I need some legal advice please...............

[Raineyrocks]

When we were in Maryland somebody I know poured Febreeze in this girls gas tank.  A cop showed up at my daughter's house to question the "somebody", (too paranoid to write their name  ), the cop said there was a witness but I think he was lying. 
Anyway the somebody admitted to doing it and the cop wrote it down in a notebook.
He came back the next morning and asked somebody to write a statement and sign it, I said, hell no we're going to call a lawyer.  The cop said he wasn't going to read somebody there miranda rights because he's not handcuffing her but told me she's being charged with malicious destruction of property and it will be reported to juvenille services.  My first question is does a cop have the right to charge someone?  Should he have read the miranda?
I called a pretty cool lawyer and I didn't ask him the above questions because later on someone said I should have, anyways we can't afford to retain him so I really can't call him again without putting out a couple thousand dollars.  He told me this somebody would probably be charged as an adult.  Then why did the cop say it was going to juvenille services, there's already a case number?
The girl's father, (the girl that had the febreeze put in it), said his insurance is covering everything but that his insurance, (State Farm), will be coming after us for the money.  He said he doesn't care as long as he doesn't have to pay anything and kids will be kids.  Real nice guy, I was surprised.  He's not pressing charges as far as I know but the cop said the state is.
Since I've been back in NH no one has called, no mail, shouldn't I have received some news?    Who do I call that's over this cop's head and what should I say?

[mvpel]

The US Supreme Court has ruled that lying to suspects does not violate civil rights.  Admitting a crime is generally a good way to get charged for the crime, regardless of how friendly the officer is.

[Raineyrocks]

The US Supreme Court has ruled that lying to suspects does not violate civil rights.  Admitting a crime is generally a good way to get charged for the crime, regardless of how friendly the officer is.

Even if she didn't give a written statement?

[J’raxis 270145]

The US Supreme Court has ruled that lying to suspects does not violate civil rights.  Admitting a crime is generally a good way to get charged for the crime, regardless of how friendly the officer is.

Even if she didn't give a written statement?

The cop will report the verbal conversation in court, and that's enough to convince most jurors and the judge. Cops would never lie, right?

[mvpel]

As opposed to little hooligans who put Febreze in other peoples' gas tanks?

[Spencer]

THIS IS NOT LEGAL ADVICE -- JUST FRIENDLY ADVICE AND OPINION

As for the U.S. Constitution and Miranda rights, the police only need to read you those rights before questioning that occurs when a person is in custody (i.e., been arrested).  The remedy for a Miranda violation is exclusion of those statements and evidence gained from the statements.  It does not sound like an issue in this case because there was no custodial interrogation.

The RULE when the police ask you anything is I WISH TO REMAIN SILENT and AM I FREE TO LEAVE.  Repeat as necessary, regardless of what the cop says.  Be polite but firm.  As mvpel noted, the police will lie to you, and the Supreme Court has endorsed this practice reasoning that an innocent person wouldn't be fooled by the lies (as far as I know, none of the current justices on the Supreme Court has ever been interrogated by the police).

Anything that you say can be used against you in court, whether it is in writing or not.  It is not considered hearsay (or unreliable) if it is your statement being used against you; this is often called a "statement against interest" or "admission of a party opponent" and is frequently the best evidence that the prosecution ever has.

Many states, including Oregon (where I practice), allow for a civil compromise of a criminal charge.  This typically involves an agreement between the victim and the defendant that the defendant will reimburse the victim for damages and / or write a letter of apology in exchange for the victim agreeing to a dismissal of the criminal charge.  In Oregon, a judge must approve such an agreement, and the prosecutor is present for the hearing on it.

You may want to call the county's public defender office and ask for the attorney of the day to discuss options; they will likely know all about Maryland law and how it applies to the person's situation.

[KBCraig]

THIS IS NOT LEGAL ADVICE -- JUST FRIENDLY ADVICE AND OPINION

As for the U.S. Constitution and Miranda rights, the police only need to read you those rights before questioning that occurs when a person is in custody (i.e., been arrested).  The remedy for a Miranda violation is exclusion of those statements and evidence gained from the statements.  It does not sound like an issue in this case because there was no custodial interrogation.

