“Do you know why I pulled you over?” banned in California

kirk.

Can gardai still do this here ?

It seems reasonable to me that gardai should have a reason to stop someone unless there's extenuating circumstances and should state a reason

https://news.yahoo.com/california-police-no-longer-ask-183023993.html

z80CPU

Thought the thread was about a banned music single.

Princess Consuela Bananahammock

There was a lawyer youtube channel that said they can't do this. They have to have a resaon and can ONLY proceed based on this reason. Example - if they legitimately stop you for speeding, they're not allowed to search for drugs or anything else unrelated to the speeding.

Witcher

The Gardai don't need a reason to stop any vehicle on a public road.

kirk.

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/121547880#Comment_121547880

Wouldn't make sense

Police could legitimately find reason to proceed further and that's surely covered by law anywhere

Padre_Pio

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/121547897#Comment_121547897

Yeah, I think they can only proceed with the stop based on the evidence they have, ie if they stop you for speeding, they cant search your car.

But if they stop you for speeding, then see drug paraphernalia on the back seat, they can search the car.

Does this even apply in Ireland.

I honestly got pulled over because the Garda thought I looked at him funny.

Allinall

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/121548414#Comment_121548414

How do you look at someone funny when you’re driving?

And how did the Garda see you looking funny at them?

Padre_Pio

Garda was pulled in at traffic lights in an unmarked car, maybe 1am. I was waiting at the traffic lights and probably looking around.

Lights went green, I pulled away and he followed me and pulled me over maybe 200m down the road.

Literally his excuse was "you looked at me like you knew me"

ottolwinner

How did the story finish Padrepio?

Princess Consuela Bananahammock

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/121547897#Comment_121547897

They have to prove that they had a reason, though. If you say "no comment" to anything other than the initial reason for being pulled over - and in some states even to that - they can't go any further.

If the cop says "I could smell drugs"; all the denfendant has to say is, "what evidence do you have?" and the cop is screwed.

If stopped, you have to give you name and ID if required, but that is all you're required to do until presented with a charge or reason. Anything else, "I do not consent" or "no comment". Without proof, the cop has nothing to go on.e

kowloonkev

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/121547880#Comment_121547880

So if there's a bottle of whiskey in your hand or a dead body in the back seat they must give you a speeding ticket and go on their way?

GSBellew

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/121547896#Comment_121547896

Do they not need to suspect you of having committed an offence if it is not a roadside checkpoint?

Witcher

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/121549159#Comment_121549159

No

Princess Consuela Bananahammock

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/121549151#Comment_121549151

Answered in subsequent posts.

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/121548414#Comment_121548414

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/121549128#Comment_121549128

Donald Trump

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/121548543#Comment_121548543

The Guard invited Padre out for a drink, Padre said yes, and now they are engaged to be married next year

Princess Consuela Bananahammock

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/121548432#Comment_121548432

Lonely Cop - did he not have a partner?

Potential-Monke

A Garda can only pull you over if he believes you have committed an offence. The Road Traffic Act has loads of reasons, simple ones such as crossing the centre line, not indicating on time, too slow to pull away from lights, etc. The reason to be pulled over is many. Once stopped, questions can be asked and observations can be made. You are quite entitled to say nothing, but it doesn't exclude you from any laws/legislation you have broken, or what is subsequently observed during the stop.

From my own experience, I used to ask that question. If the person answered with the reason I did pull them over for, they were less likely to get a ticket (if applicable). They passed the initial stage of the personality test. The rest of the interaction will also determine the outcome. Gardai have discretion. Most don't want to be giving tickets to normal folk, but sometimes normal folk need to be reminded about the bad level of their driving. Anyone who answered with "no" or was aggressive/uncooperative, most certainly got a ticket. Nothing worse than someone thinking they did nothing wrong when they did, or thinking the minor law they broke should be allowed.

