusals go, it's one and done.

Ziggy said:
I wonder if LEO stalks the fishermen during their season cuz from what I've seen their coolers are full in the mornings too.
Afterall, they need to make room for their catch in them thar coolers.

A few years ago we were trained in fish laws, and started stopping fishermen to check their catch. We also checked for alcohol, as we had to check their coolers for any caught fish. However, a lot of times they were anchored, so any OUI wouldn't apply. (In AZ it only applies to motorized watercraft, underway) As far as the tournaments are concerned, their rules ban any alcohol, and violating those rules will get them disqualified and banned from competition.

And for the record. I'm not excusing young, new, under trained officers. Either on the water or on the road. The fact that I mentioned it was NOT to have you give them a break. The public deserves and should demand professional, ethical and adequately trained officers. I have always encouraged anyone who feels that that was not the case, to file a complaint. That's the only way things will change for the better. Not only for the officers themselves, but also and more importantly, for their supervisors. Allowing them to continue what they're doing with no checks, will only make it worse. While you might think your one complaint won't make a difference, if everyone who experienced the same thing filed one, someone would HAVE to do something about it.

Every single one of you carries a video camera with you at all times, right? Record the stop (as long as you don't interfere with the officer). It's your right to do so, and when there's a recording of the incident, it's no longer your word against theirs.

TOBTEK · Aug 25, 2016

HALLETT BOY said:
Don't like 75% of sober people fail the FST's ?

I DID ! Got cuff'd and stuff'd. taken to two jails. NEVER was allowed to blow. Drew blood at the police station. Weeks later D.A sent me the test results.....0.0% BAC. I was pulled over by the Escondido PD for DRIVING to slow on a un marked road. Was 100% selective prob cause. and 100% BS. cost me over $1000.00 for car impound fee's, city impound release permit, driving lic re-instatement. I look at the PD in a whole new light now. Many are income generators for the cities , and that's it ! We have a close family friend who's a cop. Makes me sick when he boosts about this or that traffic stop and was able to get aggressive with the driver.

Spectra18 · Aug 25, 2016

I wanna know why Parker Pioneer has stopped posting their arrest report? Wonder if DUI/BUI arrest are up in the area. After all RD did mention they wanted to increase arrests in the area.

Abc123 · Aug 25, 2016

You white guys, have it easy.

[video=youtube;VFHpvPwq2i8]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VFHpvPwq2i8[/video]

BoatCop · Aug 25, 2016

Spectra18 said:
I wanna know why Parker Pioneer has stopped posting their arrest report? Wonder if DUI/BUI arrest are up in the area. After all RD did mention they wanted to increase arrests in the area.

Again, that is due to supervision. I was the one who complied and sent in the arrest reports. Both to the paper and daily to the radio station (KLPZ-1380). I did it for over 20 years. If it's been stopped, it's due to orders, or lackadaisical attitudes from above.

thetub · Aug 25, 2016

TOBTEK said:
I DID ! Got cuff'd and stuff'd. taken to two jails. NEVER was allowed to blow. Drew blood at the police station. Weeks later D.A sent me the test results.....0.0% BAC. I was pulled over by the Escondido PD for DRIVING to slow on a un marked road. Was 100% selective prob cause. and 100% BS. cost me over $1000.00 for car impound fee's, city impound release permit, driving lic re-instatement. I look at the PD in a whole new light now. Many are income generators for the cities , and that's it ! We have a close family friend who's a cop. Makes me sick when he boosts about this or that traffic stop and was able to get aggressive with the driver.

this is my gripe. My cousin went through this scenario got his car impounded and fees up the ass...

maybe use some of that grant money for the cops mess up and pay for the fees...

at the end of the day we are all people trying to make a living and pay bills right?

instead a big F you on the way out...

TCHB · Aug 25, 2016

Sure glad the Havasu police act in a professional manner. The last couple of years they have really done a good job in keeping the area safe and treat people with respect. Great to see the local police on the sand talking to the people with a smile.

