Question about Reasonable Suspicion

[Ninety]

If you run a registration from a vehicle and the registered owner comes back as a male having a suspended license.. Does the fact that there is a male driving the vehicle meet reasonable suspicion or PC for pulling that vehicle over?

DFG incident in Lake Havasu.

[RickD427]

If you run a registration from a vehicle and the registered owner comes back as a male having a suspended license.. Does the fact that there is a male driving the vehicle meet reasonable suspicion or PC for pulling that vehicle over?

DFG incident in Lake Havasu.

Ninety,

Reasonable Suspicion and Probable Cause are different standards.

We need to meet the "Reasonable Suspicion" standard to make an investigative detention (pulling the vehicle over).

"Probable Cause" is a higher standard. Although no court decision that I'm aware of has cited the 50-50 math, I like to refer to the root word "probable" as meaning more likely than not. We have to meet the "Probable Cause" standard to make an arrest, or to perform a non-consentual search of a vehicle.

Most vehicles are normally driven by just a few people. If the date on the suspension was relatively recent, and the car was registered to an individual (and not a rental car outfit), then I would think the "Reasonable Suspicion" standard is met. Look at it this way, for a normal car, how many males normally would drive that car? If you say two, then its 50-50 the driver is the guy. That puts us on the hair of having the higher PC standard. If you say a number between 3-10, then were probably at the lower RC standard.

The problem with all of this is that we never know for sure until we get to court and get a ruling. Different judges see things differently, so we kinda have to go with the averages and take our chances.

[Ninety]

Awesome thank you for the reply.


Sent from my EVO using Tapatalk

[1CavScout]

Don't mess around with Havasu cops. They do whatever the hell they want out there.

[Ninety]

Let me put this whole story into context.
AZ Game and Fish department asked "Tom" and his GF ,after exchanging pleasantries, if they were fishing as they were standing knee deep in water both holding a kayak.. the response was no, does it look like we have fishing poles?

The Agent didn't take too kindly to the remark but continued on and checked a few others down at the water.. As "Tom" and his GF loaded up their kayak the AZGFD officer waited for them.. they left the location with the officer tailing them.. after a couple of turns and noticing they were being followed.. they stopped the vehicle. Officer stops . They start to drive again and are pulled over. This is on city streets. Tom gets out of his vehicle and the officer approaches..

Officer approaches vehicle and asks for DL .. No DL only State ID .. proceedes to tell Tom that it is the law he has a DL on him when driving a vehilce.. He then asks Tom if his name is Mr Warren.. Warren being Tom's middle name.. Tom replies with no. He then states that the Vehicle is Registered to a Mr Warren and that it comes back that the registered owner is Unlicensed (I know I said Revoked earlier.. at the time I didn't think it mattered) Tom informs the officer that he is mistaken and has "false" information. Tom then asks why he was pulled over and the officer says Tom made a traffic infraction. Tom foolishly asks if he is being detained.. at which point the officer grabs his arm and tells him to put his hands behind his back..

Tom is then Detained for about 5 min.. the officer takes pictures of his vehicle and of Toms face.. releases him to go on about his business..

So I have a couple questions.. When you run information from registration to check Drivers License info related to the registered owner.. You obviously do that on a state level... So an out of state DL wouldn't show up..

Is it some departments SOP to photograph everyone you come into contact with?

Do you feel that b/c someone exercised their 1st amendment right, they deserve a little extra attention? And if so do you feel that is honoring the oath you take.

How would you go about filing a complaint?
Do you think there is anything wrong with what the officer did?

Is the only way to get the dash cam footage thru FIOA?

Now to clarify.. the registration reads First Middle Last. Is it possible the officer used Tom's middle name on purpose ? Some sort of Alias bounce back from a check? Mistaken Identity? Typical tactic used to justify further investigation?

Thank you in advance for any insight..

[CBR_rider]

Let me put this whole story into context.
AZ Game and Fish department asked "Tom" and his GF ,after exchanging pleasantries, if they were fishing as they were standing knee deep in water both holding a kayak.. the response was no, does it look like we have fishing poles?

I'm sure your friend is aware that there are many types of fishing poles that break down and fit into small bags/backapcks/etc. Considering AZGFD is charged with protecting game and fish from poachers/educating the responsible public on how to use those living resources; it sounds like an appropriate question. No need for people to be smart asses about it

The Agent didn't take too kindly to the remark but continued on and checked a few others down at the water.. As "Tom" and his GF loaded up their kayak the AZGFD officer waited for them.. they left the location with the officer tailing them.. after a couple of turns and noticing they were being followed.. they stopped the vehicle. Officer stops . They start to drive again and are pulled over. This is on city streets. Tom gets out of his vehicle and the officer approaches..

