Additions/thoughts for notice to provide police with intent to exercise silence

Weston White

Member
Joined
Nov 16, 2007
Messages
4,956
Was looking for anything more to add, correct, thoughts, etc.; this being a notice to provide police during initial contacts (of any class), with the intent to exercise silence and preserve one's rights. ...Was thinking as either a printable PDF or a a static Web link (as an arrested person may not have access to a hardcopy.)
PREEMPTIVE RECISION OF POLICE ENCOUNTER NOTICE


Upon the present date and time, I am informing you that I do not consent to any consensual encounters, coercive or harassing acts, measures, or ruses, investigative or warrantless detentions, including interrogations, with or by any law enforcement personnel;

I hereunder exercise any and all immutable rights and privileges afforded to me, by our Creator granted birthrights, as both a United States citizen and permanent resident of the State of [STATE];

I hereby invoke my right to remain silent in accord with the findings of: Griffin v. California, 380 U. S. 609 (1965); Doyle v. Ohio, 426 U.S. 610 (1976); Jenkins v. Anderson, 447 U.S. 231 (1980); Salinas v. Texas, 570 US 178 (2013); et al;

Further, I do not whatsoever voluntarily consent to any forms or methodologies of testing or inspecting, or of any searches or seizures whatsoever of my person, my property, my real estate, or my personal effects and devices;

Additionally, I have no professional or personal interest in engaging to any degree or manner, or by any forum, in arguing, conversing, debating, or discussing with you about any topic, subject-matter, scuttlebutt, issue, or concern;

My subsequent silence, or my refusal to answer your questions, or any perceived delays in my responding to your inquiries, vocally or otherwise, shall not be construed or tacitly taken as neither an admission nor presumption of the guilt or innocence of me or any other person;

Until I have obtained the prudent advice of appropriate legal counsel I can neither confirm nor deny, nor can I articulate, explain, justify, rationalize, provide quotations, information, descriptions, data, or citations to any of your concerns, demands, hypothesis, inquiries, notions, reconstructions, requests, theories, thoughts, or questions;

This instant notice shall remain as a standing statement throughout the entire duration of any, each, and every attempt at confronting, contacting, or conversing with me by you or your department, bureau, or agency—effectively from now, until the end of the world;

As this contact presently affects me and is applicable to this specific case or circumstance, I respectfully demand to immediately: 1) be set free, unmolested, along with all of my personal property, effects, and devices returned to my possession, 2) be processed and released as stated supra, or booked into jail, 3) be cited and released as stated supra, 4) receive the specialized assistance of a qualified public defender, 5) be taken before your local magistrate under habeas corpus.

Therefore, I am obliged to take all available passive and peaceful actions necessary and prudent so as to avoid any and all further contact with you or any other official associated with you.


So signed,

/s/​
 
Hard truth: Your rights in court exist to the extent that you have competent legal representation, and not one millimeter beyond that. If you are stopped by the police, and ask to speak to your lawyer, they'll leave you alone beyond the formalities of booking you. The worst they can do to you for refusing to answer questions is add other charges that would be thrown out because you actually have the right not to answer them. Trying to play legal-eagle with cops on the side of the road (or in your house) is a total waste of time and can only make things worse for you. As a rule, they know they do not understand the law beyond whatever legal coaching they were given by some intern from the DA's office who gave a Saturday afternoon presentation on how to meet quota with these 5 weird legal tricks. You can always refuse to speak without being socially awkward or weird. The cops are free to misconstrue your words/behavior however they want, and try to charge you according to their personal perceptions, but none of it will stick unless you say or do something that is actually legally stupid. The catch is that, if you are ever arrested for any reason (false charges or otherwise), you need to be prepared to at least spend the night in jail. I've often thought that America is the land of the free and home of the brave... but anyone, anywhere, at any time can be kidnapped and forced to spend the night in jail on any pretext, no matter how outlandish because "it'll get cleared up in court in the morning." Oh yeah... behold how free and brave we are....
 
Last edited:
Usually if you confess your crime, the Officer will forgive you and let you go on your way

Honesty is the best policy :up:
 
You can always refuse to speak without being socially awkward or weird. The cops are free to misconstrue your words/behavior however they want

In some situations your silence can actually be used in court against you. Prior to being arrested, or being read your miranda rights, you must verbally invoke your right to remain silent, if you don't want your silence to be used against you in court.

Source: I'm not a legal expert but I play one on TV sometimes
 
In some situations your silence can actually be used in court against you. Prior to being arrested, or being read your miranda rights, you must verbally invoke your right to remain silent, if you don't want your silence to be used against you in court.

Source: I'm not a legal expert but I play one on TV sometimes

Naw, your rights exist with or without "invoking", that's what makes them rights. Nevertheless, there is no harm in giving the officers a clear explanation that you will not be talking to them in any way, shape or form beyond informing them that you will not be talking to them in any way, shape or form. So, if the cop is going pitbull-mode with the bulging forehead-vein, you're better off talking him down off the ledge rather than giving him "suspicious", "hostile" silent-treatment. "I would love to explain everything to you officer, tell you what, after this is all said and done I'll buy you a beer and explain my situation to you. But for now, the only person I'll be speaking to is my lawyer, thank-you-very-much."

 
I agree with you, but the courts don't agree with us. See Salinas v. Texas


The legal mistake was in speaking to the police at all (about the crime). If you begin an interview with the police, then suddenly decide to stop talking to them when they ask an inconvenient question, that will be used against you. The way to avoid that is not to start talking to them to begin with.

The problem with a lot of "Internet lawyers" is that they misconstrue "right to remain silent" into some kind of weird standoff where you must remain absolutely silent or somehow the prosecutor will be able to use any word you have spoken, against you, even the words that merely pertain to the logistics of your interaction with the officer. As long as you're not stupid, you can verbally inform the police, "I don't want to speak to you about this matter, I want to speak to my lawyer", and it's going to be binding on them and there will be no legal trick the prosecutor can hang you on. You are always free to inform the police of the legal decision you are making and there's nothing the court is going to do against you for that.

Whether or not you explicitly "invoke" your Miranda rights (or the police read them to you), you have them so long as you actually exercise them. But if you start talking, then stop, you already ceded your Miranda rights as far as you did speak, and so your silence can indeed be construed against you at that point. Now, if someone has made the mistake of talking to the police, and they realize they should shut up, well, they should shut up and stick to that, but there may very well be legal repercussions just from the initial interview and nothing can be done about that. You can't waive your Miranda rights in an interview, and then retroactively un-waive them because the interview didn't go the way you wanted. If you want them, exercise them.

PS: Upon re-reading the Salinas article, I see that I didn't realize what an awful ruling that is. I think that Salinas may have incriminated himself by agreeing to speak, and then becoming silent upon being asked about the shells, but the idea that there is a general principle you must "give notice" to the government in order to have your 5th amendment right is ludicrous. Do we have to "give notice" that we intend to exercise our 1st and 2nd amendment rights also, and the default is they don't exist unless we invoked them? Absurd!
 
Last edited:
Back
Top