The RULE when the police ask you anything is I WISH TO REMAIN SILENT and AM I FREE TO LEAVE.

I'd just like to add that there does not have to be physical restraint for Miranda to apply. The key is "free to leave", and cases have been tossed because the person reasonably believed they were not free to leave.

That's why you always ask.

[kola]

Doesnt Fabreeze make car exhaust smell better?

Sounds like someone was just trying to solve air polltion problems.

maybe?

Kola

[KBCraig]

THIS IS NOT LEGAL ADVICE -- JUST FRIENDLY ADVICE AND OPINION

As for the U.S. Constitution and Miranda rights, the police only need to read you those rights before questioning that occurs when a person is in custody (i.e., been arrested).  The remedy for a Miranda violation is exclusion of those statements and evidence gained from the statements.  It does not sound like an issue in this case because there was no custodial interrogation.

The RULE when the police ask you anything is I WISH TO REMAIN SILENT and AM I FREE TO LEAVE.

I'd just like to add that there does not have to be physical restraint for Miranda to apply. The key is "free to leave", and cases have been tossed because the person reasonably believed they were not free to leave.

That's why you always ask.

Wow, what timing!

http://unionleader.com/article.aspx?headline=Supreme+Court+tosses+out+man%27s+admissions+in+rape+case&articleId=26c52b81-a1d9-41f8-8ca6-36e0916eefb6

Supreme Court tosses out man's admissions in rape case

By PAT GROSSMITH
New Hampshire Union Leader Staff
Wednesday, Aug. 8, 2007

CONCORD – A Nashua man's incriminating statements to police in a rape case cannot be used against him at trial because police did not advise him of his Miranda rights, according to a state Supreme Court ruling.

The decision, made public this morning, upholds Hillsborough County Superior Court Judge William Groff's ruling last year that police violated the rights of Jeremy Jennings, 35, of Nashua, when they did not read him the Miranda warnings before interviewing him and tape recording his statements.

Police picked up Jennings at his then Hudson home on March 15, 2005, and drove him to the local police station. He was told he was free to leave at any time but then was questioned by Milford and Nashua police officers concerning allegations of sexual abuse made by a teenage girl. The nearly two-hour interviews were tape recorded.

Jennings was never handcuffed but the court ruled he was in police custody just the same and should have been advised of his Miranda rights, i.e., the right to an attorney, to remain silent, etc.


As I said, Miranda applies when the subject believes they are not free to leave. An officer standing between them and the door has been ruled sufficient to invoke "custody" per Miranda.

Always ask, "Am I free to leave?" And then if they say yes, then leave!

[Raineyrocks]

THIS IS NOT LEGAL ADVICE -- JUST FRIENDLY ADVICE AND OPINION

As for the U.S. Constitution and Miranda rights, the police only need to read you those rights before questioning that occurs when a person is in custody (i.e., been arrested).  The remedy for a Miranda violation is exclusion of those statements and evidence gained from the statements.  It does not sound like an issue in this case because there was no custodial interrogation.

The RULE when the police ask you anything is I WISH TO REMAIN SILENT and AM I FREE TO LEAVE.  Repeat as necessary, regardless of what the cop says.  Be polite but firm.  As mvpel noted, the police will lie to you, and the Supreme Court has endorsed this practice reasoning that an innocent person wouldn't be fooled by the lies (as far as I know, none of the current justices on the Supreme Court has ever been interrogated by the police).

Anything that you say can be used against you in court, whether it is in writing or not.  It is not considered hearsay (or unreliable) if it is your statement being used against you; this is often called a "statement against interest" or "admission of a party opponent" and is frequently the best evidence that the prosecution ever has.

Many states, including Oregon (where I practice), allow for a civil compromise of a criminal charge.  This typically involves an agreement between the victim and the defendant that the defendant will reimburse the victim for damages and / or write a letter of apology in exchange for the victim agreeing to a dismissal of the criminal charge.  In Oregon, a judge must approve such an agreement, and the prosecutor is present for the hearing on it.