AZGFD probably has jurisdiction throughout the entire state to enforce criminal law (almost certainly for violations committed in their presence).

Officer approaches vehicle and asks for DL .. No DL only State ID .. proceedes to tell Tom that it is the law he has a DL on him when driving a vehilce.. He then asks Tom if his name is Mr Warren.. Warren being Tom's middle name.. Tom replies with no. He then states that the Vehicle is Registered to a Mr Warren and that it comes back that the registered owner is Unlicensed (I know I said Revoked earlier.. at the time I didn't think it mattered) Tom informs the officer that he is mistaken and has "false" information. Tom then asks why he was pulled over and the officer says Tom made a traffic infraction. Tom foolishly asks if he is being detained.. at which point the officer grabs his arm and tells him to put his hands behind his back..

Tom is then Detained for about 5 min.. the officer takes pictures of his vehicle and of Toms face.. releases him to go on about his business..

So does Tom does or doesn't have a DL? And if Tom doesn't have his DL on his and it is AZ law to possess it when operating a motor vehicle, he is in violation of that section

So I have a couple questions.. When you run information from registration to check Drivers License info related to the registered owner.. You obviously do that on a state level... So an out of state DL wouldn't show up..

AZGFD probably has access to those other states databases (like nearly all law enforcement does (or should, in this day and age...)

Is it some departments SOP to photograph everyone you come into contact with?

Everyone, no. But just like you can photograph me on the job I am more than welcome (and allowed) to photograph you. If "Tom" was being hostile, especially in light of many recent militia/extremist activity, putting his photograph and information into a local database was probably what the officer was preparing to do

Do you feel that b/c someone exercised their 1st amendment right, they deserve a little extra attention? And if so do you feel that is honoring the oath you take.

How would you go about filing a complaint? Go to the agency's website and look for a link. Otherwise, call/go to a station.
Do you think there is anything wrong with what the officer did?

I wasn't there, so I have no clue.

Is the only way to get the dash cam footage thru FIOA?

Probably, if there is dash cam footage

Now to clarify.. the registration reads First Middle Last. Is it possible the officer used Tom's middle name on purpose ? Some sort of Alias bounce back from a check? Mistaken Identity? Typical tactic used to justify further investigation?

Who knows.... your story sure makes it seem like "Tom" is in fact the same person passing off his middle name as his last name on one piece of paper/on another state's DL.

Thank you in advance for any insight..

Answers in bold

[Ninety]

Thanks for the answers..

Tom has a DL out of state. And no other known aliases.. Looking for the live scan that was recently done thru our company to see if anything comes up.. I know I have an alias or two attached to my name due to clerical errors..

Tom has never been in trouble with the law other then a couple speeding tickets.

The weird part is the officer claiming that the vehicle shows being registered to his middle name as last.. but when you look at the registration.. which is all current.. it is in proper order..


Thank you for the answers.. you did manage to dodge a couple.. and no worries if you don't want to ..

Do you feel that b/c someone exercised their 1st amendment right, they deserve a little extra attention? And if so do you feel that is honoring the oath you take.

I'd imagine the same logic applies to RS being the Registered owner is Unlicensed vs revoked.

The officer doesn't seem to articulate why he pulled him over.. only states a traffic violation , to which Tom is not written up on.. I'm ASSuming that the officer was a little bothered by the conversation down at the beach and wanted to do a little investigative work ..

Personally I feel that it is using the tools at your disposal to conduct an illegitimate inquiry into someones personal information..for personal reasons and not lawful ones... a violation of the 4th under the guise of a traffic stop..and a violation of an officers ethics.. "abuse, abuse of power I tell ya"

[IrishJoe3]

Do you feel that b/c someone exercised their 1st amendment right, they deserve a little extra attention?

Okay, I'll tackle your clearly a trolling comment.

Absolutely not, feel free to exercise your 1st Amendment rights to your heart's content. Its a free country, say whatever you want. However, be an *** hole while doing it, don't expect any favors or breaks. I save those for nice people.

And if so do you feel that is honoring the oath you take.
.

Tell me, what exactly IS this oath I took, since you seem to know so much about it?

[TRICKSTER]

Do you feel that b/c someone exercised their 1st amendment right, they deserve a little extra attention? And if so do you feel that is honoring the oath you take.

I can see why this question wasn't answered, but I'll take a shot.

No, but do you feel that this is a reasonable to make this assumption when you were not there and have only one side of the story?