530RL · Aug 25, 2016

TOBTEK said:
I DID ! Got cuff'd and stuff'd. taken to two jails. NEVER was allowed to blow. Drew blood at the police station. Weeks later D.A sent me the test results.....0.0% BAC. I was pulled over by the Escondido PD for DRIVING to slow on a un marked road. Was 100% selective prob cause. and 100% BS. cost me over $1000.00 for car impound fee's, city impound release permit, driving lic re-instatement. I look at the PD in a whole new light now. Many are income generators for the cities , and that's it ! We have a close family friend who's a cop. Makes me sick when he boosts about this or that traffic stop and was able to get aggressive with the driver.

http://www.christianpost.com/news/sober-retiree-arrested-for-dui-slaps-arizona-city-with-500k-lawsuit-97770/

Riverson · Aug 25, 2016

BoatCop said:
As far as boating is concerned, they are already 100% grant funded. There are grants from the State for highway DUI enforcement, but it has no affect on boat operations.

If the officer says he wants a breath test and you refuse, it's still a refusal for drivers license or charging purposes. The fact that you wanted or consented to a blood test, has no bearing on the initial refusal. Reason being is that violators use that as a stalling technique. More time for the BAC to drop while they find and call in a phlebotomist. And a lot of times, they will then refuse the blood test, wasting more time as they draw up a search warrant and contact the Judge. As far as refusals go, it's one and done.

That is NOT the case in CA! FST are voluntary and can be refused, the only mandatory test that can't be refused is any test post arrest...CA courts have to found it violates the 5th amendment, the right against self incrimination. I don't have personal experience but have observed several cases in court specifically about the refusal issue.

Enen · Aug 25, 2016

RiverDave said:
In an interesting turn of events, I was just contacted by what I consider to be one of the Best criminal defense attorneys in the area to advertise on RDP. I offered him a discount to write an article based on what a citizen should do and not do in the event of contact, and am hopefully going to get him to occasionally chime in on these types of threads.

RD

We should take up a collection for a retainer fund for this attorney to represent the members of RDP. Kinda like a pre-paid legal deal but just for us. That way when we all have a hired gun on tap to help learn these young hot-shot boat cops some manners.

RiverDave · Aug 25, 2016

Enen said:
We should take up a collection for a retainer fund for this attorney to represent the members of RDP. Kinda like a pre-paid legal deal but just for us. That way when we all have a hired gun on tap to help learn these young hot-shot boat cops some manners.

the retainer deal actually isn't a bad idea.. lol. not sure about the teaching manners part

Enen · Aug 25, 2016

RiverDave said:
the retainer deal actually isn't a bad idea.. lol. not sure about the teaching manners part

I'm thinking an organized lawsuit like the one 530RL posted a link to might get some attention in La Paz county. Having to defend overzealous cops actions in court might fast track the county higher-ups into making some policy changes.

BoatCop · Aug 25, 2016

Riverson said:
That is NOT the case in CA! FST are voluntary and can be refused, the only mandatory test that can't be refused is any test post arrest...CA courts have to found it violates the 5th amendment, the right against self incrimination. I don't have personal experience but have observed several cases in court specifically about the refusal issue.

Ummm. That's what I wrote.

If, after arrest, the Officer decides on the breath test, and the subject refuses, the license is suspended for 12 months. (in AZ - 24 months if it's a second refusal) If the subject refuses the breath test and states he wants a blood test, it's still a refusal, since the Officer called for the breath test.

I didn't say anything about the FSTs or PBT (Preliminary Breath Test or "PAS" in CA) in that particular post, but if you go back and read previous posts, I do state that they CAN refuse FSTs and the PBT.

Reading is fundamental.

TOBTEK · Aug 26, 2016

530RL said:
http://www.christianpost.com/news/sober-retiree-arrested-for-dui-slaps-arizona-city-with-500k-lawsuit-97770/

wouldn't work for me.... I only have a Black mans name.

