Hi gang. Allow me to establish my providince. I have been a policeman for the past twenty-seven years. I am a retired West Virginia State Police Sergeant, and currently ply my trade at a two-man town police department, in Peterstown, West Virginia (the town overlooked from the Rice Field Shelter on the AT north of Pearisburg, VA). I believe I can offer a counter perspective to this discussion (even if good sense dictates I stay out of it). I offer no judgements here. There are certainly really bad policemen, just as there are really bad doctors, mechanics, sales clerks, and yes, hikers.
From my perspective the story related in the origin of this thread can be catagorized as a typical, indeed routine call that all policemen receive. A Shoplifting complaint. Now realize that regardless of your feelings on the subject, each and every state of the union has uniquely differing laws in regard to crime and its investigation. Likewise each County or City/Town may have it's own set of ordanence that govern. Regardless of where you hale from, when in Rome (or in this case Erwin), you are subject to her laws. And so any discussion of this incident must be filtered in the light of what is legitimate and lawfull in Erwin. Since I know absolutly nothing concerning the prevailing law, I could not say if the Sheriff acted correctly. But I can make a few suggestions to you when dealing with the police, wherever you may find yourself.
The United States Supream Court has upheld the right of the police to temporarily detain a person for a reasonable length of time, in order to investigate a crime. They did not specify what that reasonable amount of time was. In the header of this thread our friend the hiker has been stopped for reasonable suspicion of committing a crime, "Shoplifting." Any officer's first duty is to identify the person to whom he is speaking. As was pointed out later in the thread, you do not have to provide the police with any information at all if you choose not to. This is so, but please realize that this will just delay the process and increase the reasonableness of your detention. It is also not advisable to intentionally give the officer false information, as the hike appears to have done in the original thread when asked for ID. (I'm sorry here to insinuate that the hiker had lied, but come on, I know if I have my wallet in my pocket.) The point is that in most states it is a crime to provide a policemen with false and/or misleading information. When the Sheriff discovered this apparent deception it again increased his suspicions, and gave him more time to detain and investigate. As for the hiker not remembering his social security number, well this is not very suspicious to me. I have met many, many people who do not know theirs by hart. The thought that the Sheriff lied to the Hiker is realy a moot point. Contrary to common belief a police officer can lie to you to obtain the information he legitametly seeks. There is no law or policy that compells us to always be truthfull. As for the Hiker being offered a ride out of curtesy to the hostel... well maybe, but more likely the police wished to confirm that he indeed was staying there and not that his statement was another falsehood.
The bottem line of is this, should you be stopped, regardless of the demeanor of the officer...
co-operate with him. You will still be detained, but you can either sorten that detention or lengthen it by your own responses or demeanor. Yes we do stereotype people based on their looks and many other factors... that's human nature. Just as people stereotype all policemen as brutish ogres of minimal intelect and even fewer morals. There is a demarkation that occures when two people speak to one another. At that moment we decide if our stereotypical asessment of the other was correct or if we are grossly mistaken. If my assesment of you is that of a bum and you reinforce that impression by being evasive and uncooperative, then you have just convinced me that you are a bum. Altermately, if you are friendly and cooperative you may just dispell my perception of you, and find that I will recipricate your courtesy.
The moral if there can be one is, be the better man. Treat others as you wish to be treated, and you may be suprised at the resaults.
As I see this incident it can be viewed in one of two ways: A Sheriff, who for some unspecified reason, enjoys tormenting the occasional hiker in town. Or consider that hiker's have been known to shoplift (like I said there are good and bad in all groups) and the Sheriff has acted as he is expected to by the people of the town who employ him. The data provided is limited and so I could not say with any degree of certainty, but my feeling, from the story related, is that his actions were reasonable under the circumstances described.
Through no fault of their own policemen seem to spend much of their time with those who are not the cream of polite society. Is it any wonder then that policemen expect people to act badly around them. And is it realy a suprise that some in the profession appear less than polite themselves. We seem to want to believe that the police can somehow remain detached and uneffected by things that go on around them. It's as if people expect us to function as machines do. We don't.
Stop by Peterstown when y'all are in the neighborhood. Ask for Kenny Hedrick, I'm usually around town. Your always welcome and we'll chat.
Reply With Quote
Originally Posted by rickboudrie
.