Are you aware that it is a common practice among criminals to switch last and middle names around to avoid being easily identified? When they are caught and charged with giving a false name to a police officer, they often claim that the officer misunderstood and mixed up the middle name with the last name.
I can see why this would make the officer suspicious, especially with someone driving without a license and not having a license from the same state as his ID Card.

[Ninety]

Okay, I'll tackle your clearly a trolling comment.

Absolutely not, feel free to exercise your 1st Amendment rights to your heart's content. Its a free country, say whatever you want. However, be an *** hole while doing it, don't expect any favors or breaks. I save those for nice people.



Tell me, what exactly IS this oath I took, since you seem to know so much about it?

You know.. I started to send you a private message as to not dirty up this thread.

Not really a trolling question in my opinion .. as it relates directly to an incident that happened earlier today.

I'm a little surprised that you took exception to the comment and I'm trying not to get upset about it..

I don't expect any favors from police. I expect them to do their jobs indiscriminately. I'm sure its a pretty hard task to accomplish at times..

I'd say you take an oath to defend the constitution, along with your honor, the badge, the community and Exercise integrity in doing so.

I think the question goes directly to the character of police. Is that why YOU think it's a trolling question? I would think it's a pretty easy question to answer.. it's either a yes. .if someone talks **** to me I show them some extra attention.. I pull them over I search their car yadda yadda..

or its a no I deal with *******s everyday.. an occasional one will drive by and talk **** and I just let it go in one ear and out the other..


I've been on this forum long enough.. and participated in enough threads related to LE that you've interacted in.. I've never said disparaging comments about LE.

I came here to ask some questions about IMHO a questionable stop. Not to troll. Maybe I shouldn't have directed it as a question to the leos here, rather phrase it as a scenario where an officer did in fact do the things I asked about.

ETA:

On my honor,
I will never betray my badge1,
my integrity, my character,
or the public trust.
I will always have
the courage to hold myself
and others accountable for our actions.
I will always uphold the constitution2
my community3 and the agency I serve.

I, do solemnly swear, that I will support and defend the Constitution of the United States, and the Constitution of the State of California against all enemies, foreign and domestic; that I will bear true faith and allegiance, to the Constitution of the State Of California; that I take this obligation freely, without any mental reservations or purpose of evasion; and that I will well and faithfully discharge the duties, of the office of Police Officer of the City of Anaheim, acting to the best of my ability.

I DO SOLEMNLY DECLARE UPON MY HONOUR AND CONSCIENCE THAT I WILL ACT AT ALL TIMES TO THE BEST OF MY ABILITY AND KNOWLEDGE IN A MANNER BEFITTING A POLICE OFFICER

I WILL PRESERVE THE DIGNITY AND WILL RESPECT THE RIGHTS OF ALL INDIVIDUALS

I WILL DISCHARGE MY DUTIES WITH INTEGRITY AND WILL PROMOTE UNDERSTANDING AND CONCILIATION

I WILL EXERCISE MY AUTHORITY AS A POLICE OFFICER IN THE MANNER INTENDED BY THE LAW

I WILL FAITHFULLY OBEY THE ORDERS OF MY SUPERIORS AND WILL BE READY TO CONFRONT DANGER IN THE LINE OF DUTY

I WILL ACT WITH HONESTY, COURTESY AND REGARD FOR THE WELFARE OF OTHERS, AND WILL ENDEAVOUR TO DEVELOP THE ESPRIT DE CORPS

I WILL ACT JUSTLY AND IMPARTIALLY AND WITH PROPRIETY TOWARDS MY FELLOW OFFICERS

I WILL CONSTANTLY STRIVE TO HONOR THIS OATH IN MY SERVICE AS A POLICE OFFICER

seems like pretty much every employment contract I've ever signed minus the constitution and community interaction stuff.

[Ninety]

I can see why this question wasn't answered, but I'll take a shot.

No, but do you feel that this is a reasonable to make this assumption when you were not there and have only one side of the story?

Are you aware that it is a common practice among criminals to switch last and middle names around to avoid being easily identified? When they are caught and charged with giving a false name to a police officer, they often claim that the officer misunderstood and mixed up the middle name with the last name.
I can see why this would make the officer suspicious, especially with someone driving without a license and not having a license from the same state as his ID Card.

Thank you Trickster.. No it's probably not a fair ASSumption.. but reasonable maybe.

I am aware that criminals do that.. I'm a little ticked I have an "alias" attached to my name.. not sure if I can get it removed..