Riverson · Aug 26, 2016

BoatCop said:
Ummm. That's what I wrote.

If, after arrest, the Officer decides on the breath test, and the subject refuses, the license is suspended for 12 months. (in AZ - 24 months if it's a second refusal) If the subject refuses the breath test and states he wants a blood test, it's still a refusal, since the Officer called for the breath test.

I didn't say anything about the FSTs or PBT (Preliminary Breath Test or "PAS" in CA) in that particular post, but if you go back and read previous posts, I do state that they CAN refuse FSTs and the PBT.

Reading is fundamental.

Indeed, I guess that may beg the question...do the cops consider you "arrested" upon the stop? That's the rub, arrest vs detained etc.
In addition, the post I quoted said nothing about upon arrest..

The post may have been out of context, but it I said any refusal is refusal. It is not.

BoatCop · Aug 26, 2016

Riverson said:
Indeed, I guess that may beg the question...do the cops consider you "arrested" upon the stop? That's the rub, arrest vs detained etc.
In addition, the post I quoted said nothing about upon arrest..

The post may have been out of context, but it I said any refusal is refusal. It is not.

Arrest is arrest. You are told you're under arrest, you get pretty, shiny bracelets, and you are most likely headed for jail. Or at a minimum, to the station.

A PBT is not a breathylizer. It is part of the FSTs to determine if there is probable cause for arrest. You have the right to refuse it, just like the rest of the FSTs.

The breathylizer, intoxylizer, whatever you want to call it, is another thing. That is the evidentiary test to obtain evidence to present in court. If the Officer says he wants you to take the intoxylizer and you say "No! I want a blood test." You have refused the Officer's proscribed test, and suffer whatever consequences comes with the refusal. Therefore, as I said before. Once you refuse one, you refused them all.

But then again, I only did this for some 40-odd years. So I MAY be mistaken. :cool

Riverson · Aug 26, 2016

BoatCop said:
Arrest is arrest. You are told you're under arrest, you get pretty, shiny bracelets, and you are most likely headed for jail. Or at a minimum, to the station.

A PBT is not a breathylizer. It is part of the FSTs to determine if there is probable cause for arrest. You have the right to refuse it, just like the rest of the FSTs.

The breathylizer, intoxylizer, whatever you want to call it, is another thing. That is the evidentiary test to obtain evidence to present in court. If the Officer says he wants you to take the intoxylizer and you say "No! I want a blood test." You have refused the Officer's proscribed test, and suffer whatever consequences comes with the refusal. Therefore, as I said before. Once you refuse one, you refused them all.

But then again, I only did this for some 40-odd years. So I MAY be mistaken. :cool[/QUOTE

Wow...I respect you! Didn't think you'd get that worked up....FYI 32 years in law, court everyday!
I really tend to agree with you, maybe I'm wrong.

Spectra18 · Aug 26, 2016

As I have openly mentioned before, Parker isn't the same. I got busted last year, for me it REALLY AINT THE SAME. Whether the cop is a rookie or a vet, above the limit get busted! Any alcohol get busted! Thinks your on something get busted! Some river lice ran into YOU, been sippin on Ultras get busted (your fault). Its only a matter of time. We are the ones that got some money, thats why we got boats. They know who to milk, boy my tits are dry after lawyer, impound, classes, and fines. IT AINT A FREE COUNTRY. All i wanna do is toss a few back enjoy the sun and the breeze, but nope, po-po gonna bust me ...

530RL · Aug 26, 2016

BoatCop said:
Arrest is arrest. You are told you're under arrest, you get pretty, shiny bracelets, and you are most likely headed for jail. Or at a minimum, to the station.

A PBT is not a breathylizer. It is part of the FSTs to determine if there is probable cause for arrest. You have the right to refuse it, just like the rest of the FSTs.

The breathylizer, intoxylizer, whatever you want to call it, is another thing. That is the evidentiary test to obtain evidence to present in court. If the Officer says he wants you to take the intoxylizer and you say "No! I want a blood test." You have refused the Officer's proscribed test, and suffer whatever consequences comes with the refusal. Therefore, as I said before. Once you refuse one, you refused them all.

