What is does reasonable suspicion mean in regards to filming police on duty? 33 Answers as of December 14, 2011

There is a lot to this question. Reasonable suspicion means if the police believe you committed some sort of crime. Basically if police contact you, you have the right to ask them if you are free to leave and if they say you are you can leave.

Reasonable suspicion is what they need to detain you. Probable cause is what they need to search. Slightly different burdens and different analysis. If you're contacted by the police, your first question should be, "Am I free to go?" If the answer is yes, then you are free to walk away. If they say no, then you're detained. The Miranda rules don't necessarily apply during a detention and there are different rules about searches during a detention, but the bottom line is that you still have your Fourth, Fifth and Sixth Amendment rights to be free from unreasonable searches, against self-incrimination and to an attorney, respectively. If you are not free to go, you can politely, but firmly decline any request to search or provide a statement. The only thing you must do is provide your TRUE information. You cannot lie or do anything else that may be considered as delaying or obstructing their investigation. Police: Hi, can I talk to you? You: Am I free to go? Police: Sure, but I'd like to talk to you for a minute. You: No thanks. Have a nice day. (Walk away) or: Police: I need to talk to you. You: Am I free to go? Police: No - you're not under arrest, but you're just detained while I sort things out. Where are you coming from (or what are you doing or other type questions)? You: I respectfully decline to answer any questions until I speak to my lawyer. Police: You're not under arrest - I'm just trying to get to the bottom of things. You: I understand. I'm still declining to answer any questions until I speak to my lawyer. [Repeat as necessary] Same thing with search requests. Under certain circumstances, they may legally be able to pat you down for weapons during a detention, but other than that, you have the right to decline a request to search. Do it politely, but firmly. The typical response is for the officer to say something like, "If you don't have anything on you, there shouldn't be any problem, right?" Same response from you. A polite, but firm denial of their request to search. If they order you to do things, do not resist. That's when attorneys and motions in court come into play, but the side of the road is NOT the place to argue with an officer about your Fourth Amendment rights.

The police need reasonable cause to arrest, detain, or search a person. Reasonable cause is the same as reasonable suspicion. This has been defined by case law to mean would a reasonable person it the same place with the same knowledge come to the same conclusion. If the police can stop you on the street the same way anyone would. However, if you are detained the police need reasonable cause to believe that a crime was committed and that you were involved in that crime. If the police stop you and start questioning you then you can leave, if they do not let you leave you are detained. In that case they need to Mirandize you. If this happens tell them that you want your attorney with you before any questioning.

The courts judge reasonable suspicion on a case by case basis. There is no hard and fast rule to reasonable suspicion. Reasonable suspicion allows the police to detain a person to investigate potential illegal activity. You may terminate a police encounter by refusing to speak to them. However, if the police have reasonable suspicion, you can be detained until the police confirm or dispel their reason for stopping you.

Ask them if you're free to leave. If they say "yes", then leave; If they say "no," tell them you want to call your lawyer.

"Reasonable suspicion" is a flexible standard based on "what would a reasonable police officer do when he observes the situation?" We usually want police to question folks who appear to be doing something unlawful, like standing behind a closed store at midnight. The escalating encounters are: routine questioning (free to leave), detention (not free to leave - office investigating potential crime), arrest (not free to leave - in police custody- officer believes person committed a crime). In all phases the suspect does not have to talk (and should not) except for perhaps giving name/identification info. Always ask to leave and always ask for a lawyer. If allowed to leave, THEN LEAVE. An "investigatory detention" allows the officer to freeze the situation and people and ask questions to determine if a crime has occurred or is occurring. Police are public servants and their conduct in public may be filmed, as long as it does not intefere with an investigation or violate privacy rights of individuals.

speaking to you is still considered a consensual encounter until you ask to leave. if they have reasonable suspicion already to do a Terry Stop, asking to leave won't stop them from frisking you and asking for your ID. Most courts think that it is perfectly reasonable to ask for ID and frisk you for weapons if they are suspicious. The best thing to do is, politely ask if you are under arrest and whether you are free to leave. Courts believe it is not against your 5th amendment rights to be ask to provide ID or your name, unless you clearly believe that your name alone would incriminate you (ie having an active warrant). navigating the police encounter is a difficult thing to do. You can ask them why they are talking to you. They can lie to you, they can refuse to answer. The only thing you can do is ask if you are free to leave and if they say yes, leave. if they say no, ask if you are under arrest. if they say yes, ask for an attorney and remain silent. "those who don't walk, might walk." Most arguments about reasonable suspicion are made after you are wrongfully arrested. I wish that could be prevented more often.

