It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

So NJ troopers arrest woman for remaining silent, where's Miranda?

page: 1
11
<<   2  3 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on May, 5 2016 @ 10:05 AM
link   
This is totally ridiculous. These people claim to be LEOs? I thought the Miranda right was the most basic thing they teach you.


TRENTON — Two New Jersey state troopers cuffed a woman along a Warren County roadway and hauled her in on an obstruction charge because she refused to answer questions during a routine traffic stop, according to dashboard camera footage obtained by NJ Advance Media. The October 16 incident, which happened near the New Jersey-Pennsylvania border on Route 519, is now the subject of a federal civil rights lawsuit filed by the woman, Rebecca Musarra, an attorney from Philadelphia. Musarra claims in the suit the troopers violated basic rules familiar to anybody who's ever watched a police show on TV, including the right to remain silent. She claims at least three troopers insisted during the ordeal that her refusal to answer questions was a criminal act.

www.nj.com...-homepage-featured




posted on May, 5 2016 @ 10:19 AM
link   
LOL ... and she's an officer of the court.

hahahaha



posted on May, 5 2016 @ 10:22 AM
link   
I am unable to watch the video at this time.

Does she specifically state that she refuses to answer their questions? You have the right to remain silent but I believe you have to declare that right verbally. Simply not saying anything to police is not the same as invoking the right to remain silent.
edit on 5-5-2016 by introvert because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 5 2016 @ 10:23 AM
link   
guess the cops didn't get that part of the miranda rights?

seriously, they are just coming up with excuses to arrest people. and they not are even good excuses! still, want to know why she was pulled over. if her story is verified, this should be thrown out real quick!



posted on May, 5 2016 @ 10:23 AM
link   
Ironically, her NAME was Miranda.



posted on May, 5 2016 @ 10:27 AM
link   
Police only need to read you Miranda rights after they arrest you. They are free to ask any questions they like but you don't have to answer.


Some states require you to give them your name and birthday if they ask but I don't know about this state.



posted on May, 5 2016 @ 10:28 AM
link   

originally posted by: Bluntone22
Police only need to read you Miranda rights after they arrest you. They are free to ask any questions they like but you don't have to answer.


Some states require you to give them your name and birthday if they ask but I don't know about this state.


That is correct.



posted on May, 5 2016 @ 10:29 AM
link   

originally posted by: introvert
I am unable to watch the video at this time.

Does she specifically state that she refuses to answer their questions? You have the right to remain silent but I believe you have to declare that right verbally. Simply not saying anything to police is not the same as invoking the right to remain silent.





The footage shows she eventually told the trooper she was an attorney and that she did not have to answer questions. Stazzone then ordered her out of the vehicle.



posted on May, 5 2016 @ 10:33 AM
link   

originally posted by: blackthorne
guess the cops didn't get that part of the miranda rights?

...want to know why she was pulled over...


" ...suspecting her of speeding". Note they only "suspected" her of speeding.



posted on May, 5 2016 @ 10:39 AM
link   

originally posted by: UnBreakable

originally posted by: blackthorne
guess the cops didn't get that part of the miranda rights?

...want to know why she was pulled over...


" ...suspecting her of speeding". Note they only "suspected" her of speeding.


They always call people suspects until they are convicted in court
Paying a speeding ticket is an admission of guilt. You can appear in court to fight a ticket but will likely lose.



posted on May, 5 2016 @ 10:53 AM
link   

originally posted by: IAMTAT
Ironically, her NAME was Miranda.


Not the woman who was arrested in this instance, it was Musarra.



posted on May, 5 2016 @ 10:58 AM
link   
a reply to: UnBreakable

While refusing to answer question could be cause for suspicion, as long as she provided the documents necessary to legally drive (DL, insurance, etc), which she claims she provided, there should be no legal justification for arrest, unless there was some other reasonable suspicion *after* he pulled her over. While the refusal might be reasonable, the obstruction is convenient for the cops in many instances when citizens don't simply do as they're told or when they actually make cops do their jobs (eg, investigate).


The dashboard camera footage shows Stazzone approached the vehicle on the passenger side and asked Musarra for her license, registration and insurance.

"While you're looking for that, do you know why you're being pulled over tonight?" the trooper asked her, according to the tape. She claims she provided the documents but didn't respond.


I'm no lawyer, but I would think that, legally, that's ALL she has to do is provide the documents.

Obstruction. BS.



posted on May, 5 2016 @ 11:00 AM
link   
a reply to: UnBreakable

Somethings not clear here....was she or wasn't she mirandized? And she can be held for 24 he's wirhout being charged or told why she's being detained.

Something we are not being told here....



posted on May, 5 2016 @ 11:08 AM
link   
a reply to: UnBreakable

Just an FYI miranda rights are required an officer may not always offer to read them off. "Thus, if law enforcement officials decline to offer a Miranda warning to an individual in their custody, they may interrogate that person and act upon the knowledge gained, but may not use that person's statements as evidence against him or her in a criminal trial." (Source Wiki)

I come from a Police and Military family, I have asked officers at home why I never heard them read, they answer mostly only in felony arrests.



posted on May, 5 2016 @ 11:11 AM
link   
a reply to: UnBreakable

After watching the video I will comment with the following.