But then again, I only did this for some 40-odd years. So I MAY be mistaken. :cool

From a legal standpoint I am totally with Boatcop on this.

From a perspective of officers and the citizenry working together, it is tragic. It is no longer let's take the people who are going to hurt other people off the river, it has become a game of thrones, or more harshly, a dick measuring contest. They no longer care about safety or right versus wrong, just about winning.

I truly wish Alan/BoatCop would not haver retired. :thumbsdown

Riverson · Aug 26, 2016

Dial 1800 no cuffs..lol

Remember everyone is innocent until they are proven guilty...due process still applies even on the river!

530RL I agree I think we'd all be better off if Boatcop was still on the river, he isn't now we have wantabee guys that don't think on their feet.

No matter what BC thinks, I really do respect him and his opinions!

Ballyhoo · Aug 26, 2016

Riverson said:
Indeed, I guess that may beg the question...do the cops consider you "arrested" upon the stop? That's the rub, arrest vs detained etc.
In addition, the post I quoted said nothing about upon arrest..

The post may have been out of context, but it I said any refusal is refusal. It is not.

I am not sure what you are trying to get here. If the cop has a valid detention, it doesn't matter what other things he is thinking about, its irrelevant. Legal detention = not free to leave. It doesn't always lead to an arrest.

Riverson · Aug 26, 2016

Ballyhoo said:
I am not sure what you are trying to get here. If the cop has a valid detention, it doesn't matter what other things he is thinking about, its irrelevant. Legal detention = not free to leave. It doesn't always lead to an arrest.

I'm glad you see it as that simple...it isn't. I'm done with you and the issue.

yz450mm · Aug 26, 2016

I always thought that somebody Under Suspicion of DUI had the choice between breath and blood. Or is this just in California?

10 years ago, I was in Havasu with a group of friends. The owner and Driver of the boat was sober, never drank in his life. We went on a night cruise through the channel, and as we got into thompson bay, he needed to jump in to pee. He killed the boat and jumped overboard, and my buddy sat down in the captain seat. When the driver turned the key off, it turned the lights off, so my buddy turned the key back to accessory. The cops lit us up from about 50 feet away and hauled off my buddy for DUI, even know they had been watching and clearly knew that he was not driving the boat. The fact that we had a sober operator meant nothing to them, they still hauled him in and made him go through the whole process. He lost his job and had to drive to Havasu three or four times to try to defend himself.

Ballyhoo · Aug 26, 2016

Riverson said:
I'm glad you see it as that simple...it isn't. I'm done with you and the issue.

A detention is based on reasonable suspicion. The cops need objectively reasonable facts that show the person was involved in criminal activity or about to be involved in criminal activity. Courts have ruled that around 20 minutes is a reasonable amount of time for a detention. That can change quickly tho and turn into an arrest situation. That is where the standard changes to probable cause. That is a thumbnail sketch of the two. In both situations you are not free to leave. Come on keep the hard questions coming.

I will agree that there are some cops that would not be able to explain those differences if called to. I still dont understand the point you were trying to make. The other thing that is strange is that you insinuated that the cops are the ones that decide what charges are brought forward= Wrong. The cops might book a guy for one crime or many different crimes. The prosecutor makes the decision as to what charges are in the complaint. I am certain that you knew that

Nice job with the last second edit! Waiting for you to explain why it's not that simple. Give us some knowledge.

yz450mm · Aug 26, 2016

Ballyhoo said:
A detention is based on reasonable suspicion. The cops need objectively reasonable facts that show the person was involved in criminal activity or about to be involved in criminal activity. Courts have ruled that around 20 minutes is a reasonable amount of time for a detention. That can change quickly tho and turn into an arrest situation. That is where the standard changes to probable cause. That is a thumbnail sketch of the two. In both situations you are not free to leave. Come on keep the hard questions coming.

