Live data from Hacker News

Reminder: Oh, Won't You Please Shut Up? (2011)

popehat.com

141–150 of 216 posts

Re: Reminder: Oh, Won't You Please Shut Up? (2011)

#141
post #131

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> It's a police force that handles an area which has just 7400 residents. And about 300,000 daily commuters. What's the commuter/resident ratio for Ferguson? The City of London Police also have certain national responsibilities, in the fields of fraud and intellectual property.

I suppose the problem in Ferguson is more about out-of-town shoppers than commuters. Specifically, out-of-town shoppers for controlled substances. So this is yet another symptom/consequence/whatever in the war on drugs. Just because you made me interested, I googled and found e.g. this: http://www.latimes.com/nation/la-na-darren-wilson-arrest-201... Should Brooks, a resident, and Johnson, a non-resident, have been ar…

Well, your comment on London got me interested, and while I couldn't find arrest-warrant stats for the City, I did find this: http://www.met.police.uk/foi/pdfs/disclosure_2014/april_2014...

Among Greater London's boroughs (not including the City), the out and out winner for outstanding arrest warrants, with more than twice as many as the runner-up (in both absolute terms and per head of population), was the City of Westminster. The vast majority of these -- 535 of 587 -- were for "other offences" (i.e., not actual bodily harm, burglary, robbery, possession of an offensive weapon, serious violence, or sexual offences). What do you suppose that's all about? Can't all be MPs fiddling their expenses.

Re: Reminder: Oh, Won't You Please Shut Up? (2011)

#142

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If you're a US citizen returning to the US, you actually are not obliged to answer their questions. That said, this is a pretty grey area and they certainly don't like it if you don't. https://greyenigma.wordpress.com/2012/03/30/i-am-detained-by...

Right, that's nice to know. I'm not a US citizen though, so I think I really need to answer those questions - without a lawyer - unless I want to be put back to the next plane heading back where I came from.

Basically, yes. It's an ugly situation and lots of people take the stance of never visiting the US because of it.

Re: Reminder: Oh, Won't You Please Shut Up? (2011)

#143

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There is an additional wrinkle here. The overwhelming majority of people prosecuted by the Feds are guilty of something (and not just of some "made up" crime). I worked for a federal appellate judge. Saw dozens of criminal cases come up on appeal. Didn't see a single one from the Feds where the evidence of guilt wasn't overwhelming (even if some convictions were defective for technical reasons, and even if some were…

Aaron Swartz

Aaron was clearly guilty of the crime he was charged with.

You can debate the morality of that crime being on the books, but it's clear that he did what he was charged with.

Re: Reminder: Oh, Won't You Please Shut Up? (2011)

#144

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There is an additional wrinkle here. The overwhelming majority of people prosecuted by the Feds are guilty of something (and not just of some "made up" crime). I worked for a federal appellate judge. Saw dozens of criminal cases come up on appeal. Didn't see a single one from the Feds where the evidence of guilt wasn't overwhelming (even if some convictions were defective for technical reasons, and even if some were…

Aaron Swartz

[deleted]

Re: Reminder: Oh, Won't You Please Shut Up? (2011)

#145
post #10

The question that I have every time I read about something similar to this is not about the law itself, but about the human who's applying the law: how/ why/ what is the line of thought that would lead them to (supposedly) knowingly do something like this? I realize that processes, bureaucracy and generally abstraction can allow people to do less than desirable behaviours, but I can't quite figure out which abstracti…

There is an additional wrinkle here. The overwhelming majority of people prosecuted by the Feds are guilty of something (and not just of some "made up" crime). I worked for a federal appellate judge. Saw dozens of criminal cases come up on appeal. Didn't see a single one from the Feds where the evidence of guilt wasn't overwhelming (even if some convictions were defective for technical reasons, and even if some were…

> The overwhelming majority of people prosecuted by the Feds are guilt.

That is not the right narrative for HN. The cop is the perp and the perp is the victim is taken as gospel here.

