Scribd
Upload
263 views4 pages

Using The 5th Amendment

The document describes an encounter between a driver and several police officers during a traffic stop. The driver refused to provide his driver's license or registration, invoking his Fifth Amendment right against self-incrimination. This led to a lengthy exchange where the driver only asked questions of the officers and they demanded to see his documentation. Eventually the original officer said the matter would be dealt with another time and they all left after about 30 minutes. The driver plans to follow up by writing a letter to the commanding officer of the first officer.

Uploaded by

Anonymous nYwWYS3ntV
Copyright
© © All Rights Reserved
We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.
Available Formats
Download as ODT, PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd
263 views4 pages

Using The 5th Amendment

The document describes an encounter between a driver and several police officers during a traffic stop. The driver refused to provide his driver's license or registration, invoking his Fifth Amendment right against self-incrimination. This led to a lengthy exchange where the driver only asked questions of the officers and they demanded to see his documentation. Eventually the original officer said the matter would be dealt with another time and they all left after about 30 minutes. The driver plans to follow up by writing a letter to the commanding officer of the first officer.

Uploaded by

Anonymous nYwWYS3ntV
Copyright
© © All Rights Reserved
We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.
Available Formats
Download as ODT, PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd
You are on page 1/ 4

USING THE FIFTH AMENDMENT

Using The 5th Amendment *Research & Editing by decotajoe@gmail.com


Most Americans make the mistake of not beginning their case in the first encounter with a
government agent. Securing your rights requires that you know what they are and secondly, by
extracting information from the government agent that delineates his limited authority. The following
article was given to me as a photo copy from what appears to be some columnar printing. I have
selected it to be a part of my research because of the method by which an ordinary citizen has
established his fifth amendment right not to be compelled to become a witness against himself by
providing certain documentation (drivers license and registration) that could be used against him in a
court of law. For those of you struggling to secure your rights and avoid government abuse, the insight
provided by this example might serve as an excellent tutorial.
********************
Thursday I had an opportunity to practice the fifth amendment and other things I've been thinking on.
Keep in mind that I have no driver's license and I have never registered my car. The plates on the car
came with it when I bought it. The tags on the plates expired last year. Below is what happened.
At about 10:20PM on Thursday, September 14, 2000, I was traveling on Interstate 5 heading north
and approaching the Interstate bridge that crosses the Columbia river between Oregon and
Washington. There is an incline to the bridge and as I neared the top of the incline I saw, on the east
(right) shoulder of the freeway, a police car. The way it was parked led me to believe that the officer
inside was probably using some sort of speed detection device to determine the speed at which cars
pass by him.
Well, I was one of those cars that passed by him and after doing so he put his car in gear and got
behind me in the left most lane following me across the bridge. As soon as we were off the bridge he
started his red and blue lights flashing. I navigated my car to the right shoulder of the freeway and
stopped a little ways before the on ramp from SR 14 enters I-5. The officer got out of his car and
came to mine. I locked my doors and rolled my window down about an inch and a half.
The officer informed me that he clocked me doing 70 in a 45 mph work zone. I ignored the statement
and asked "How may I assist you?". The officer then said, "I need to see your driver's license." I said,
"If I had such an instrument, could you use it against me?" He did not answer my question, but
repeated his demand. I repeated my question. He ignored me again and again repeating his demand. I
again asked if he could use it against me. I told him that I invoke my right which is protected by the
fifth amendment - not incriminate myself. I asked: "Am I under arrest?" He said "No." I asked "is there
any reason for you to believe than I'm engaged in any form of commercial activity requiring a license?"
He said "The law requires you to show me your license." I said "Are you licensed to practice law?" He
said that he was a police officer. I asked again if he was licensed to practice law and I asked: "Don't
you know, that only those licensed to practice law can make determinations of law, including a
determination to whom the law applies?" He did not answer the question but again insisted that I show
him my driver's license. I again asked if he could use it against me if I had such an instrument. I then
asked again "Am I under arrest?" and again he said "No." He decided to go to his car for a bit. I sat
there waiting for his return.
The officer returned and again asked to see my license. Again I asked if he could use it against me. I
asked him to summon his commanding officer. I asked him for his business card and he said that he did
not have one. He said his name was Mike Hanson and his badge number is 975. I then said "I put you