Yea.. I don't really take any exception to the detention in handcuffs at all.. Well within his prerogative to do so.. My questions really go to the reason he would have done it and if he had the proper RS to actually initiate the stop..

Registered vehicle
Runs name on registration in AZ and no DL hits.. (Why even run it? )
ASSumes the driver IS the registered owner AND does not have a DL

What happens after that doesn't really matter.. as nothin illegal had been done.. the officer says traffic infraction but doesn't issue a citation.. so was it a traffic violation that initiated the stop or the fact that the registered owner to the vehicle and being a male and not in the AZ MVD DL data base..


ETA::

Maybe I am looking at this all wrong..

Does having an anti LE attitude or perceived anti attitude give you RS to think that person is a criminal? Does it give an officer the right to investigate further? I'm sure it peaks your interest..

[IrishJoe3]

You know.. I started to send you a private message as to not dirty up this thread.

Not really a trolling question in my opinion .. as it relates directly to an incident that happened earlier today.

I'm a little surprised that you took exception to the comment and I'm trying not to get upset about it..

Your original post was fine, IMO, but that one question struck me as a below the belt dig. Maybe it was me misinterpreting....if so I apologize.


I don't expect any favors from police. I expect them to do their jobs indiscriminately. I'm sure its a pretty hard task to accomplish at times..

Fair enough.

I'd say you take an oath to defend the constitution, along with your honor, the badge, the community and Exercise integrity in doing so.

Fair enough

I think the question goes directly to the character of police. Is that why YOU think it's a trolling question? I would think it's a pretty easy question to answer.. it's either a yes. .if someone talks **** to me I show them some extra attention.. I pull them over I search their car yadda yadda..

Kinda like what I said, call me whatever you want, just don't call me late for dinner. I really don't care. But if you're gonna motherf--k me, don't expect to get a verbal warning. But no I don't get offended or bent out of shape, not am I going to compromise my integrity or stoop to their level by trying to find something shady to get back at the person

or its a no I deal with *******s everyday.. an occasional one will drive by and talk **** and I just let it go in one ear and out the other..


I've been on this forum long enough.. and participated in enough threads related to LE that you've interacted in.. I've never said disparaging comments about LE.

I came here to ask some questions about IMHO a questionable stop. Not to troll. Maybe I shouldn't have directed it as a question to the leos here, rather phrase it as a scenario where an officer did in fact do the things I asked about.


To your credit it was very civilly put, thanks.

ETA:

In bold

[Ninety]

Whew. Thank you..

[IrishJoe3]

Thank you Trickster.. No it's probably not a fair ASSumption.. but reasonable maybe.

I am aware that criminals do that.. I'm a little ticked I have an "alias" attached to my name.. not sure if I can get it removed..

Yea.. I don't really take any exception to the detention in handcuffs at all.. Well within his prerogative to do so.. My questions really go to the reason he would have done it and if he had the proper RS to actually initiate the stop..

Not knowing what he knows, I have no idea. Did you indeed commit a traffic infraction? (Possible). In regards to solely stopping you for having a no DL hit outta Az, I think a couple others answered that pretty well. Personally, I can't see a situation where I would do that. I really don't see the point

Registered vehicle
Runs name on registration in AZ and no DL hits.. (Why even run it? )
ASSumes the driver IS the registered owner AND does not have a DL

You keep writing ***umes which brings me back to your below the belt dig. I get what you're saying, the officer/warden was an @ss by making assumptions. But I'm seeing you make a whole lot of assumptions as well here.

What happens after that doesn't really matter.. as nothin illegal had been done.. the officer says traffic infraction but doesn't issue a citation.. so was it a traffic violation that initiated the stop or the fact that the registered owner to the vehicle and being a male and not in the AZ MVD DL data base..

An infraction doesn't equal citation. And there's no requirement that an infraction be cited. There are plenty of things I've stopped a driver for but never cited. So thats plausible.



ETA::

Maybe I am looking at this all wrong..

Does having an anti LE attitude or perceived anti attitude give you RS to think that person is a criminal? Does it give an officer the right to investigate further? I'm sure it peaks your interest.

Its hard to generalize without any context, but IMO no. If someone's openly hostile I'll surely wonder why, and maybe will look and see if there's anything that would explain the hostility (ie parolee). Really, the type of the contact will dictate the scope of the investigation far more than attitude.

Making the assumption that what you said is exactly how it happened and there are no other facts, I'm scratching my head at the, ah, thoroughness of the warden. (They called wardens there?) If you think it was out of line, (really, only you can say), by all means file a complaint.

[hitman13]

So, maybe I missed it, but is the vehicle registered in AZ or CA?