I will agree that there are some cops that would not be able to explain those differences if called to. I still dont understand the point you were trying to make. The other thing that is strange is that you insinuated that the cops are the ones that decide what charges are brought forward= Wrong. The cops might book a guy for one crime or many different crimes. The prosecutor makes the decision as to what charges are in the complaint. I certain that you knew that tho.

Easy boys, we're all on the same team here.... [emoji106] [emoji106] [emoji106]

I think a lot of the heartache from our side comes from the blurry lines between the different phases. Safety stop, detention, arrest , prosecution.

I don't believe that most rookie cops have the ability to back out of a detention situation gracefully. Once they have detained someone, I'm sure they want to go in for the kill to get those notches in the bedpost. More experienced cops, like boatcop, recognize certain things and can back out with some class.

For the original poster, if the rookie cop had simply ended the interaction after the negative response to alcohol consumption, this thread wouldn't exist. However, he kept digging, trying to find something that wasn't there. Then he ended the interaction negatively, which is why this thread continues on.

FlyByWire · Aug 26, 2016

yz450mm said:
I always thought that somebody Under Suspicion of DUI had the choice between breath and blood. Or is this just in California?

This is the case in California. The arrestee decides which test they want to submit to.

C-2 · Aug 26, 2016

A reasonable articulable suspicion.
A set of facts that can be articulated (described/identified), not a hunch, that a crime is about to be committed, is being committed, or was committed.

And, when stopped in a vehicle (and I imagine a vessel), you and your passengers are already detained; "seized" within the meaning of the 4th.

Different than walking on the street in a consensual encounter with law enforcement where you are free to leave unless told you are being detained.

boatnam2 · Aug 26, 2016

Be cool if they had a Parker waze app on river lol

yz450mm · Aug 26, 2016

boatnam2 said:
Be cool if they had a Parker waze app on river lol

I don't understand why nobody has created a water shuttle , on a donation/tip basis. Grab a beater pontoon, put in seating for 12, and make runs between the bars and campgrounds.

Hey wait, come to think of it, all these enforcement agencies are doing it in the name of safety, right? So maybe they would chip in and sponsor a designated driver program! Yeah fucking right...

boatnam2 · Aug 26, 2016

yz450mm said:
I don't understand why nobody has created a water shuttle , on a donation/tip basis. Grab a beater pontoon, put in seating for 12, and make runs between the bars and campgrounds.

Hey wait, come to think of it, all these enforcement agencies are doing it in the name of safety, right? So maybe they would chip in and sponsor a designated driver program! Yeah fucking right...

Few people have done it, never worked out really.

yz450mm · Aug 26, 2016

boatnam2 said:
Few people have done it, never worked out really.

That was the old Parker, times have defi changed. Would you use it? I know we would, even though we are in walking distance of Roadrunner.

boatnam2 · Aug 26, 2016

I go to bed by 9pm lol, my Bar runner days are behind me.....

max930 · Aug 26, 2016

Just from being around cops from a young age. My uncle was one for over 30 years. Fact is over 30 years, he has had lots of encounters. He knows how the department wants things done. He knows how to write it up in away the prosecutors will likely prosecute. They know what the judges want to hear. Cops can and do "lie" as in twist statements to justify whatever action was taken. Reality is you only really have rights in the court room.

HALLETT BOY · Aug 26, 2016

max930 said:
Just from being around cops from a young age. My uncle was one for over 30 years. Fact is over 30 years, he has had lots of encounters. He knows how the department wants things done. He knows how to write it up in away the prosecutors will likely prosecute. They know what the judges want to hear. Cops can and do "lie" as in twist statements to justify whatever action was taken. Reality is you only really have rights in the court room.

That's a sobering statement , sadly I believe it's true .

BoatCop · Aug 26, 2016

yz450mm said:
I don't understand why nobody has created a water shuttle , on a donation/tip basis. Grab a beater pontoon, put in seating for 12, and make runs between the bars and campgrounds.

