Arrested at Foxwoods and banned for life

[Jackal52]

Here's my opinion on stops and searches. I have been an
attorney for 16 years. I practiced criminal defense law for 7 years.(I've handled 100's of cases, I've tried a murder case, and written 7 appeals) However, the last 9 years I have done tax work, so this information may be inaccurate/incomplete and/or outdated.
Anyhow, I believe the current law is that if asked questions by the police, then you have to give your name, address, and "the nature of your business" (Supreme Court Case by Rehnquist?)

Example: Stopped in the casino.

Cops: Do you know the man who started the altercation at the poker table?

Answer: Hello Officer, my name is Joe Smith, I'm from Chicago, and I was here playing poker. Am I under Arrest?

Cop: No, not yet, are you a jail-house lawyer!; No, but we have questions, If you don't talk you will be arrested,etc, etc, etc,

Next statement by you: (1) Am I under arrest? and (2) Am I free to leave?

If the answer to (1) is yes, then state " I want a lawyer, I will remain silent, and I choose to exercise all my rights under the Fourth, Fifth, Sixth and Fourteenth Amendments of the U.S. Constitution.

If the answer to (1)is no, then ask if you are free to leave, if you are not, then you are being "Stopped" (Called a "Terry Stop"). If you are being "Stopped" say the following:

If I'm not under arrest, I'm going to leave. (At this point, walk away.--if they stop you---say the following: I have nothing to say. I want to remain silent. I have a right against self-incrimination. Am I free to leave?

If they don't let you go now, then you have been "arrested" according to some courts because your freedom of movement is impaired.

Try walking away, if stopped, demand an attorney or the right to leave. (Keep demanding an attorney and say nothing else if cuffed)

Hopes this helps.

[ludawg23]

First off, learn how to drink like a man and maybe you wouldn't have been so drunk and acted like a fool.

2nd, you deserve anything/everything that's coming to you.

3rd, donkey punch your friend in the back of the neck.

[prodonkey]

5oz beers LOL

[kendal14]

[ QUOTE ]
Also when I drove back to the hotel I was not that drunk. I am almost positive I would pass all DUI tests.

I am 100% sure I would have after sitting in the hotel for over an hour before driving back to the casino.

[/ QUOTE ]

I do not agree with your throwing a beer at a casino and I think that is dumb at best... but I think most of us have been a little too drunk and hyped up sometime and have done some stupid things. So I wish you the best regarding that part of your story. You also seem remorseful and understand that you did something wrong.

However, the quoted sentences need to be addressed because there is very little chance that they are true. If you were downing 5oz beers at as fast as you could and got drunk enough to through chips, a beer, and cards at a casino; there is NO WAY you were sober enough to pass a sobriety test... and more importantly probably should not have been on the road.

Sitting in your hotel room for an hour will AT BEST flush one's beer's worth of alcohol out of your system. The legal BAC for a sober driver is <.08 (which is just under ONE beer an hour). I'm guessing even though the beers were 5oz., you did better than one an hour and were over the legal limit.

This was only to tell you to think before you get behind the wheel of a car after drinking. You need to understand the legal ramifications of being behind the wheel and more importantly, you need to learn how to be level-headed and responsible (which is what I think you might have a problem with... based only on this story of course).

Off my soapbox now.

[MicroBob]

I agree and this occured to me as well.

In one breath he is saying that he did all these things partly because he was drunk and in another breath he's insisting that he was perfectly okay to drive at pretty much the same time.

If the drinking affected his behavior that much then his driving was almost certainly impaired.

He also said he was too drunk to post details about this as he had just gotten back although I guess he could have gotten more sloshed in his hotel-room after this ordeal and before he posted that.

[primate]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]

This is very naive. The probable cause to search arises when the suspect refuses the search then suddenly becomes nervous, fidgety, sweating etc etc. (Ways and means)

But we are getting off topic.

That mobile phone was an item of evidence therefore the Police had the power to seize it. End of move on.

Cops laid it on thick and told the lad "look if you want to keep your phone tell us the name of your friend and give us your number, otherwise we take the phone and you don't see it for a very long time".