Reasonable Suspicion is on a case-by-case basis with the "totality of the circumstances" taken into consideration. The officer must have reason to believe that some sort of criminal activity is at hand. This is a lower standard than probable cause and any infraction of the speed limit or motor vehicle code is enough to pull you over for example, but not to arrest you. It is best to not fight or struggle or be belligerent with the police even if you do believe they are in the wrong. The time to take up that fight is in the courtroom and not by the side of the road. That can only lead to injuries or being charged with Resisting & Obstructing a police officer, which is a felony. If the search or seizure is illegal, the proper time to contest that is with a motion to suppress or dismiss in a court of law. To do so otherwise, puts everyone's safety at risk.

*Reasonable suspicion* is a legal standard of proof in United States law that is less than probable cause, the legal standard for arrests and warrants, but more than an "inchoate and unparticularized suspicion or 'hunch' "; it must be based on "specific and articulable facts", "taken together with rational inferences from those facts". Police may briefly detain a person if they have reasonable suspicion that the person has been, is, or is about to be engaged in criminal activity; such a detention is known as a *Terry* stop. If police additionally have reasonable suspicion that a person so detained may be armed, they may "frisk" the person for weapons, but not for contraband like drugs. Reasonable suspicion is evaluated using the "reasonable person" or "reasonable officer" standard, in which said person in the same circumstances could reasonably believe a person has been, is, or is about to be engaged in criminal activity; it depends upon the totality of circumstances, and can result from a combination of particular facts, even if each is individually innocuous.

Reasonable suspicion is what would make a reasonable police officer believe that a crime is being committed or that "criminality is afoot". If they believe that you are about to commit a crime or have drugs or a gun they can stop you, question you, and search you. If you film them they will arrest you for Obstruction of Governmental Authority or take the camera away, especially if they are doing something wrong. They have a gun, a badge, and all the power. If you mess with the bull you get the horns.

The term "Reasonable Suspicion" has to do with stop or detention. Any cop can approach a citizen on the street and address them. It only becomes a problem if the person tries to walk away and the officer grabs them or tells them to stop. Reasonable suspicion is that something specific the officer can point to as unequivocally suggesting criminal behavior or weapons possession. Reasonable suspicion can develop over time and there's no clear cut formula for assessing it. Behavior that could be innocent or isn't clearly criminal doesn't count. Officers are not permitted to go on fishing expeditions until the find evidence either. The typical scenario for a traffic stop. Perhaps the driver commits an infraction like failing to signal. That alone doesn't allow the officer to do anything but stop the driver and request license, registration and insurance. But the whole time of that transaction, the officer is observing. He is looking around your car. If he sees something illegal, like drugs, the officer is permitted to detain the driver and seize the suspected drugs. If the officer opens the bag and finds marshmallows, he must return them and allow you to go on your way. If he finds suspected drugs, he can have you exit your car and handcuff you. He can even make you sit in the back of his patrol vehicle. However, if the officer field tests the substance and finds it isn't drugs, he has to kick you lose. Likewise if the officer sees the driver stuffing something under the seat, the officer would be allowed to order the driver out of the vehicle and secure him while the officer searched the area for a gun or knife. The best way to handle a contact with the police is to remain perfectly still with your hands in view. You must be polite and respectful or risk that the whole thing may spin out of control. I recommend that one keeps his insurance card and registration in an envelope on the visor. I also recommend that you have your license somewhere within easy reach; so when the officer approaches, you can simply hand it to him. If you can't do that, be sure to tell the officer what you are doing before you do it. "I'm going to reach behind my left side and remove my wallet sir." Sudden moves are a good way to get shot. Beyond that, respectfully inform the officer that you are going to exercise your right to remain silent and that you are exercising your right to counsel. There are two reasons for this. The first reason is the officer has to cease questioning you without counsel. The second reason is it may protect you from a request to search. Just say no. Beyond that, just prepare ahead of the time to keep your hands visible and be respectful. Don't worry about what the officer says or does, your lawyer will sort it all out.

Good question. Reasonable suspicion is when an Officer can detain a person, based on specific and articulable facts, which would lead a reasonable person to conclude a crime might have occurred or is occurring. Nothing stops a police officer from asking to speak with you. Just as anyone can approach you on the street and ask for the time or directions, a police officer can approach and ask where you are going or where you have been. Just as with any stranger you have the right to decline to answer. Sometimes officers are interested, but do not have the "articulable facts" to detain you. If however you stop and agree to speak with them the contact will be considered consensual. You have the right to politely decline interaction and walk away. Even if the Officer has the facts necessary to detain you, you still don't have to answer the questions. First question to the officer should always be, "Am I being detained?" If not, you have the right to walk away. If detained, your second statement should be to demand to have your attorney present for any and all questioning. After making that unequivocal insistence upon counsel you must stop talking.

