Probable cause, reasonable suspicion

When can the cops stop you?

Jim Forsberg Phoenix Police Reserve Officer

I worked with Jim Forsberg at Sperry Flight Systems and Honeywell at the plant on 19th Avenue and Deer Valley Road for about 4years.

In addition to being a worker at the plant Jim Forsberg was a reserve cop for the Phoenix Police. On his own time he would grab a cop car and go out and arrest people for the fun of it.

By the time I got to Sperry Jim had stopped doing this but he did teach me a lot about what the police can and can’t do.

Like most cops Jim Forsberg is also crooked. He ripped me off for $100 in the final year I worked with him. He ripped off Chuck Howe another engineer we worked with using the same scam to a tune of $1,000+. And he constantly borrowed money from Ken Huff and never paid it back.

Can the cops stop anybody, anytime?

Can the cops stop anybody, anytime? Depends on if your driving a car or on foot.

In a car they must have “probable cause” or “reasonable suspicion”

If you driving a car the police can ONLY stop you if they have either “probable cause” or “reasonable suspicion” which are two legal terms I will get into later.

If the cops turn on the lights and pull you over and they don’t have “probable cause” or “reasonable suspicion” they have violated your civil rights. But they do this quit often and seldom get punished.

On foot they can only detain you if they have “probable cause” or “reasonable suspicion”.

If your on foot the police can only detain you, which is a polite word for arrest you if they have either “probable cause” or “reasonable suspicion”.

On foot they can ask you questions, but you don’t have to answer

If you’re on foot and I want to question you, I can demand that you stop and answer my questions. And you can always tell me to “get lost”.

If you’re on foot and the cops want to question you, the cops can demand that you stop and answer their questions. And you can always tell the cops to “get lost” just like you can tell me to “get lost”.

Sadly most people don’t know they can tell the cops to “get lost”, and if they do they are often afraid to tell the cops to “get lost”.

The police almost always lie and say you must answer their questions or you will be arrested!

Last but not least most cops are more like criminals thugs, and even if you tell them to “get lost” they will refuse. And they will probably also lie and tell you that you will be jailed if you refuse to answer their questions or bad, bad, bad things will happen to you. Again when they do this nonsense they are violating your civil rights. But cops rarely get punished for this criminal behavior.

Probable cause, reasonable suspicion

For the police to legally detain you, which is the same as arresting you they must have either Probable cause, reasonable suspicion.

Most people think being arrested is the same as being charged with a crime. Any time you are detained by the police, that is the same as being arrested. And just because you have been detained or arrested that doesn’t mean you will be charged with a crime.

You have been charged with a crime when the police write you a ticket. In this case your usually released.

When the police take you down to the police station and book, this is the cause of when you’re being charged with a crime.

Probable cause

Probable cause is when the cop sees you commit a crime. The cop sees you speeding, the cop sees a bag of marijuana on your dashboard. In both cases the cop has “probable cause” to arrest you and charge you with a crime.

Probable cause is when someone else tells the cop you committed a crime. When someone says “Officer that man robbed me”, that gives the cop “probable cause” to arrest the man.

Probable cause is not when you think someone might commit a crime, or when you think someone might have committed a crime.

A cop does not have “probable cause” to arrest people with long hair because he thinks all long hairs take drugs.

A cop does not have “probable cause” to arrest Black people because he thinks all Black people are criminals.

A cop does not have “probable cause” to stop any person leaving a bar to check him out for drunk driving. The cop has to have some evidence that the person is actually drunk, such as the car is weaving, before he has “probable cause” to stop the person.

This is just a nutshell view of “probable cause”, prosecutors, defense attorneys and judges can argue for days about what is and isn’t probable cause.

Reasonable suspicion

“Reasonable Suspicion” is a much lower standard then “probable cause”.

Say at noon, a White man, wearing a blue suit, robs a Circle K and drives away in a blue VW.

Two miles away at 1 p.m. on the same day a cop sees a White man, wearing a blue suit, driving a blue VW. The cop has “reasonable suspicion” to stop the man and determine if he is the man who robbed the Circle K.

Say it is 6 p.m. or 6 hours later and the same things happens. The cop probably would not have “reasonable suspicion” to stop the man because too much time has passed.

Or the car is a Ford, again the cop probably doesn’t have “reasonable suspicion”.

Or the man is a Black man, again the cop probably doesn’t have “reasonable suspicion”.

Or the man is wearing shorts, again the cop probably doesn’t have “reasonable suspicion”.

Again this is a nutshell view of “reasonable suspicion”, judges and lawyers can argue for days about what is and is not “reasonable suspicion”.

The rules can change over time.

Because of court decisions just what “probable cause” and “reasonable suspicion” are can change over time.

In an article in Reason Magazine the San Jose Chief of Police who made a statement something to the effect that 20 years ago if he arrested a person an unlocked home, next to the persons unlocked car the police would NOT have had “probable cause” to search either the home or the car.

Then he said that if the same person was arrested today outside the home which was unlocked and next to the car was unlocked the police would have “probable cause” to search both the home and car under the current rules.

You’re detained without “probable cause” or “reasonable suspicion”?