You may want to call the county's public defender office and ask for the attorney of the day to discuss options; they will likely know all about Maryland law and how it applies to the person's situation.

Thank you so much Spencer!

[Raineyrocks]

THIS IS NOT LEGAL ADVICE -- JUST FRIENDLY ADVICE AND OPINION

As for the U.S. Constitution and Miranda rights, the police only need to read you those rights before questioning that occurs when a person is in custody (i.e., been arrested).  The remedy for a Miranda violation is exclusion of those statements and evidence gained from the statements.  It does not sound like an issue in this case because there was no custodial interrogation.

The RULE when the police ask you anything is I WISH TO REMAIN SILENT and AM I FREE TO LEAVE.

I'd just like to add that there does not have to be physical restraint for Miranda to apply. The key is "free to leave", and cases have been tossed because the person reasonably believed they were not free to leave.

That's why you always ask.

Wow, what timing!

http://unionleader.com/article.aspx?headline=Supreme+Court+tosses+out+man%27s+admissions+in+rape+case&articleId=26c52b81-a1d9-41f8-8ca6-36e0916eefb6

Supreme Court tosses out man's admissions in rape case

By PAT GROSSMITH
New Hampshire Union Leader Staff
Wednesday, Aug. 8, 2007

CONCORD – A Nashua man's incriminating statements to police in a rape case cannot be used against him at trial because police did not advise him of his Miranda rights, according to a state Supreme Court ruling.

The decision, made public this morning, upholds Hillsborough County Superior Court Judge William Groff's ruling last year that police violated the rights of Jeremy Jennings, 35, of Nashua, when they did not read him the Miranda warnings before interviewing him and tape recording his statements.

Police picked up Jennings at his then Hudson home on March 15, 2005, and drove him to the local police station. He was told he was free to leave at any time but then was questioned by Milford and Nashua police officers concerning allegations of sexual abuse made by a teenage girl. The nearly two-hour interviews were tape recorded.

Jennings was never handcuffed but the court ruled he was in police custody just the same and should have been advised of his Miranda rights, i.e., the right to an attorney, to remain silent, etc.


As I said, Miranda applies when the subject believes they are not free to leave. An officer standing between them and the door has been ruled sufficient to invoke "custody" per Miranda.

Always ask, "Am I free to leave?" And then if they say yes, then leave!

Wow, KB this is weird timing, thanks!  She was questioned in my daughter's front yard when he wrote the stuff in the notebook.  I want her to pay for what she's done but not go back and forth to Maryland 4 or 5 times.    I would have liked to just work it out with these people and had a legal document of let's just say paying $50 a month until it's paid off.  I wish the cops wouldn't have gotten involved but I understand why they called them.  I was going to make somebody confess when I found out.

[Raineyrocks]

Doesnt Fabreeze make car exhaust smell better?

Sounds like someone was just trying to solve air polltion problems.

maybe?

Kola

Here is another strange coincidence, (like the article KB found), my old neighbor called me and said his daughter watched a show on the History Channel, (I'm pretty sure it was probably the Discovery Channel), about bleach, sugar, and febreeze being put in people's gas tanks.  They said it doesn't damage anything.  He knows the family that the somebody did this to and thinks they are just looking to get their car repaired on someone else's dime.   I don't think so though but I will check out the archives on those shows.

[Fragilityh14]

"what are you going to tell me next, that you had sex with my grandmother while pouring sugar in my gas tank?" - Dante Hicks.

It's a shame your daughter didn't say "...I dont know anything about that" when the police asked her.

[Raineyrocks]

"what are you going to tell me next, that you had sex with my grandmother while pouring sugar in my gas tank?" - Dante Hicks.

It's a shame your daughter didn't say "...I dont know anything about that" when the police asked her.

For the record I never said it was daughter but good guess anyways.  I kinda agree with you because I would've rather handled this without the cops but I still would've made her pay for damages.

[Lex]

If someone poured something into my gas tank and I didn't know who it was, I would tell the cops. If I knew who it was and they were willing to work with me to resolve the matter I wouldn't call the cops.