A reasonable suspicion is exactly that. It's less than probable cause for an arrest but based on what the cop sees he has a reasonable suspicion that something illegal is taking place. You can't terminate an encounter with a cop by asking if you're under arrest. He has the right to detain you without arresting you for a reasonable period to determine who you are and what you're doing if he has reasonable suspicion that illegal activity is taking place. You can always refuse to answer any questions he asks and tell him you won't talk without an attorney to advise you.

Officers are allowed to talk to you. You can ask them if you are being detained, and you can refuse their questions. But, determination of reasonable suspicion is not something that can be done in the moment. This is something that the Officer will claim that they have, and your attorney will dispute that claim, and the Judge will make the decision as to whether there was reasonable suspicion. The Flex Your Rights video is excellent for giving you a quick basic idea of your rights. But it is only a starting point to understanding the complex system of rights.

I have no idea where this question is going. Let me suggest this: IF you do not trust the police, or hate the police, NEVER DIAL 911, for any reason. What is reasonable suspision is determiend by a judge after you are arrested and charged. If it was reasonable, the evidence is not suppressed. If it was unreasonable, the evidence is suppressed. Reasonable suspicion is not an animal to be identified by its feet or snout. Terminate the police encounter by walking away. If you are under arrest, they will throw you to the ground and throw the cuffs of you, THEN you will know you were not free to leave.

This is a somewhat complex question. First, you always have the right to film police activity in a public place in Massachusetts, just as you would anyone else. Conversely, police officers have the right to initiate a casual conversation just as any other member of the public does. Just as if a stranger started an unwelcome conversation with you, however, you have the right to say something like "I'm sorry, but I don't have time to talk right now," and walk away. If the officer stops you and makes you feel as if you are not free to leave, this amounts to a Constitutional "stop" which must be justified by some reasonable suspicion. (This standard comes from Terry v. Ohio, which requires a "reasonable and articulable suspicion that criminal activity is afoot.")

You may well be right on your interpretation and position, but without knowing the particular facts, I cannot answer. True there are some officers who are abusive and hide behind their badge. Others are simply trying to do their job. Reasonable suspicion is hard to define and is more based upon the particular circumstances. Example: someone witnesses a crime being committed and there description of the person committing the crime matches you (but you are innocent and have nothing to do with the incident, other than the fact that you resemble the person described), and the officer stops you. This is "reasonable suspicion". An officer has the right to stop you and detain you long enough to make the necessary inquiries.

Reasonable suspicion is a legal burden of proof. It is very low. Basically, the cops need reasonable suspicion that you have done something illegal. They "reasonably" belief something is up based on their training and expertise. Most cops lie about this and just use it to approach you or pull you over, and then they get further into another crime.

That's actually a bunch of different, semi-related questions. I'm not sure what "reasonable suspicion" has to do with filming police on duty. Regardless of the technical details of what the law actually says, police will ALWAYS have some reasonable suspicion to stop you, briefly detain you, and pat you down for contraband. Again, not clear what that has to do with your question re: filming police.

Your question can't be answered because you are looking at it from the wrong end. No one can make an exhaustive list of what reasonable suspicion is. The officer has to be able to articulate his reasons in court. If they are reasonable and create suspicion, then you have your answer. A person is required to identify themselves and to cooperate with basic requests or instructions. You are not required to do anything that might amount to incriminating yourself in any criminal activity. (Note: that doesn't exactly apply to DUI situations. If you refuse to take a breathylzer, you can lose your license for at least a year even though taking the test may incriminate you.)

It would be best, if confronted by police to ask first, am I free to leave? If yes, then leave, If you are told you are not free to leave, ask if you are under arrest. If under arrest allow the police to excourt you to jail where you can make bond and make no further statements.If they advise you that you are not free to leave but not under arrest tell them that you are requesting an attorney and say nothing further unless and until you have counsel at your side.

Reasonable suspicion is difficult to define. It can be very fluid. It is usually defined as suspicion of criminal activity based on specific and articulable facts, taken together with rational inferences from those facts. Basically if a reasonable person could look at a situation, and can articulate the specific facts of the situation that raise suspicion, then it is reasonable. The easiest way to terminate the encounter is to politely ask the officer the reasons for why they are stopping/detaining/questioning you. If the officer cannot give you a reasonable response, they should not be having contact with you.

Reasonable suspicion of particularized criminal activity is required before a law enforcement office can make a seizure by stopping a person or a vehicle. The seizure cannot be based on a generalized suspicion. Whether a reasonable suspicion exists must be determined from the particularized facts of the case where a review of the officer's observations may occur.