Hey wait, come to think of it, all these enforcement agencies are doing it in the name of safety, right? So maybe they would chip in and sponsor a designated driver program! Yeah fucking right...

In order to do this, there are numerous hurdles to overcome. In order to carry passengers for hire (shuttle/taxi/etc.) you're required to obtain a Coast Guard license. If you carry more than 6 persons, the boat is required to be inspected and certified safe for commercial use, and a USCG Captain's license is required. Those processes take months, if not years of training and experience and a whole lot of money.

It's like that for a good reason. The safety of passengers is the #1 responsibility of any boat owner/operator. When someone takes money (or anything else of value) the burden of responsibility is even greater. It's a legitimate function of Government to ensure the safety of its citizens, so the Coast Guard requires certain conditions before someone can carry passengers on the water.

And before someone suggests a "free" service, donation only, or some other way to scam around the license, as soon as someone takes something of value, the license conditions kick in. And the bar shuttles (think Sundance, Pirates Den) who offer free shuttles to the bar are also subject to licensing and inspection because the bar is getting something of value, ie paying customers, in exchange for a boat ride. It's the same as the Casino shuttles in Laughlin.

max930 said:
Just from being around cops from a young age. My uncle was one for over 30 years. Fact is over 30 years, he has had lots of encounters. He knows how the department wants things done. He knows how to write it up in away the prosecutors will likely prosecute. They know what the judges want to hear. Cops can and do "lie" as in twist statements to justify whatever action was taken. Reality is you only really have rights in the court room.

I'm sorry you feel that way. In 40 years in law enforcement I never lied, shaded the truth, covered up or altered facts or did anything other than be 100% truthful and ethical in everything I did. I never had to, never thought about it, and couldn't live with myself if I did. I also very seldom went to court, as my cases and arrests were righteous, legitimate, and beyond reproach. The prosecutors and defense attorneys knew that if one of my cases went across their desks, it was going to be plead out, since it would be a sure conviction at trial, and my facts could not be disputed. And that includes several aggravated assault, manslaughter and negligent homicide cases arising from boat collisions involving drunk boaters.

It does no good to waste time trying to railroad someone when there are other serious violations and actual drunks causing havoc. When an officer's cases are consistently dismissed outright, because they are borderline cases, the report is fucked up, or everything about the case can be challenged, all it does is waste the officers', the subjects', the prosecutors', and the court's time. AND shine a bad light on the officer and the department.

While I have no doubt that there are some out there like that. The fact that your uncle was dishonest doesn't mean every other cop out there is.

CLA · Aug 26, 2016

BoatCop said:
I'm sorry you feel that way. In 40 years in law enforcement I never lied, shaded the truth, covered up or altered facts or did anything other than be 100% truthful and ethical in everything I did. I never had to, never thought about it, and couldn't live with myself if I did. I also very seldom went to court, as my cases and arrests were righteous, legitimate, and beyond reproach. The prosecutors and defense attorneys knew that if one of my cases went across their desks, it was going to be plead out, since it would be a sure conviction at trial, and my facts could not be disputed. And that includes several aggravated assault, manslaughter and negligent homicide cases arising from boat collisions involving drunk boaters.

It does no good to waste time trying to railroad someone when there are other serious violations and actual drunks causing havoc. When an officer's cases are consistently dismissed outright, because they are borderline cases, the report is fucked up, or everything about the case can be challenged, all it does is waste the officers', the subjects', the prosecutors', and the court's time. AND shine a bad light on the officer and the department.

While I have no doubt that there are some out there like that. The fact that your uncle was dishonest doesn't mean every other cop out there is.

You realize this statement makes you 100% full of shit? Statistically I would venture that over a 40 year career even the Pope has embellished or bent the truth. The fact that you believe you never in 40 years EVER freaking EVER bent any truth is prof that you may have a mental instability problem. No one is that perfect even God.

CLA · Aug 26, 2016

yz450mm said:
I always thought that somebody Under Suspicion of DUI had the choice between breath and blood. Or is this just in California?

