Beta
×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

Search and Seizure at the Supreme Court

CowboyNeal posted more than 10 years ago | from the gideon's-trumpet dept.

Privacy 1636

Pemdas writes "On March 22nd, the U.S. Supreme Court is slated to hear a case involving an arrest for lack of producing ID on the demand of a police officer. Dudley Hiibel was parked off the road, and was asked 11 times to show ID to the police officer, who gave the justification of 'investigating an investigation.' Finally, he was arrested, and eventually convicted of delaying a police officer,' and fined $250. The incident occurred in Humboldt County, Nevada; Mr. Hiibel's side of the story includes a good section on Terry stops, and has a video of the incident for download. The parallels to the previously covered Gilmore v. Ashcroft case are striking, and the ruling will be an interesting precedent on the issue of requiring ID's. The ACLU, EPIC, and EFF, among others, have filed Amicus briefs in the case."

cancel ×

1636 comments

Sorry! There are no comments related to the filter you selected.

Don't forget... (-1)

SCO$699FeeTroll (695565) | more than 10 years ago | (#8334595)

...to pay your $699 licensing fee you cock-smoking teabaggers.

Batman touched my junk liberally. (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#8334607)

Batman touched my junk liberally. he strapped me in to his batmobile and he couldnt keep his offensive hands off of me. he was performing many red flag touches. i couldnt believe what the fuck was going on. i told batman the city would not approve of a millionaire touching an underage kid for free.

Can you believe it? Batman did all this. He picked me off the street, strapped my arms and legs down in the batmobile's passenger seat, and just wouldn't stop fondling my cock'n'balls.

They definately were red flag touches. the goddamn referee he had in the back seat kept on raising up this red flag every time he touched my junk but did batman care? NO WAY! He just kept on doing it. I couldn't believe what the fuck was going on, indeed. I pleaded with Mr. Wayne but to no avail. I told him the city would not approve of such a wealthy man touching an underage kid like me (at the time I was 13) without at least compensating me for the trauma and the use of my body as his own personal plaything.

This got to him, worrying about his image. He continued to fondle me, all the while ignoring the referee's red flags. Then he drove the batmobile to my house and *ejected the seat I was in*! It was amazing. But surprisingly, after I woke up the next morning, my bank account had $150k in it! Can you believe it?

Re:Batman touched my junk liberally. (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#8334791)

holy shit that the funniest thing i've read all year

Solution... (-1, Redundant)

EvilLiberalGuy (739004) | more than 10 years ago | (#8334611)

DEATH to the brownshirts who imprison those who refuse to identify themselves when they have obviously committed no crime and those same brownshirts who beat and torture innocents, such as this man's daughter!!!

Wear the yellow star (5, Insightful)

ObviousGuy (578567) | more than 10 years ago | (#8334623)

Slowly, slowly, we slide down this long road. Don't close your eyes, you'll miss the whole thing.

Re:Wear the yellow star (5, Informative)

AyeFly (242460) | more than 10 years ago | (#8334767)

How the heck did the yellow star post get marked as offtopic? do you have no knowledge of 20th century history? nazis made Jews wear yellow stars to publicly identify them... and you also had to show ID whenever an SS or Stormtrooper or police officer or judge or MP or any anonymous person asked for it. The above post is saying that the US can become like the nazi state if we allow this kind of raw authority into our civilization. At least, thats my take on it... and if you dont think so all i can say is, "Sieg Heil"

why ? (0, Interesting)

sir_cello (634395) | more than 10 years ago | (#8334624)


Why is this being reporting ? There's no way the Supreme Court will allow the officer to get away with this. It would create a horrible precedent: citizens would be obliged to take instruction from people they can't authenticate.

I THINK THE WORD YOU WANT IS "REPORTED" (-1, Flamebait)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#8334675)

Also, please gob my knob. I'm a police officer and you're required to help me investigate an investigation.

Re:why ? (1)

pavon (30274) | more than 10 years ago | (#8334692)

It would create a horrible precedent: citizens would be obliged to take instruction from people they can't authenticate.

I think you read that backwards it was the citizen who would not show his ID to the cop, not vice versa.

Re:why ? (1)

sir_cello (634395) | more than 10 years ago | (#8334776)


Looks like I read it backwards. Still got modded up to 5 though :-). Says a lot for the quality of material and people on slashdot. It's 3am where I am, so at least I have an excuse, but you guys on the east coast in the late evening don't have much of an excuse :-).

Re:why ? (5, Insightful)

nomadic (141991) | more than 10 years ago | (#8334710)

The Supreme Court has over the past two decades become far more accepting of searches, thanks primarily to the court's shift to the right, and the perceived threat of the "drug epidemic".

