Dec 07 2005
No warrant, no entry.
“Toronto police admit that refusing to allow your residence to be searched in Parkdale this week could land you on the list of murder suspects in the dismemberment of a mystery woman…”
Thankfully, I do not live in Parkdale.
When Lisa and I first moved in together one of the first conversations we had about the new arrangements was the “No warrant, no entry” discussion. It’s not because I am a rabid civil libertarian (although I value the privacy of my home above many things), it’s because I am a firearms owner and while I do not fear the justice system (I am not a criminal yet) I do fear the bureaucratic minions of my betters in elected office.
I’ve read my fair share of horror stories about wrongful firearms confiscations based on an officers ignorance of the applicable legislation. The system is geared to take immediate action, it’s not particularly suited to making it’s own mistakes right once that action has been proven wrong. My home, as a result, has a strict policy in this regard.
I wish the officers the best of the luck in their inquiries. I’m thankful I don’t have to turn them away, today.
You should add to your house rules never allow the CAS entry to your home, and NEVER speak to them without a lawyer present. Not on the phone and not on your doorstep, just tell them your lawyer will contact them as soon as possible.
At least confiscated guns generally don’t suffer long-term effects once returned, unlike children; and CAS workers are even more ignorant of the law and power mad.
Never speak to cops. Ever. Have you ever heard of a cop getting kudos for having exonerating a suspect? Not bloodly likely.
Sorry, but that’s the advice that Cowboy Lawyer gives out. He also gives the same advice as Brenda on that topic as well.
I just spent a month being terrorized, along with the family, by a rabid, frothing at the mouth non-English speaking Mountie. We finally had to call in the legal counsel to make him grasp the words “Don’t call again” and “RCMP Public Complaints Commission”. I somehow suspect that it’s not the first time that he’s heard those words in relation to his activities.
I swear that half of the problem arose from him having clearly graduated from a french troop at Depot, meaning that the few questions I answered, he couldn’t understand the answers to. The scary thing? I wasn’t a suspect…I was a WITNESS!
Both She Who Must Be Obeyed and I agreed that the way that things went, if I didn’t happen to have a father who is a well known criminal defence lawyer and a retired cop, plus my having a good legal grounding of my own(Including knowing when the conversation has gone from “friendly” to “I’m trying to pin something on you”), I’d have been hooped. In other words, if my Dad was a plumber, I’d probably be in jail now.
I’m now understanding the advice my father gave me against becoming a cop. He was right, I’d have snapped and taken to beating co-workers about the head on a frequent basis. My counterpoint at the time was that I worked contract security, I’m used to working with morons. I’m actually beginning to doubt that I even experienced half of it.
Damn Greg, I think I missed a good (if irritating) story there, drop an email some time and fill in the blanks.
Yes you’re right, a lot of people have trouble with that transition when when dealing with the police. I’ve used the phrase “This conversation is over, unless I’m being charged.” more than once in my life. I suspect I’ll use it again.
CAS didn’t bear mentioning I figured, if I’m not allowing the police in, minor minions of the gummint are not coming in either.
As for talking with the police, well I’m comfortable with their most basic interogration tool, the “long uncomfortable silence” and don’t feel the need to fill it with my own ramblings and admissions (an exception to this is when I discuss zombie movies with them).
To use an entirely beaten to death expression, “I know my rights”.
-GRIN-
Toronto cops have springboarded from the “Holly Jones” case, where the villain turned out to be one of the (few) people who refused to consent to a ‘voluntary’ search. Applying this reasoning, can we next expect to be stopped on the 401 for no reason other than that some perp had previously been apprehended on the 401?
Police insisted, “… anything they inadvertently discover during a search would likely be ignored.” “Likely?” Well … isn’t that reassuring!? In my book, if it looks like a fishing expedition, and smells like a fishing expedition …
This is another instance of … “The innocent have nothing to fear.” And we all know about that one, don’t we?
http://www.butterfliesandwheels.com/badmovesprint.php?num=65
“They that can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety.” — Benjamin Franklin, 1759