Friend thinking "wait a minute here I didn't burst an old codgers eardrums" decides [censored] it I done nothing wrong, here ya go.

What I don't get is why OP returned to the scene of the crime lol. There isn't a law about NOT making yourself available to the cops now is there.

[/ QUOTE ]

WTF is wrong with you. This is either completely made up or applies to some country other than the US.

The guy with the cell phone is not even suspected on anything. How can there possibly be probable cause to believe he committed a crime. There is no reasonable suspicion either, so no Terry stop can be made.

It is clear that you have no legal training and are completely talking out of your ass. Please do everyone a favor and stick to subjects you know something about rather than spreading misinformation.

TYIA!

[/ QUOTE ]

Your absolutely right of course and by your reasoning the following would apply.

Suspect hits eastern motors across the head with the lead piping and runs off. Suspect runs round the corner, bumbps into OP's friend and throws him the lead piping.

Cops turn up and after searching the immediate area come across OP's friend who (is innocent) but just happens to be holding the valuable piece of evidence (the lead piping).

Now according to your logic, OP's friend doesn't match the description of the suspect so the Cops have no power to stop, speak, detain or take possession of the lead piping.

[Ganjasaurus Rex]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]


This thread is tilting me, I'm done.

[/ QUOTE ]

thank god, cuz if I had to read any more of your stupidity I was going to start raping small children and clubbing baby seals

[/ QUOTE ]

[Ganjasaurus Rex]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]

This is very naive. The probable cause to search arises when the suspect refuses the search then suddenly becomes nervous, fidgety, sweating etc etc. (Ways and means)

But we are getting off topic.

That mobile phone was an item of evidence therefore the Police had the power to seize it. End of move on.

Cops laid it on thick and told the lad "look if you want to keep your phone tell us the name of your friend and give us your number, otherwise we take the phone and you don't see it for a very long time".

Friend thinking "wait a minute here I didn't burst an old codgers eardrums" decides [censored] it I done nothing wrong, here ya go.

What I don't get is why OP returned to the scene of the crime lol. There isn't a law about NOT making yourself available to the cops now is there.

[/ QUOTE ]

WTF is wrong with you. This is either completely made up or applies to some country other than the US.

The guy with the cell phone is not even suspected on anything. How can there possibly be probable cause to believe he committed a crime. There is no reasonable suspicion either, so no Terry stop can be made.

It is clear that you have no legal training and are completely talking out of your ass. Please do everyone a favor and stick to subjects you know something about rather than spreading misinformation.

TYIA!

[/ QUOTE ]

Your absolutely right of course and by your reasoning the following would apply.

Suspect hits eastern motors across the head with the lead piping and runs off. Suspect runs round the corner, bumbps into OP's friend and throws him the lead piping.

Cops turn up and after searching the immediate area come across OP's friend who (is innocent) but just happens to be holding the valuable piece of evidence (the lead piping).

Now according to your logic, OP's friend doesn't match the description of the suspect so the Cops have no power to stop, speak, detain or take possession of the lead piping.

[/ QUOTE ]
Did OP hit the guy over the head with his cell phone???

Hilarious.

[Pokabandito]

What some people are omitting in this thread is that IF a police officer performs a search or confiscates personal property, etc. without consent then any "evidence" they find will be inadmissible in court due to illegal search. If your rights have been violated by police officers you are right, there's nothing you can do at the moment but keep your mouth shut and ask to speak to your lawyer. However, later (a good) lawyer will get the case dismissed because your constitutional rights will have been violated.

To sum up this thread:
[x] Friend should LEAVE EXPEDITIOUSLY after cashing out chips, imo
[x] Friend should politely refuse surrender of his phone without a warrant, imo
[x] OP should drive HOME after receiving phone call, imo
[x] Situation avoided if OP didn't act like drunk 13 year old, imo

[NoLimitLeagues]

i wonder if the dealer was reprimanded, he deserved to be, he should have never allowed that straddle, because the first card had already came out. i cant beleive you are all patting the dealer on the back. if he only had 4 posts and not over 1000, you guys wouldnt be kissing the dealers butt.