Re:why ? (1)

TedCheshireAcad (311748) | more than 10 years ago | (#8334732)

I've been asked for ID before from a cop for no particular reason. Being afraid of being arrested if I don't comply, I hand over my ID. Some day when I don't care about having a record, I'll say "how about YOU show ME some ID, asshole?"

In Soviet Russia.....nevermind.

Re:why ? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#8334781)

Consume, Conform, and Obey

like the good citizen you are!

Yes Big Brother, what can I do for You?

What is there to hide? (-1, Troll)

ajiva (156759) | more than 10 years ago | (#8334627)

It just doesn't make sense to be stubborn in front of a cop. If you have nothing to hide, show your damn license. The cop's gonna run a check, find nothing wrong and either leave you alone or ask you to leave. Why be a dumbass for NO GOOD REASON. Now if the person was staging a rally, or trying to protest something, yes I can understand. Ahhh well

Re:What is there to hide? (4, Insightful)

Borealis (84417) | more than 10 years ago | (#8334641)

If you're a cop, why harass somebody for no good reason? There's no reason to abuse your authority by forcing somebody to give you id if there's no real reason to investigate them.

Re:What is there to hide? (3, Interesting)

pnatural (59329) | more than 10 years ago | (#8334812)

Forgive me for generalizing, but most police that I've met or known personally have a common personality trait. Namely, they love their own authority, and they love to wield it. Anything you do that questions their authority provokes a canned response: time to harass you, arrest you, or otherwise ensure you know they're the one with the power.

This is just an observation; you may find it true or not. It might even help you to understand the motivation behind what they do, and if it does help you, you're one up on them.

Again, I apologize for the generalization. I'm sure it's not true for all police, but it's true for all the police with whom I've interacted.

Re:What is there to hide? (5, Insightful)

tsunamifirestorm (729508) | more than 10 years ago | (#8334644)

just because the innocent have nothing to hide, means that there is no reason for giving up our rights of privacy.

Re:What is there to hide? (4, Insightful)

asklepius (456552) | more than 10 years ago | (#8334660)

I agree that you shouldn't be stubborn in front of a cop, but that doesn't mean that cops can do whatever they want. The officer needs a reason to find out your identity, etc. They can't pull you over on the highway for nothing, why can they ask for ID for no reason if you are just hanging out on the side of the road. Sounds a little scary to me.

Re:What is there to hide? (4, Insightful)

Will242 (211296) | more than 10 years ago | (#8334738)

Did y'all read the article?

What everyone here seems to be missing is the fact that the officer was responding to a report (eg, some other citizen called the police) of domestic violence after seeing this guy argue with his daughter in the truck, and in fact, there had already been a physical exchange between the guy and his daughter.

Then, once additional officers arrive and the arrest is in progress the daugher tries to *phsyically force her way* past one of the cops. I just can't feel for the supposed "victims" in this case even after having read only their side of the story...

Re:What is there to hide? (5, Informative)

fishbowl (7759) | more than 10 years ago | (#8334679)

He HAS a good reason. The BEST reason. He is defending his (and your, and my) rights. Defense of your rights and fundamental freedoms is the ONLY thing worth killing or dying for.

Everything else is trivial.

One of the few things that distinguishes America as a free country is the absense of checkpoints and "papers please" where your very existence is presumed to be a crime until YOU demonstrate that you have a right to exist and that you are free to go.

Re:What is there to hide? (3, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#8334705)

Rights are like muscles. If you don't exercise them, you lose them.

Re:What is there to hide? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#8334709)

Be a good little Nazi and go along with the SS and there's nothing to worry about.

Drawing the line. (5, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#8334721)

If you have nothing to hide, show your damn license.

1. What's your name?
2. Can I see some ID?
3. What is your reason for being here?
4. Can I see what's in your trunk?
5. Can I see what's in your pockets?
6. Can I see what you have in your garage at home?
7. Can I take a look at the contents of your hard drive?

Where shall we draw the line, if not at #1 or #2?

I mean, heck, if you've got nothing to hide, and teh ID check came up clean, just let the cop look in your trunk and find nothing wrong. You may as well just let him have a quick look in your pockets, also, because he'll find nothing wrong unless you have something to hide. If the officer is conducting an investigation and you have nothing to hide, then there's no reason to not let him look in your garage at home, either, unless you have something to hide. If you have nothing to hide, there's no reason to not let him look at the contents of your hard drive either, since he'll find nothing wrong.