Re: Reminder: Oh, Won't You Please Shut Up? (2011)

#146
post #11

Actually over the years, I've found that shutting my mouth would be helpful not only when talking to law enforcement. Not always so good at carrying that out though. Anyways, it reminds of the time I was arrested for smoking the forbidden devil vegetable. We were brought into the city court room to be indicted while we were waiting two suburban white teenagers were in from the bench getting chewed out by the judge, s…

Not always so good at carrying that out though.

Ron White has a good line about this in his standup routine: "I had the right to remain silent... but I didn't have the ability"

Re: Reminder: Oh, Won't You Please Shut Up? (2011)

#147
post #3

> Hence, the government's chickenshit false statement trap works — even though the government agents set it up from the start. If you don't read Popehat, this might be the moment you realize it's a good idea to start. Very rarely do you see legal discussion detailed enough to be meaningful, while informal enough to hold your attention. Other discussions of note is the bizarre sentencing of Petraeus: https://www.popeh…

Another thing to note is that Popehat is a group blog. Ken does most of the posting and is the reason most people read but there are other posters too.

Re: Reminder: Oh, Won't You Please Shut Up? (2011)

#148
post #75
post #63

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If you read the ferguson report -- and I can't do it justice -- the police were systematically used to assault black people, and use them as a cash source to fund local government. Meanwhile, white people skated on the same charges. I can't do the report justice, but it's utterly appalling. And while white people might not know what is going on, trust me, black people damn sure do. To say the least, this does not imp…

Crazy stat : city of Ferguson has outstanding arrest warrants on more than half of its citizens. This is an insane police state! http://www.huffingtonpost.com/nathan-robinson/the-shocking-f...

This is the result of the crazy patchwork quilt of small municipalities in St Louis County. All of these municipalities need money and property taxes are usually not enough to fund the police etc.

So they use ticketing as a revenue generator and that has really screwed up the relationship between the officials and the people who live in those towns.

There's a tiny tiny town called St. John. It has a tiny tiny city limits boundary on the highway (I-170). Yet they use that to capture speeders and generate enormous revenue. Every local knows not to speed through that tiny corridor on 170. Then there's the next city boundary on the same highway and the one after. Often filled with speed traps.

There's one report here: http://www.thenewspaper.com/news/45/4542.asp

The whole county needs to consolidate all these tiny municipalities and put the police under one large force like Indianapolis or Louisville or others.

Re: Reminder: Oh, Won't You Please Shut Up? (2011)

#149

Earlier quoted context omitted.

No, I think that most Americans don't have a lawyer on call. The typical advice I have heard is to do a little research on lawyers in your city, and have a phone number of a reputable lawyer (or a few) in your wallet in case of a potentially severe legal situation. When you call them and establish a relationship where you are paying for their services they become "your lawyer". (this is not advice, I'm not a lawyer,…

> (this is not advice, I'm not a lawyer, etc) Related: will people sue you if you don't include that disclaimer?

If you are a lawyer, you need to make clear that something you say isn't "legal advice" because you can otherwise be held accountable for it.

I think the "IANAL" disclaimer is just a step beyond that so non-lawyers can't be mistaken for acting as lawyers giving out legal advice (not sure what liabilities that would entail).

Re: Reminder: Oh, Won't You Please Shut Up? (2011)

#150

Earlier quoted context omitted.

So how do you google for an appropriate lawyer when in custody and you only get one phone call? Not cynical, I really wonder. I guess the exact same problem exists where I live (the Netherlands).

In Germany, in many cities and towns, local attorney associations provide emergency phone numbers. The provide free legal advice on the phone and provide you with a free attorney for the duration emergency (e.g. while a search warrant is executed). Intrestingly, I just noticed that I have the number stored in my cell phone (since before I had a smart phone). That may not be the smartest way to do it.

Another German here. I have legal insurance. Comes with a card for your wallet listing a 24 hrs hotline that puts you in touch with a lawyer (for free) within seconds.

I've actually made use of it several times to get a professional opinion on difficult situations.

Post reply on HN