on notice that you are in trespass upon several of my rights." I then said: "I put you on notice that for
every minute you hold me here it will cost you ten thousand dollars." I asked him "is your house paid
up because I'm going to own it. I'm going to sue you." Again I asked him if he was licensed to practice
law and he would not answer.
After a couple rounds of wanting to see my license and me wanting to know if he could use it against
me, he left to chat with another officer that had appeared.
Another officer approached, and we went through the "I need to see your license, will you use it against
me routine." His name is something like Brusseau. Eventually he went away.
Then another officer came to the window on the other side of my car and pointed to the glove
compartment while knocking on the window and saying something like "I need to see what's in there".
I waved him to come around to my window and he came. I asked what he wanted and he said that he
needed to search my car. I asked him if he had a warrant. He must not have liked that question
because he left.
Another officer came who was with the Vancouver Police, He told me his name, but I did not catch it, I
think it started with "Ta". Anyway, he went on to explain how the other officers were just doing their
jobs. I asked him if he was here to protect my rights or if he was in collusion with the other officers. He
paused for a minute then continued on with the doing their job thing. Then he left.
Another officer, black mustache, came to the other window pointing at my glove compartment.
I waved to him to come on around, and then he left.
There were now two police cars behind me, a Vancouver police car on the on ramp from SR 14 and
an unmarked police car behind him. Four police cars flashing their lights.
During the above, other officers were writing what is commonly known as the VIN number down
and an officer started calling me "Steve something". I asked why they were calling me that name
and they said that is who the car is registered to. I told them that you are making presumptions.
Again they wanted to see my license and again I asked if it could be used against me if I had such a
license. Another officer had a camera and twice the flash went off. Both times I attempted to not be
seen in the photograph. They all waked away for a few minutes.
The original officer came back and told me something like: "I will tend to the matter another time, have
a good day." I said "OK". The officer turned off' the lights on his car, but the others did not turn off'
their lights. I suspected entrapment and stayed where I was. About five minutes later, they got into
their cars and one by one they left. When I was the only one there, I started my car and drove off.
I took the first exit, which was the Mill Plain exit and there was a Vancouver police car parked on the
shoulder. I saw it go there when it left from the place of encounter. I passed it and it followed me,
but in the lane to my right. I went under the bridge on Mill Plain and into the lane to turn to go south
on I-5. The Vancouver police car passed me by. I went to SR 14 and then home.
The whole thing took about 30 minutes (approx. 10:20PM to 10:50PM). There was a lot of activity
and I did not get everything that was said and the order may not be exact. Except for placing them on
notice and invoking my rights, all I did through the whole encounter was to ask questions. Even when