Re:Drawing the line. (3, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#8334789)

What has it gots in its pocketses?

it's called refusing a resonable request. (0, Troll)

p51d007 (656414) | more than 10 years ago | (#8334733)

When are people going to get it through their thick skulls. Driving an automobile (since this guy was parked IN a car) is considered a PRIVLEDGE, not a right. If you read the driving manual for any state, it will have in it (paraphrasing) "driving is a privledge granted by the department of revenue of (insert your own state). This priveledge can be revoked at such time by the director of revenue. Also, according the the laws (at least in my state), if you FAIL to produce an ID, as requested by an officer, then you may be arrested for "failing to obey a resonable request by an officer" We have laws for a reason, and when someone doesn't like one, they whinnnnneeeeee and complain instead of using the system to get the law changed. I don't like a lot of the laws on the books, but I'm not going to break them, I'm going to work within the system to get them changed, leagally.

Re:What is there to hide? (1, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#8334735)

Please bend over while the nice officer pulls on his latex glove for your cavity search. After all, he's investigatin an investigation.

If I'm parked somewhere doing no wrong in the US, I don't need to prove who I am. Now, if this were Soviet Russia 20 years ago, occupied Germany 60 years ago, etc. Sure. But I'm trying to remember what the diference there is...

Re:What is there to hide? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#8334769)

of course that's the only sensible thing to do. why stop at showing your license? may as well allow them to go ahead and search you. they are just doing their job, right? might as well make it a good search while you're at it... bend over and cough please. and why stop there? you wouldn't mind peeing in this cup, would you? might as well hand over your laptop to make sure every thing on the hard drive is in order there is well...

Wow (3, Funny)

cptgrudge (177113) | more than 10 years ago | (#8334628)

The first thing that ran through my head while reading the summary was a Nazi German saying, "Your papers, please."

Imagine my surprise when the site of the article is papersplease.org [papersplease.org] .

Republicans 5-4 (-1, Flamebait)

BoomerSooner (308737) | more than 10 years ago | (#8334630)

Liberty is dead in America (US). Ashcroft, Bush, etc...

Just remember in 2004 anyone else is a better choice.

Re:Republicans 5-4 (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#8334649)

Lousy democrats

Re:Republicans 5-4 (1, Offtopic)

boobsea (728173) | more than 10 years ago | (#8334809)

It was many of your "Democrats" in the Supreme Court who recently found the anti-free speech parts of the campaign finance laws to be perfectly constitutional

Lesson learned (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#8334631)

Don't have sex with underage boys along the side of the road.

It's that simple

Next story please.

Silly me, and I thought... (4, Funny)

Kjella (173770) | more than 10 years ago | (#8334634)

'investigating an investigation.'

...it was Internal Affairs that "investigated investigations". Oh well...

Kjella

Re:Silly me, and I thought... (3, Funny)

Bingo Foo (179380) | more than 10 years ago | (#8334670)

Yeah, he should have told the officer that that sounded like a conflict of interest. Then he would have been let go for sure.

Laws (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#8334639)

What is wrong in america are the open ended laws that allow people in authority to decide what is illegal or not. For example, the supreme court ruled that constitutional rights do not stop at school, yet there are still dresscodes at public schools. You could delay a cop by talking to them.
-Stu

I URGE YOU TO CONSIDER MORE IMPORTANT ISSUES (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#8334640)

Such as, who will Meredith choose: Matthew or Ian?

Welcome to the Police State (5, Insightful)

madMingusMax (693022) | more than 10 years ago | (#8334647)

Produce your papers, comrade.
Always carry your papers, comrade.
Do not question us, comrade; that, of course, is our job.

Did I just wake up in 1950s Communist Russia?

I quote Michael Moore: "Dude, where the hell did my country go?!?!"

Re:Welcome to the Police State (1, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#8334826)

Ugh, and you pick Michael Moore to quote?
How easy will it be to force people to do things against their will when we have no guns to defend ourselves?
but, of course, that can't happen here, right?

How can they do that? (4, Interesting)

scribblej (195445) | more than 10 years ago | (#8334650)

I love to watch COPS. I know, I'm a horrible exampe of white trash. But I just can't resist. I see things like this happen on COPS all the time - no really, watch it and you'll see. And I always wonder, "How the *hell* can they do that?!"

You'll see them come up to some guy who seems like he's just minding his own business, and they'll totally abuse his rights -- although in their defense, in the end, the guy always ends up being guilty of something.

This seems like as good a time as any to ask - how CAN they do that?

Re:How can they do that? (2, Insightful)

GigsVT (208848) | more than 10 years ago | (#8334684)

That's the answer to the guy who trotted out the "if you have nothing to hide" line.

They can do it because no one fights back.

Re:How can they do that? (selective Editing) (4, Insightful)

G4from128k (686170) | more than 10 years ago | (#8334736)

You'll see them come up to some guy who seems like he's just minding his own business, and they'll totally abuse his rights -- although in their defense, in the end, the guy always ends up being guilty of something. No one sees the COPS footage were the innocent person was abused, found to be innocent, and then let go -- that would not make good TV.

