Arresting Officer What Crimes Would You Charge

¶ … arresting officer what crimes would you charge him with?

If one were the arresting officer, it appears as though the only charges that this individual could be charged with would be grand theft auto.

If you were the defense attorney what argument(s) in court do you make in court challenging the police stop of your client?

As the client's defense attorney, one area of defense that I would no doubt engage in, would be the civil rights violations that come attached to racial profiling. In this example, there is a very clear and very rampant violation occurring in that the driver of the care was being targeted as a potential suspect in this crime, based solely on the fact that he is of a Hispanic national origin. This practice is largely based on the belief that certain kinds of people commit certain types of crimes, which can cause the biased and bigoted practice of generalizing about a particular ethnic group, according to such profiling. I would argue that the officer stopping my client was obviously the result of biased racial profiling a tendency which results in numerous stops of innocent motorists by the police, simply because of their skin color.

Let us not forget the fourteenth amendment. The 14th amendment states very clearly, that no state may "deny any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws." By definition, the exact actions of what this police officer did, demonstrated clear and unequal protection. It is a well documented fact within the research of the social sciences that men of African-American or Latino descent are more likely to be stopped by the police and are more likely to be treated as though they are not law-abiding citizens. This fact, as manifested in the stopping and harassment of this young man demonstrates the concept of unequal protection.

3. If you were the district attorney what argument(s) would you make in support of the police stop?

The arguments in support of the police stop are obvious. The police was alerted to the presence of the suspect on the road, and was told to be on the look-out. Thus in order to eventually apprehend the suspect, the police would have to stop and question at least, at minimum, one driver. The police officer in this case was only doing his job: He was given the task of apprehending the suspect of a stolen car. He successfully completed this task. Any charges that he acted unfairly or unprofessionally are ludicrous.

4. If you're the defense attorney, what argument(s) do you make in court to exclude from evidence the statements your client made to the police?

The police officer clearly did not follow protocol. The young man was never advised of his constitutional rights under the 5th amendment; the client was never advised that he had the right to remain silent or the right to an attorney. In this case, all the information that the client volunteered and self-incriminated himself with, are all inadmissible.

5. If you're the district attorney what argument(s) would you make to allow the admissibility of the statements?

In this case, I would argue that the young man volunteered this information: one can treat the information offered up as a confession. If a guilty party feels like confessing as this young man obviously did then it's up to him to do this, and the reading of the Fifth Amendment rights are just a formality.