The lady was being a jerk and she escalated the situation for no reason.

I've been pulled over by the cops before. And I treat the cop the same way I would like to be treated.

WOW! What a concept right?

Usually the cop doesn't give me a hard time. They tell me to get whatever fixed. And I'm on my way again.

Now did these cops overstep their authority? Probably.

Will she spank them in court? More than likely.

Could she have avoided this whole situation entirely by not being rude? Absolutely.



posted on May, 5 2016 @ 11:15 AM
link   
a reply to: grey580

I agree that there is less friction if you are polite to cops (works for me a lot).

However, you're implying we should temporarily suspend our rights just to make things go more smoothly?

What's the point in rights if we willing give them up simply for convenience?



posted on May, 5 2016 @ 11:21 AM
link   

originally posted by: grey580
a reply to: UnBreakable

After watching the video I will comment with the following.

The lady was being a jerk and she escalated the situation for no reason.

I've been pulled over by the cops before. And I treat the cop the same way I would like to be treated.

WOW! What a concept right?

Usually the cop doesn't give me a hard time. They tell me to get whatever fixed. And I'm on my way again.

Now did these cops overstep their authority? Probably.

Will she spank them in court? More than likely.

Could she have avoided this whole situation entirely by not being rude? Absolutely.


Irrespective -- the situation shouldn't exist. There is only rights, and there is no such right not to deal with rude people. It doesn't give you the right as an officer to punish rude people harder. She did nothing illegal. Minor speeding is not criminal, which means it's not illegal, it's a civil infraction which makes it unlawful. Obstructing a police investigation IS criminal, and IS illegal -- so they attempted to turn a regular person INTO a criminal just because they didn't like her attitude. They criminalized a normal subjective emotional response. Speeding has to be clocked by the way. A police officer cannot "Estimate" your speed -- they have to have empirical proof that you were speeding in some recorded fashion. Evidently, they didn't.

It doesn't matter if she could have had a better attitude, you have the right to human emotion and being pulled over unjustly tends to upset people, that's NORMAL, whether or not you've been conditioned by their corruption that it's not doesn't matter.

Also, no -- the police cannot just detain anybody they want for 24 hours. Only suspects in CRIMINAL investigations. If it's not criminal, and they have no probable cause that something criminal is taking place -- they cannot detain you. You also cannot be handcuffed without Miranda Rights. Being handcuffed IS arrest.

Also, if she's an attorney -- that means she's a defense attorney or they would have recognized her if she was a state prosecutor. Being a defense attorney will inform you of the grave injustices that happen on a daily basis, you will get to see police lie in court on a daily basis. Not speaking is absolutely what everyone should do, and doing that isn't a demonstration of a bad attitude. It's a demonstration of being safe.

In other words, matters of court are supposed to be OBJECTIVE and matter of fact, not SUBJECTIVE and matter of opinion. For instance -- I don't think she was rude at all, I perceive it as being safe with an air of frustration. You perceive her as being rude. See how that's an opinion?

They need to stop hiring emotionally unstable and stupid people to be officers of the law. Based upon your statements, I am led to believe that if you were a police officer -- people being abrasive to you would result in you escalating and trumping up charges. That's what happened in the video.

Matters of court are supposed to be OBJECTIVE matters of fact, not SUBJECTIVE matters of opinion. Wow, what a concept, right? Police have too many fake laws that allow them to arrest people on subjective matters of opinion. Obstruction is deliberately tanking an investigation. A speeding ticket ISN'T AN INVESTIGATION. It's a civil citation based upon an observed FACT. If there was no probable cause that there was something criminal taking place, then there is no start of an investigation, it's a simple as cutting the ticket and moving along. If there is no investigation started, then she cannot have obstructed -- it's pretty clear cut that the cop was just a jerk off.
edit on 5-5-2016 by SRPrime because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 5 2016 @ 11:51 AM
link   

originally posted by: Bluntone22

originally posted by: UnBreakable

originally posted by: blackthorne
guess the cops didn't get that part of the miranda rights?

...want to know why she was pulled over...


" ...suspecting her of speeding". Note they only "suspected" her of speeding.


They always call people suspects until they are convicted in court
Paying a speeding ticket is an admission of guilt. You can appear in court to fight a ticket but will likely lose.


Ok. Thanks.



posted on May, 5 2016 @ 11:59 AM
link   
a reply to: Liquesence

You can be polite and respectful and still maintain your rights.

When the cop asked her about being pulled over.

She could of answered with a simple , no.

If she didn't want to answer any of the police officer questions she could of asserted her right to remain silent. Or she could of said that's none of your business to any question.

Just because you have a right doesn't mean you have to be a jerk about it.



posted on May, 5 2016 @ 12:01 PM
link   
I think if that had been me, I would also file a police report accusing the officers of armed kidnapping. It might not go anywhere, but I would push it as hard as I could.



new topics

top topics



 
11
<<   2  3 >>

log in

join