What happens when the cops detain you with out either “probable cause” or “reasonable suspicion”?

The cops have violated your civil rights and falsely arrested you.

But the cops routinely violate people rights this way and the police are rarely punished for their crimes.

Can the cops search you?

Normally the police are NOT allowed to search you. But in the Supreme Court decision Terry vs. Ohio they ruled that if the police want to question you they can give you a pat down search to look for weapons.

That is a pat down search on the outside of your clothing. They are not allowed to reach into your pockets. They are not allowed to force you to remove parts of your clothing so they can search under it. And the search is for weapons only.

The police frequently abuse this. In one case the cop claimed he thought a baggie of marijuana was a weapon, and arrested the person when it turned out to be marijuana instead of the gun the cop though it was.

In another case the cop said he though a credit card was a deadly weapon and removed it from the person searched. When the credit card turned out to be stolen the person was arrested for theft.

Do you have to tell the cops your name, or give them ID?

You only have to give the police a license if you’re doing something that requires a license.

Driving a car requires that you have a drivers license. So if your stopped while driving a car you have to give the police a drivers license.

Fishing or hunting on government land requires fishing or hunting license. So if your fishing or hunting and stopped by the police you’re required to present the cop with a fishing or hunting license.

So if you’re not driving a car, or doing something like fishing or hunting that requires a license then NO you don’t have to give the police any identification.

The police will often lie and tell you that if you don’t give then identification they will arrest you and jail you. But this is almost always a lie. You don’t need to give the police identification unless you’re doing something that requires a license, like driving, fishing or hunting.

Do you have to tell the police your name?

Up until the Supreme Court decision of Hiibel v. Nevada you did not need to tell the police your name. Let me repeat that prior to the Supreme Court case of Hiibel v. Nevada you were not required to tell the police your name.

After the Hiibel v. Nevada case there are a few specific times when you have to tell the police your name. And that is you can be required to verbally tell the police your name. You still do not need to give them any form of identification.

There are 2 conditions that all must be met before the police can require you to tell them your name.

The first condition is your state must have a law requiring you to identify yourself, when your stopped by the police and the police have “reasonable suspicion” to detain you.

If your state doesn’t have such a law then you can always refuse to tell the police your name. However Arizona does have such a law it is A.R.S 13-2412

The second condition that must also be true is the police must have “reasonable suspicion” to stop you. If the police don’t have “reasonable suspicion” to stop you then they can NOT use this law to force you to disclose your name.

Last this Supreme Court case does NOT required that you give identification to the police. It merely required that you verbally tell your name to the police. You are not required to give the police any ID.

I have talked to several lawyers on the Hiibel case and they all say it just opens a huge can of worms.

One issue is the Supreme Court has routinely said the police can lie and try to trick a suspect into confessing. What if the police lie and tell you that they have “reasonable suspicion” to detain you, when they don’t have “reasonable suspicion”, and then demand that you state your name?

Can you take the Fifth and demand that you wish to speak to your lawyer, so your lawyer can determine if the police have “reasonable suspicion” to detain you, and then based on your lawyers advice, decide whether to tell the police your name?

The lawyers say that sounds like a good answer. But the lawyers also say that has never been tested and they don’t know if it will hold up in court.

Another question is Hiibel didn’t take the Fifth. Hiibel just told the police that it was none of their business what his name was. So can you take the Fifth and refuse to obey this law?

The lawyers say that sounds good too. But again it has never been tested in court so they don’t have an answer.

Unconstitutional local laws

I was stopped by the Tempe Police and I refused to tell them my name.

They told me I was required by law to tell them my name. I told them they were lying and no such law existed.

They then looked up the law and it was a City of Tempe city law that required me to produce identification for the police. They even showed me the law.

I responded with “I am not going to obey some city code that says the Fifth Amendment is null and void”.

They didn’t charge me with a crime, although I suspect they could have, based on this Tempe law which is probably unconstitutional.

I have been stopped by the police at least 10 times and always refuse to tell them my name. Each and every time they have detained me for about and hour, told me I was required by law to tell them my name. But not once did they ever charge me with a crime.

Never carry ID with you!

Almost every time I have refused to tell the police my name they usually illegally violate my 4th Amendment right and steal my wallet and search thru it looking for identification.

For this reason I never carry ID on my person.

When I drive, I keep my drivers license locked in a combination safe in the car. The reason I used a combination lock is so the police can’t steal my keys and let themselves in, which is something they would do if a key could open the safe.

Do you have to answer police questions?

When you’re stopped by the police can they force you to answer questions other then what your name is as I noted above? No! Based on the Fifth Amendment, you can’t be forced to answer any questions.

I always take the 5th when I am stopped and refuse to answer any questions.

Each and every time I have taken the 5th the police lie and tell me that “the 5th doesn’t apply in this case and you have to answer our questions”.

So just remember if you take the Fifth the cops will almost certainly lie and tell you that you must answer their questions. Just continue to politely say I am taking the 5th and not answering any questions. They won’t like it, but it will keep you out of trouble.

Some other incidents where crooked Phoenix police officers have violated my civil rights:

Michael Greenfield

Robert Sparks