You wish (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#8334798)

Ever been to Lakewood, WA?

Not an innocent babe in the city.

Re:How can they do that? (1)

ThomK (194273) | more than 10 years ago | (#8334801)

You'll see them come up to some guy who seems like he's just minding his own business, and they'll totally abuse his rights -- although in their defense, in the end, the guy always ends up being guilty of something.

Yeah, on COPS he does!

Re:How can they do that? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#8334804)

You'll see them come up to some guy who seems like he's just minding his own business, and they'll totally abuse his rights -- although in their defense, in the end, the guy always ends up being guilty of something.

This seems like as good a time as any to ask - how CAN they do that?


Simple. They use the latest and greatest tools [fiskars.com] to edit out the civil-rights violations.

Re:How can they do that? (4, Insightful)

Tassach (137772) | more than 10 years ago | (#8334806)

the guy always ends up being guilty of something
Well, there are so many laws on the books that it's almost impossible for anyone go through a normal day without breaking a few laws. Plus, it doesn't take a rocket scientist to play "spot-the-stoner". And of course we're talking about TV... all the stops they make that don't result in an arrest wind up on the cutting room floor
This seems like as good a time as any to ask - how CAN they do that?
Because we let them.

There are 4 boxes to use in the defense of liberty: soap, ballot, jury, ammo. Use in that order. Starting now.

Any Relevant Links????!!! (-1, Troll)

Pave Low (566880) | more than 10 years ago | (#8334652)

What a horrible submission. Other than the submitter's own words, there's no link to any summary of the case. The docket doesn't show very informative. Instead we have links to the Supreme Court, ACLU, EPIC, EFF (gee, thanks, how else would we have ever found them). And the only link to one side's story is slashdotted.

So where can I actually find a real story that verifies what the submitter is talking about? I would like to actually read about this case.

Ooooh, let me think.... (-1, Troll)

Chuck Chunder (21021) | more than 10 years ago | (#8334720)

I wonder if Google [google.com] has anything. Oooh, what a fucking surprise, it does! And with "Dudley Hiibel" being such a common name too.....

HERE IS A RELEVANT LINK (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#8334729)

http://www.talkleft.com/archives/005908.html#00590 8

TOOK 2 SECONDS TO FIND ON GOOGLE, YOU'RE WELCOME.

Take 3 seconds next time... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#8334827)

And encode the URL [talkleft.com] .

I spent 8 hours in jail for this (5, Interesting)

spun (1352) | more than 10 years ago | (#8334654)

I was coming home from a party in LA thrown by CRAPTV (the folks who brought us 'Orgasmo') and I made the mistake of getting a ride from a fellow party goer who was slightly tipsy. The cops stopped her after she made a right turn from the left lane. At the time, all I had was a Hawaii state ID. The cops couldn't find me in the computer system, so they said, "Well, legally, we can hold you for up to three days while we try to find out who you are." I was in a cell for eight hours. Finally they came in and said, "We found you. You're free to go." No apology, of course. Welcome to Kalifornia, may we see your papers?

Re:I spent 8 hours in jail for this (1, Interesting)

scribblej (195445) | more than 10 years ago | (#8334739)

Unreal! I'm not a lawyer... so someone who is, please tell me how this is legal!

thank you John Asscroft! (5, Informative)

segment (695309) | more than 10 years ago | (#8334822)

Don't feel bad there's not much you as an individual can do unless you have a boatload of money to throw around...

In 1952, the McCarran-Walter Immigration Act mandated 3 million non-citizens to carry ID cards and threatened 11 million naturalized citizens with deportation if they were charged with being communists. A bus drivers' union official was grabbed from the bargaining table where he was successfully negotiating a wage increase and shorter hours and held at Ellis Island, New York for deportation to Canada. Harry Bridges, for decades the leader of the San Francisco Longshoremen, was harassed with repeated deportation efforts. source [lrna.org]

Don't worry though the USA PATRIOT ACT's will take care of all your problems.

Putting a stop to this now. (5, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#8334659)

No doubt there will be posters who are want to argue the facts in the case, to argue the internet does'nt tell boths sides of the story. But to pre-empt them: it doesn't matter! The case is going before the Supreme court because the courts based their rulings on a state law that requires ID to be shown when requested by an officer. None of that other stuff matters a wit; it was after all only a $250 fine anyway.

Thus this case really is about whether or not it is legal to require people to show ID.

I think this is ridiculous, since this would imply that you must carry ID at all times just in case.

don't do the crime (-1, Funny)

Hall and Oates (575706) | more than 10 years ago | (#8334663)

if you can't do the time.

Only a criminal would have to be concerned with this issue, because if you're not doing anything wrong, you've got nothing to worry about and should show the police your ID ASAP.

