New answers tagged

0

Note that it's pretty obviously not illegal to simply possess another person's ID--it's not exactly an unusual situation with couples. I have handed plenty (probably upwards of 100) of government officials my wife's passport, nobody has ever had a problem with that.


5

NO It is decided state-by-state (for state-wide agencies like state troopers), and county by county, and city-by-city whether or not to buy and use cameras. Also, they are not usually always running. Policies as to when officers are required to turn them on vary as well as when the public and the involved officers get access to the recordings.


37

I think the officer is probably lying, not just mistaken, but he is not required to always be truthful. In addition to the law against possessing ID with intent commit, or to aid or abet, any crime, it is also against the law to be knowingly in possession of a stolen credit card, or any other property. An exaple of a strict-liability possession crime, which ...


27

Looking at Washington's Identity Theft statute RCW 9.35.020 No person may knowingly obtain, possess, use, or transfer a means of identification or financial information of another person, living or dead, with the intent to commit, or to aid or abet, any crime. So, just possessing someone else's credit card is not a crime as long as one does not have the ...


3

No. The police cannot determine if you have a lawful reason to know the details. Not their job. You can file your civil case using fictitious defendant name and then just apply for a court order to disclose who the guy actually is as part of the disclosure process. Provided that the court is satisfied you have a case, it will grant such order and the police ...


3

There is no such thing, legally, as "an attack on someone's writing". The only way in which any use of one person's writing by another could be the subject of legal action would be if it infringed copyright. But individual words, short phrases, and individual numbers are not subject to copyright protection. In theory such things might be protected ...


15

No. There's nothing in neither the Gambling Act 2005 nor the Police Regulations 2003 specifically preventing police officers from buying lottery tickets (or gambling in general for that matter). The principal requirement from the Police Regulations is at Schedule 1, para 1 which is to do it (like everything else in life) sensibly: A member of a police force ...


0

As far as I know, law enforcement does have the choice of whether or not they tell you the details. Obviously, they can't tell you everything about this person, but they can choose whether or not to tell you simple things like the criminal's name.


4

Let's break it apart: The police has an union or charity. That's legal in most jurisdictions. The union or charity accepts donations from non-police. Also legal in most jurisdictions. The union communicates who the donors are. Generally legal in most jurisdictions. Keeping it secret would be just as problematic. Police officers have some discretion if and ...


-5

The typical situation is that a supporter of the Police Benevolent Association can get a card, which says something like "The bearer of this card is a supporter of the PBA and you should try to extend every courtesy possible". This is entirely legal and is not corrupt or fraudulent. Law enforcement officers can exercise discretion in enforcing the ...


4

Whether any person, provided that they are in full legal capacity (not a minor, not incapacitated etc.), needs a lawyer, is to be decided by that person. Even criminal defendants can be self-represented if they've got the balls for it — the law does not impose a requirement to have a lawyer when the person does not want it. Considerations as to whether to ...


2

Here is the form, for US District courts. It starts by saying YOU ARE COMMANDED to produce at the time, date, and place set forth below the following books, papers,documents, data, or other objects It is basically irrelevant how many nanoseconds it takes to obtain the data being subpoenaed. Legally relevant variables are (1) whether a motion to quash the ...


0

No, while there are a limited number of jurisdictions that have "must arrest" laws for domestic violence, in general police in the U.S. have wide digression as to what crimes they witness will lead to an arrest.


4

Police have discretion in the enforcement of the law Which is to say, police get to decide which crimes they make arrests for, which they handle with warnings, which they report and which they ignore. This applies whether they are in uniform, undercover or off-duty. If they abuse this discretion then they are liable to disciplinary action. If they apply it ...


1

The answer to your question is the Mathmatician's Yes. They are legally obligated to report it (normally to their handlers after the fact in a timely manner) and they are allowed to continue searching for evidence for the larger crime. It's just one more list to charge the guy with when the government agency decides to move on the "target". ...


Top 50 recent answers are included