I had an elderly man get out of his car at me one day because I pulled him for going through a red light, clearly through it, and he adamant he didn't. He got a ticket. It'#s nice to be nice, and while it doesn't always guarantee you won't get a ticket (the offence really does matter), you've a better chance. Maybe not these days though, the public reaction to the ticketing "scandal" has basically guaranteed, imo, tickets will be issued regardless nowadays.

cj maxx

I read the new law as the police saying why they pulled you over . Seems sensible enough ?

GSBellew

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/121549164#Comment_121549164

I believe you are incorrect.

I felt like it is not a reason, they must have reason to believe that you have already committed or are in the process of committing an offence.

If you can link the legislation that permits stopping a vehicle for no reason it would help.

Witcher

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/121552836#Comment_121552836

Gardai have statutory and common law powers to stop any vehicle for any or no reason.

If relation to the implementation of these powers see case stated of DPP (Stratford) v Fagan.

'The Supreme Court decision in DPP (Stratford) v Fagan (1994) also held that the Gardai have the power to stop motorists and make inquiries-even where they have not formed the opinion that the motorist has committed an offense.'

https://ie.vlex.com/vid/dpp-stratford-v-fagan-793924421

Jim2007

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/2058328777/do-you-know-why-i-pulled-you-over-banned-in-california

So you’d be happy to be incapacitated by an uninsured driver in an inroad worthy car, simply because you think Garda should not be allowed to conduct check points…. US law is highly politicized and in general following the US down any path has very little to recommend it.

If you want to look at any jurisdiction, then look at civil law, not common law especially as practiced in the US.

Manic Moran

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/121552904#Comment_121552904

This isn't a US politicised thing, it's a 200-year-old 4th Amendment thing. Generally speaking, US law has always held the privacy of the individual to be fairly sacrosanct. In other words, if you're minding your own business, and there's no reason to think that you're not following the law, then the government (the police in today's equivalency) have no business harassing you. The presumption is that you're following the law unless there's active reason to believe otherwise. As an extreme (by Irish standards) example:

https://www.abajournal.com/news/article/spotting-a-concealed-gun-is-not-reason-enough-for-police-to-stop-and-investigate-top-state-court-rules

Which brings us to the article which is a little sensationalist. The police in California, as everywhere else in the US (4th Amendment again) have always had to have a reason to pull you over. Sure, the 'do you know why' question is a bit of fishing, as (a) if they answer correctly, they've just admitted guilt, and (b) if they volunteer a different answer, then they've just given the cop something else. But they must always have had a reason of some infraction, whatever it was, before they could light someone up and ask them why they thought they were pulled over.

However, the requirement to state does not prohibit fishing. For example, I was pulled over by Texas DPS a couple months ago for an infraction so minor that the ticket isn't even a fix-it ticket, there's no penalty or tasking other than my loss of time for the five minutes I was stationary at the side of the road. Trooper came up, said "I'm Trooper X, and the reason I've pulled you over is...." just as the new California law requires.

But the important thing was that it was a reason for him to run my ID, and get eyeballs into whatever may have been visible inside my car. That sort of thing isn't stopped by the new California law, and the portion which requires stating out front is simply another protection for idiots who incriminate themselves.

Cheddar Bob

Serious question- are the Gardai who aren't the most stellar students in Templemore the ones who end up getting sent to the traffic corps?

Like if you join the guards surely the ambition is kicking down doors, drug busts, bursting in bedroom doors with the old "get yer trousers on son, yer nicked" style of a 70s Cockney detective. Progressing to detective later on, calling your colleagues with a mock Glasgow lilt to tell them "ders bin a merder" in the best Jim Taggart accent (because such horrors demand levity to keep you sane)

Little boys dont really dream of standing by a rural roadside with a hairdryer catching some lad rushing to work who forgot to set his alarm when being a guard is their ambition.

For me the childhood dream involved having carte blanche to shoot people. Which is why I wouldn't have got in, along with my taste for recreational drugs.