Re:don't do the crime (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#8334783)

Yes. Only a Jew or a Negro should be concerned with oppression and authority overstepping its boundaries. A white guy shouldn't worry, because he has nothing to worry about, because the police are his friends right?

Re:don't do the crime (1, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#8334800)

That is funny...

Well, I'm not a criminal, but I'm concerned about this issue. I don't have the time if a cop decides I need to stop and display ID at his whim. I have things to do, I'm not committing any crimes, don't waste my time with your insecurities and need to push your authority on someone (which in most cases is what it's really about).

His webserver must not have shown ID (5, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#8334666)

Apparently it's been arrested.

mod this parent up funny you clods (I'm off today) (0, Offtopic)

osjedi (9084) | more than 10 years ago | (#8334831)

I've got no points today. Someone else do it.

Probable Cause? (4, Interesting)

Supp0rtLinux (594509) | more than 10 years ago | (#8334672)

I wasn't aware that "parking off the road" was probable cause to "investigate an investigation". Surely this is a free country and so long as he wasn't trespassing, parking on the side of the road isn't a crime? I see truck drivers do it all the time. Are they required to show ID? Not to mention, its not just the $250 fine or the invasion of privacy that's at issue. There's also the impound fees, the potential bail/bond fees and lost interest on funds that could be sitting in a bank account, not to mention possible lost time at work, etc. This is what is known as a cop having nothing better to do with his time.
I had a similar issue arise recently in which I was stopped while driving to a shooting range and suspected of possibly having a stolen vehicle. I was searched and the gun I was taking to the range was found and confiscated (I live in California where just owning a gun is typically considered a crime). Thankfully, I showed proof of legal ownership of my truck *before* the search which removed the probably cause (not that transporting a gun was a crime anyway). The judge realized this and dismissed the case. But again, its an example of cop on a power trip. Once you refuse to cooperate, they act like the judges themselves instead of just the peace officers they're supposed to be.

The only thing necessary for Micro$oft to triumph is for a few good programmers to do nothing". North County Computers [nccomp.com]

Re:Probable Cause? (1)

GigsVT (208848) | more than 10 years ago | (#8334811)

I believe the standard you are looking for is "reasonable suspicion", to merely stop and request ID.

I do think they would need probable cause to actually detain someone against their will.

IANAL.

Just don't get it (4, Informative)

Docrates (148350) | more than 10 years ago | (#8334676)

I live in Panama (in Central America, not FL) and here, like in most other places in Latin America, you have a Cedula, basically a national ID. When a law enforcement agent asks you for your ID, you show it to them. If you don't it means that A) you don't have one because you're an illegal immigrant or B) you're a convicted felon and have escaped from prison...or something to that extent.

I fail to see what's so horrible about this system. I'm not trolling, I really don't see it. Comments are most welcome.

Re:Just don't get it (4, Insightful)

GigsVT (208848) | more than 10 years ago | (#8334714)

Have you ever asked a blind man to describe what "red" look like?

Re:Just don't get it (1)

Kenja (541830) | more than 10 years ago | (#8334754)

"Have you ever asked a blind man to describe what "red" look like?"

Yes, he said it looked like music tastes.

Re:Just don't get it (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#8334745)

The term "cedula" reminded me of the movie Salvador... Worth a watch.

Re:Just don't get it (2, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#8334757)

Yeah well, Panama, like pretty much everyplace else in SA, you pretty much are expected to do anything that a man in uniform with a gun orders you to do.

You don't see anything so horrible with that system because you are willing to live under it. One more day. Someday, somewhere, the reason you don't want to identify yourself to an authority figure will not be as obvious to you as "illegal immigrant" or "escaped felon."

It's happened before, in other parts of the world, where unthinkable things would be done to you simply because your papers indicated you were of the wrong ethnic group to be in this part of town after dark... So that's not the case in Panama today, but why are you so willing to give them the tools they need to oppress your people when they choose to?

When people aren't concerned about their liberties before it's too late, when it's too late, well, it's too late.

Re:Just don't get it (3, Insightful)

SparafucileMan (544171) | more than 10 years ago | (#8334832)

Actually, its not that they're willing to live under it. It's just that Panama has a habit of getting invaded by the United States, who always supports the military, who are the ones with the guns, who run the country. I mean christ, ever heard of the PANAMA CANAL?

Re:Just don't get it (1)

slifox (605302) | more than 10 years ago | (#8334766)

Whoops!

I forgot it in my other pants as I was only going to the store down the street.

Guess I'll be spending a night in jail while they try to identify me as not a convict!