10 years ago, I was in Havasu with a group of friends. The owner and Driver of the boat was sober, never drank in his life. We went on a night cruise through the channel, and as we got into thompson bay, he needed to jump in to pee. He killed the boat and jumped overboard, and my buddy sat down in the captain seat. When the driver turned the key off, it turned the lights off, so my buddy turned the key back to accessory. The cops lit us up from about 50 feet away and hauled off my buddy for DUI, even know they had been watching and clearly knew that he was not driving the boat. The fact that we had a sober operator meant nothing to them, they still hauled him in and made him go through the whole process. He lost his job and had to drive to Havasu three or four times to try to defend himself.

I bet those cops had never told a lie in 40 years. You know............that's easy to do.

hvnfun · Aug 26, 2016

sd broker said:
I decide to go for a afternoon jet ski cruise up to the dam in Parker (this was my first mistake).

It's Thursday, nobody around except the 4 of us on jet skis...Coming back down river from the dam I make the turn by Buckskin then see the La Paz County Sheriff boat rounding the corner by Echo lodge. We pass each other, no big deal, then a few seconds later he decides to light me up. I politely asked him why I was being pulled over, his response was "You we're going the wrong direction on a federal waterway"...WTF??? I've been on this river long enough to know which direction to go...

Still being polite, I show him my fire extinguisher, registration, etc...All checks out well. I figure i'm on my way, not so fast! He ask's If I've been drinking, told him not even a drop. After telling him "NO, I haven't been drinking", he pulls out his pen and tells me to follow the tip. Apparently he didn't like the results so he asked me to step on his boat. At this point i'm getting quite frustrated. He does more of the "pen test" to which he determines I show 2 out of 4 faults...By this time I am beyond irritated and flat out annoyed. He then tells me I need to blow in the machine. At this point I'm about to lose it. I'm sober as a gopher and have given him nothing to indicate otherwise. I told him I'm not blowing into any machine. He checked his box and said "lucky for you the machine is on the other boat, you can go now"

My question is this...Don't they need probable cause to administer such tests? Can I refuse to do their tests? This was a shakedown and a waste of time.

I appreciate law enforcement but this was ridiculous.

FYI the cop seemed to be about 15 years old.

Its election time, best way to send those guys a message is to elect a new La Paz Sherriff.

t&y · Aug 26, 2016

lol... WTF happened in here. Summer is coming to an end and everyone starts slinging shit again...

BoatCop · Aug 26, 2016

CLA said:
You realize this statement makes you 100% full of shit? Statistically I would venture that over a 40 year career even the Pope has embellished or bent the truth. The fact that you believe you never in 40 years EVER freaking EVER bent any truth is prof that you may have a mental instability problem. No one is that perfect even God.

What is so unbelievable about an honest cop? Someone who takes the oath seriously and lives and works under both the letter and spirit of that oath? When one takes on the authority and ability to take away another's money, freedom, and even their very life, they better damn well do it by the book.

There's this thing called the Brady list. If a police officer has lied or done ANYTHING else unethical or dishonest, they get put on this list that goes to every defense attorney in the jurisdiction. They then can be discredited in court, as being known to be dishonest. That makes them 100% not credible to a jury and reduces, if not eliminates, their ability to function as a police officer.

That's like saying that EVERY plumber rips you off. EVERY contractor is a liar and fudges invoices. EVERY butcher has his thumb on the scale. The only people who accuse others of wrongdoing and dishonesty and believe that EVERY one in this profession or that profession has to be dirty, are those who have the propensity to live their own lives in that exact same way.

spectra3279 · Aug 26, 2016

I would say that the truly honest cops are few and far between. Some start out as assholes and some become jaded over time.