I informed them of certain facts, I did it in question form - like: "Don't you know that only those
involved in commercial activity are required to have a license? Of course most of my questions went
unanswered. Other questions I asked the first officer were: "Are you in collusion with the dispatcher?";
"is this being recorded?". He did say it was not being recorded.
My first plan was to get the names, badge numbers, and any other information I could, about the
officers that were there that night. Whether the officer was acting on orders or was acting in a private
capacity (yes I know that he was acting in a private capacity, but I want it admitted to by those above
him or I will sue them as well). If he was acting under orders, then I will, of course, be required to sue
his commanding officer also. And to find out if he was given orders by his commanding officer,
continuing the discovery process all the way up to the governors' office. All of them that admit to
authorizing said activity will be sued unless damages are paid me.
My current plan is to write a letter to the commanding officer of Officer Mike Hanson. In this letter I
will attempt to determine if he authorized Mike Hanson to stop me without having any evidence that I
was required to have license or for that matter, having any reason to believe that I was engaged in any
activity requiring such a license. I need to know if Mike Hanson was acting independently or under
orders of a superior.
********************
This concludes the article as it was provided to me.
Nine years ago I entered into a discussion with a person knowledgeable in law who had, at one time,
been cited for failure to submit to a test that would have informed the officer who made the stop,
whether this person was driving under the influence of alcohol. In other words, the test would have
revealed whether he was drunk or not.
Down in California & other states, I believe that if youre convicted of driving drunk three times, you
will be sentenced to 6 years in a State penitentiary. By doing so we the people become the one
causing injury. Most Americans do not know that it is unlawful (not illegal - you need to know the
difference) to cause injury to a person who has harmed no one. A drunk driver, while I dont condone,
support, or sympathize, is still a person who has harmed no one. And being true to the foundational
principles of law, it is unlawful to cause this person injury through the use of the common force that
law represents when that person has not harmed anyone. In doing so we are punishing someone
because they might be going to harm someone. How ugly can we be? How ugly that an advanced
civilization would imprison someone because they might harm someone. However, let him harm
another through his chosen behavior and I have no problem if he is locked up or the next 25 years. But
not because he might harm someone. If you are foolish enough to attempt a justification of
imprisonment or any other punishment provided through the courts to an individual who has harmed no
one, I can guarantee you that I can find things in your life that you do everyday that are un-necessary
and carry the potential to harm someone. Therefore, should I use force of law to imprison your body
because you might be going to cause someone harm by doing these un-necessary activities? Just think
of all the un-necessary things that you do that might cause someone else harm. Driving activities for
example. Do you go fishing? Do you go out to dinner? Do you go to the movies or the theater? Do you
go to ball games? Do you go out on dates? Do you go skiing? Do you go hiking? Do you go camping?
These and a host of other daily activities are not necessary and each one carries the risk that you might
cause injury to another. Should you be placed in prison because you are engaging in an un-necessary
activity that might cause harm to another?

It is my sincere hope that you are bright enough to answer: NO!


Back to the gentleman who appeared in court. Because the police officer in question had enough
integrity not to lie under oath, it was discovered that the defendant had asked the officer to write and
sign a statement that any information garnered or gathered by the test would not be used against him in
court. The officer testified that he had refused to provide such a signed statement. The defendant then
moved the court for dismissal based on the fact that the fifth amendment provides that an individual
can not be compelled to become a witness against himself and that his bodily fluids are private and
come under the protection of the fifth amendment. Based on this, the court grated dismissal of the
charges.
And while I dont think that people should be driving drunk, neither do I think that they should be in
prison. Most recognize that alcoholism is an illness. Part mental, part physical, but still an illness.
Would we condone imprisoning people with AIDS? In many, if not most cases it was their choices and
behaviors that brought them to this condition. How can we call ourselves civilized and imprison people
who have harmed no one?
Know your rights ahead of time. Begin to secure them in your first encounter with a government agent
(police or otherwise). Communicate with the administrating agency from which the citation or
complaint was issued and make the communication in writing, sent through U.S. Mail, return receipt
requested. When the receipt is returned to you by the postal service, it is evidence that your letter was
delivered. Attach it to a copy of the letter that you sent and keep it in your records. If your letter
requires a response, as most will, you might request that any response be in writing by someone with
the lawful authority to make such response and that the response be signed by this person.
Government agencies are great at making demands that no one signs. You might also consider making
an assertion as to your position on the matters under discussion and that if no response is forth coming
in 60 days, this will be construed that your stated position on these matters is acceptable to this
government agency. By doing so you are setting the stage for a default judgement.
Remember to make your case with the administrating agency,
for if you dont bring it up with them,
it is quite likely that you will not be allowed to bring it up in court.

You might also like