Please board the train for relocation (4, Insightful)

Gothmolly (148874) | more than 10 years ago | (#8334773)

And when masses of people were herded onto trains for 'relocation', or into ghettos, because the State told them to do so, they were just obeying too. You don't see whats so horrible about it because you've been brought up in a State where this level of massification is accepted. I'm not trolling either, its just something thats very important to a people who (until recently) did not expect this sort of behavior from their police.

Not papers, just a name (4, Insightful)

bentini (161979) | more than 10 years ago | (#8334678)

The problem is that he didn't give his *name*, not his papers.

According to courts, you don't have a reasonable expectation to not have to give your name, because you use it all the time. You probably do, however, have a reasonable expectation of not having to rattle off any ID number that's private.

What's so wrong about giving a cop your name if you give it to everyone else?

Re:Not papers, just a name (1)

Gothmolly (148874) | more than 10 years ago | (#8334730)

No, he didn't have any identification to produce. Of course, the policeman should have busted him for driving without a license at this point, but remember, 1/2 the population has an IQ below 100.

Re:Not papers, just a name (1)

kevlar (13509) | more than 10 years ago | (#8334799)

He wasn't driving, he was parked on the side of the road.

Re:Not papers, just a name (1)

nsayer (86181) | more than 10 years ago | (#8334761)

According to what I read on the appelant's site (I may have missed something, and perhaps the site is a tad biased), the cop didn't even ask the guy his name, he simply demanded ID.

Yes, but... (1, Funny)

ShockerFan (741511) | more than 10 years ago | (#8334685)

Yes, but who will investigate the investigators' investigators?

I don't get it, what is the problem here ? (0, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#8334686)

Why didn't this guy just show his ID ? Was he a criminal ? How are we supposed to fight the war on terror if people have attitudes like this ? The cop was just doing his job. If this guy wasn't breaking the law why was he so scared of identifying himself ? No smoke without fire.

Read the full story (1, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#8334693)

The police office was responding to a possible domestic violence situation.

This was covered much more in depth on kuro5hin.org days ago!

Happened to me (4, Interesting)

Gothmolly (148874) | more than 10 years ago | (#8334694)

Several years ago, I ended up working late on some Microsoft catastrophe at work. By the time I got home at 1am, I was too keyed up to sleep, so I went for a walk. This is in a suburban-rural area, typical small town neighborhood. While walking around, a police cruiser pulls up, the window rolled down, and the spotlight went in my face. The conversation went something like:

Cop: Hey pal, whats going on?
Me: Nothing, just out for a walk.
Cop: Kind of late for that.
Me: Well I just got home from work and I'm still really awake.
Cop: Got any ID?
Me: Um sure..whats going on? (fumbled for wallet, gave license)
Cop: (mutters into radio with my info)
Me: Is there some problem, has there been a crime reported?
Cop: Um yes, we've had reports of someone walking around.
At this point, a truck LOADED with lawn furniture, to the point where it's mounded up in the back, with ropes holding it in, drives by. Driver and passenger of said truck watch carefully. Eventually, I was released, after being asked if I was wanted for anything. Had I been old (was 24 at the time), or walking a dog, or female, I'm sure none of that would have happened.

Re:Happened to me (5, Funny)

Neil Blender (555885) | more than 10 years ago | (#8334765)

I ended up working late on some Microsoft catastrophe at work.

Nice. Work in a dig at Microsoft. Ah, Slashdot.

Re:Happened to me (1)

dnixon112 (663069) | more than 10 years ago | (#8334823)

As much as I can sympathize with how you were inconvenienced, if it was nothing more then 10 minutes of your time I would consider that a job well done by the cops. The fact of the matter is, young males commit most crimes, don't take it personally. And although in some regards it's troubling to see the steps the US government is taking in terms of law enforcement, stopping people who look suspicious (even if they're innocent) late at night to ask them what they're doing is not something I consider a breach of privacy or any other such nonsense.

Mirror? (1)

at_kernel_99 (659988) | more than 10 years ago | (#8334695)

Can someone post a mirror, or a direct link to the story so we can use the Google cache? The mother's /.ed already.

This is why.. (1)

pantycrickets (694774) | more than 10 years ago | (#8334703)

www.fuckacop.com [fuckacop.com] exists.

How could it get this far? (1)

phriedom (561200) | more than 10 years ago | (#8334707)

I think it is really sad that none of the lower courts that heard this case overturned it.

Fabulous! (0)

Cytop1asm (751794) | more than 10 years ago | (#8334711)

If you knowingly did nothing wrong, then why would you withold your license? For the principle of the thing? It would make so much more sense to show your ID to save from paying $250 especially if you know you did nothing wrong.
The police officer has every right in this case to demand the ID and arrest him if he doesn't give some sort of identification.