I'm not saying they are not out there. I'm just saying that the ones who do it to make an actual difference over the long haul are few. I can neither confirm nor deny you are one, but I would tend to believe you kept your principles based on how you interact here on the boards.

max930 · Aug 26, 2016

Maybe "lie" is too strong a word. Fact is when you go up against the police in any situation, you must keep in mind they know how to work the system to get their job done. Take probable cause for a traffic stop. Good luck fighting a DUI because the police truly didn't have it to pull you over!

t&y · Aug 26, 2016

max930 said:
Maybe "lie" is too strong a word. Fact is when you go up against the police in any situation, you must keep in mind they know how to work the system to get their job done. Take probable cause for a traffic stop. Good luck fighting a DUI because the police truly didn't have it to pull you over!

Have what.. Probable Cause? That right there is the problem my friend. The police legally DO NOT need Probable Cause to pull you over, yet you and millions of other people out there think they do.

max930 · Aug 26, 2016

t&y said:
Have what.. Probable Cause? That right there is the problem my friend. The police legally DO NOT need Probable Cause to pull you over, yet you and millions of other people out there think they do.

True.... Depends on type of stop. Oh I'm not suggesting police lie to go after innocent people, pin a BS crime on them, etc. More of they stopped you and smell booze or drugs. So their narrative fits more with the easily discovered crime. As far as rights go, they really are not enforceable until its in the court room. Hence the cops favorite line tell the judge!

C-2 · Aug 26, 2016

Reasonable articulable suspicion for a traffic stop and detainment. It is a lower standard than Probable Cause.

Probable cause is a 50.01% belief/preponderance of evidence, that the suspect committed a crime. In other words, more likely than not that the person committed a crime.

BoatCop · Aug 26, 2016

Police only need "Reasonable Suspicion" to effect a traffic stop and detain a person in a motor vehicle.
"Probable Cause" is the standard to make an arrest.

Reasonable Suspicion is a standard that a reasonable person would presume a person has violated a law, rule, regulation, or Statute.

Seeing a license plate with an expired year tab is suspicion that the owner of the vehicle is in violation of the law requiring current vehicle registration.

A person traveling 20 MPH over the speed limit meets the standard of reasonable suspicion that the person is in violation of the Speed Limit. In this instance, it's also probable cause.

Probable cause is the standard that a person would believe, and has sufficient evidence, that a crime, or violation, has occurred and the person in question committed that crime or violation.

A person driving a vehicle that matches one recently stolen is reasonable suspicion that they are driving a stolen car. They can be stopped and detained as long as reasonably necessary to determine the vehicle's status.

When the VIN numbers confirm that it IS the stolen vehicle, there is probable cause to arrest the driver for possession of the stolen vehicle.

Neither probable cause nor reasonable suspicion is required for Law Enforcement to make a stop on a vessel on Federal Waterways. This is known as the "Vessel Exception" to the 4th Amendment, and has been ruled on by the US Supreme Court:

http://law.justia.com/constitution/us/amendment-04/16-vessel-searches.html

HolyMoly · Aug 27, 2016

You have the right to remain silent. But you lack the ability.

BoatCop · Aug 27, 2016

HolyMoly said:
You have the right to remain silent. But you lack the ability.

Shut up.

Midgets have no rights.

spectra3279 · Aug 27, 2016

HolyMoly said:
You have the right to remain silent. But you lack the ability.

Hey tater tot. Have not seen you around for a while

HolyMoly · Aug 27, 2016

BoatCop said:
Shut up.

Midgets have no rights.

You'll never take me alive copper!

What are my rights?

Retired And Loving It.

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Banned

Retired And Loving It.

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

CHA PLEASE

Well-Known Member

In it to win it

Well-Known Member

Retired And Loving It.

Well-Known Member

CHA PLEASE

Retired And Loving It.

CHA PLEASE

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

CHA PLEASE

Well-Known Member

CHA PLEASE

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

I just work here

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Retired And Loving It.

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Hvnfun

t&y

Retired And Loving It.

Vaginamoney broke

Well-Known Member

t&y

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Retired And Loving It.

reMember

Retired And Loving It.

Vaginamoney broke

reMember