ACLU (4, Informative)

Neil Blender (555885) | more than 10 years ago | (#8334713)

Even the ACLU says to you have to show ID when stopped in a car. (read here [aclu.org] ) It is irrelevent whether or not you are parked. (You can get a dui for sitting in the driver seat of a parked car with the engine off.)

Re:ACLU (1)

toast0 (63707) | more than 10 years ago | (#8334792)

The father was not in the car. He was meerly near the car.

The EFF? (3, Insightful)

JoeBaldwin (727345) | more than 10 years ago | (#8334722)

While it's nice to have them on his side, why would the EFF want to be in this case? I thought their brief was *electronic* rights.

In Solviet Russia... (-1, Troll)

Little Brother (122447) | more than 10 years ago | (#8334726)

The cops arrest YOU for not showing papers. Wait, I didn't have to reverse it this time, what's going on?

Re:In Solviet Russia... (-1, Troll)

adrianbaugh (696007) | more than 10 years ago | (#8334762)

You got it wrong though. I think you meant:

In Soviet America, the cops arrest YOU for not showing papers ;-)

Article text (1)

jericho34 (542866) | more than 10 years ago | (#8334731)

Meet Dudley Hiibel. He's a 59 year old cowboy who owns a small ranch outside of Winnemucca, Nevada. He lives a simple life, but he's his own man. You probably never would have heard of Dudley Hiibel if it weren't for his belief in the U.S. Constitution. One balmy May evening back in 2000, Dudley was standing around minding his own business when all of a sudden, a policeman pulled-up and demanded that Dudley produce his ID. Dudley, having done nothing wrong, declined. He was arrested and charged with "failure to cooperate" for refusing to show ID on demand. And it's all on video. On the 22nd of March 2004, the U.S. Supreme Court will decide whether Dudley and the rest of us live in a free society, or in a country where we must show "the papers" whenever a cop demands them Welcome to Humboldt County. Papers, Please. No? You're Under Arrest.

This was on Kuro5hin (5, Interesting)

ryancerium (665165) | more than 10 years ago | (#8334740)

Some of the comments [kuro5hin.org] on K5 were very good, especially the ones by people who RTFA and watched the friendly video. Despite my own right-sided tendencies, I don't side with this guy. He'd been drinking, he'd been arguing, he was rude to the cop (which shouldn't be illegal, but is certainly stupid), and generally isn't a good guy. There are insinuations that the subtitles in the video don't actually agree with what people are actually saying, which makes his position appear weaker.

I hope not carrying ID, or not giving it out w/out good reason, stays legal, but I also hope that drunk, obnoxious jerks get regulated on.

The Nazification of America (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#8334744)

Otherwise known as the Bush presidency.

There are some things I like about Bush but overall, I hate what he's done to America. He's turned it into an ugly, uncaring caricature.

I wouldn't be too upset if Bush were killed.

Perhaps he was an MBA? (0, Offtopic)

twoslice (457793) | more than 10 years ago | (#8334747)


A little OT but very funny...

Three MBAs and three engineers are traveling by train to a conference. At the station, the three MBAs each buy tickets and watch as the three engineers buy only a single ticket.

"How are three people going to travel on only one ticket?" asks a MBA.

"Watch and you'll see," answers an engineer.

They all board the train. The MBAs take their respective seats but all three engineers cram into a restroom and close the door behind them. Shortly after the train has departed, the conductor comes around collecting tickets. He knocks on the restroom door and says, "Ticket, please."

The door opens just a crack and a single arm emerges with a ticket in hand. The conductor takes it and moves on.

The MBAs saw this and agreed it was quite a clever idea. So after the conference, the MBAs decide to copy the engineers on the return trip and save some money (recognizing the engineers' superior intellect). When they get to the station, they buy a single ticket for the return trip. To their astonishment, the engineers don't buy a ticket at all.

"How are you going to travel without a ticket?" says one perplexed MBA.

"Watch and you'll see," answers an engineer.

When they board the train the three MBAs cram into a restroom and the three engineers cram into another one nearby. The train departs. Shortly afterward, one of the engineers leaves his restroom and walks over to the restroom where the MBAs are hiding. He knocks on the door and says, "Ticket, please."

I think I'm required to here in California anyway. (1, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#8334752)

Specifically, the contract on being granted my Drivers License (or CA ID) is that I submit it upon demand by a "peace officer".

Now, that's completely different from being required to carry it at all (Save, of course, while driving). But if I DO have it, I believe I'm required to surrender it.

I don't know what restrictions surround something like a Passport.

I was arrested for this offense in Texas (5, Interesting)

jpnews (647965) | more than 10 years ago | (#8334763)

Long story short: Last year a newbie Sheriff's deputy arrested me for "failure to I.D." I was walking back from the store early in the morning, and a cop who I'd already had an incident with demanded my I.D. I'm fairly well-versed in Texas law on the matter, and I knew I was right.

Anyway, I plead not guilty and the deputy didn't show up at trial. I'm currently in the process of having the arrest record expunged.

The bottom line on this is: Constitutionally, every search or siezure must be reasonable, which the courts have decided means that reasonable suspicion must exist. If you're just walking down the street (like I was), and you don't match the description of a person wanted for a crime, and you're not committing a crime, there's no reason you should be compelled to identify yourself. Period.

So Tempting (-1, Redundant)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#8334772)

In America, cop asks for ID.
In Soviet Russia...wait...

Interesting questioni (1)

foidulus (743482) | more than 10 years ago | (#8334774)

Though it's an interesting point, the fact that he was in his car on the side of the road. The only way you can get into a car on the side of the road is if you drove that car(most likely), so in order to drive the car you must have a license. The cop is morally responsible to make sure that someone who doesn't have a license(a repeat drunk drive for example) isn't on the road, so maybe the question is what powers do the police have to police the road to make sure everyone is safe versus the right for people to maintain their privacy? I wish there was an easy answer to that, on one hand you don't want a police state, but on the other hand, you don't want 15 year olds cruising down the road in their mom's station wagon.
I'd like to hear what other people think on this topic.

I write a weekly newspaper column (4, Informative)

prisoner (133137) | more than 10 years ago | (#8334782)

and I talk about this subject with some frequency. Judging from the feedback I get, most people just don't get it or don't care. Most believe that if you have nothing to hide, it shouldn't be a problem. I've been searching for a more elegant way to rebut this other than saying its just dead wrong but have yet to come up with it.

People equate the "papers please" line to movies about Nazi Germany or Soviet Russia but I think we are closer than most of us would admit.

btw, if you've got a good way to rebut this that doesn't include fuck or asshole, I'm all ears biatches...:)

What's wrong with asking for ID? (1, Interesting)

Zerbey (15536) | more than 10 years ago | (#8334796)

OK, I have not read the article so can't comment on this case (the site's /.'d :(). Why do so many people get worked up when a cop asks for you id?

Case in point, which has been getting a lot of coverage in FL recently. A man was shot and killed by police because they thought he was a fugitive, it turns out he wasn't the man they where after - he was a law abiding citizen. Reason he was shot: he ran from the police when they tried to pull him over, when they finally caught up to him he reached for something in his pocket that the office thought was a gun (turned out it wasn'). I'm sorry the guy's dead, but if he'd just stopped and showed his ID he'd have been sent on his way and two families lives wouldn't be ruined.

Yes, it's an extreme example I know but you see my point. Just show your id, if you've nothing to hide why worry?

While it's bad, it's not as bad as implied (5, Informative)

strech (167037) | more than 10 years ago | (#8334819)

The site goes on about the cop saying he was "investigating an investigation" and implies the cop gave no reason for it or anything.

Which is overstating.

The cop never said he was "investigating an investigation" from watching the video. He did, however, say to the man as soon as he got there something along the lines "I'm investigating reports of a fight between you two" indicating the man and the woman in the car.

And the person asked for ID was fairly belligerent. He kept on asking the officer to arrest him.

The charge isn't specifically a law that makes it illegal to present ID, I think (though I'm not sure), it's a charge of obstructing a peace officer. Which may be from aforesaid law, but I didn't see that when I looked before.

This sounds like a good way (2, Informative)

nija (667087) | more than 10 years ago | (#8334820)

to Flex Your Rights [flexyourrights.org] as an American. Know what to do in a situation such as this. Remeber there are checks and balances and they work both ways. I think this precendent (being set by the policeman) is a bad one, and it could run us down a very slippery slope.

Duh! (4, Informative)

El (94934) | more than 10 years ago | (#8334828)

Mimi Hiibel was hauled-off to juvenile detention and charged with resisting arrest. In court, her father asked the judge a simple question: what charge was Mimi arrested for resisting? The case was dismissed. This is true; at least in California, you cannot be arrested for the sole charge of "resisting arrest". The amazing thing is that they actually had to have a court case to set a precedent to establish this as part of California state law! By the way, you are also legally allowed to resist arrest if you beleive the officer intends to harm you in an unlawful manner -- but just try arguing THAT one in court!
Load More Comments
Slashdot Login

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?

Submission Text Formatting Tips

We support a small subset of HTML, namely these tags:

  • b
  • i
  • p
  • br
  • a
  • ol
  • ul
  • li
  • dl
  • dt
  • dd
  • em
  • strong
  • tt
  • blockquote
  • div
  • quote
  • ecode

"ecode" can be used for code snippets, for example:

<ecode>    while(1) { do_something(); } </ecode>