The right to remain silent

Archive From The 'Tank
User avatar
Cail
Lord
Posts: 38981
Joined: Mon Mar 08, 2004 1:36 am
Location: Hell of the Upside Down Sinners

The right to remain silent

Post by Cail »

Detained by the feds for not answering questions.
I was detained last night by federal authorities at San Francisco International Airport for refusing to answer questions about why I had travelled outside the United States.

The end result is that, after waiting for about half an hour and refusing to answer further questions, I was released – because U.S. citizens who have produced proof of citizenship and a written customs declaration are not obligated to answer questions.

* * *

“Why were you in China?” asked the passport control officer, a woman with the appearance and disposition of a prison matron.

“None of your business,” I said.

Her eyes widened in disbelief.

“Excuse me?” she asked.

“I’m not going to be interrogated as a pre-condition of re-entering my own country,” I said.

This did not go over well. She asked a series of questions, such as how long I had been in China, whether I was there on personal business or commercial business, etc. I stood silently. She said that her questions were mandated by Congress and that I should complain to Congress instead of refusing to cooperate with her.

She asked me to take one of my small bags off her counter. I complied.

She picked up the phone and told someone I “was refusing to cooperate at all.” This was incorrect. I had presented her with proof of citizenship (a U.S. passport) and had moved the bag when she asked. What I was refusing to do was answer her questions.

A male Customs and Border Protection officer appeared to escort me to “Secondary.” He tried the good cop routine, cajoling me to just answer a few questions so that I could be on my way. I repeated that I refused to be interrogated as a pre-condition of re-entering my own country.

“Am I free to go?” I asked.

“No,” he said.

The officer asked for state-issued ID. I gave him my California Identification Card. I probably didn’t have to, but giving him the ID was in line with my principle that I will comply with an officer’s reasonable physical requests (stand here, go there, hand over this) but I will not answer questions about my business abroad.

The officer led me into a waiting room with about thirty chairs. Six other people were waiting.

The officer changed tack to bad cop. “Let this guy sit until he cools down,” the officer loudly said to a colleague. “It could be two, three, four hours. He’s gonna sit there until he cools down.”

I asked to speak to his superior and was told to wait.

I read a book about Chinese celebrities for about 15 minutes.

An older, rougher officer came out and called my name. “We’ve had problems with you refusing to answer questions before,” he said. “You think there’s some law that says you don’t have to answer our questions.”

“Are you denying me re-entrance to my own country?” I asked.

“Yes,” he said, and walked away.

I read for about five more minutes.

An officer walked out with my passport and ID and handed them to me.

“Am I free to go?” I asked.

“Yes,” he said.

But we weren’t done.

I picked up my checked bag and was told to speak to a customs officer. My written declaration form had been marked with a large, cross-hatched symbol that probably meant “secondary inspection of bags.”

The officer asked if the bags were mine; I handed him my baggage receipt.

He asked if I had packed the bags myself. I said I declined to answer the question.

He asked again, and I made the same reply. Same question; same response. Again; again.

“I need you to give me an oral customs declaration,” he said.

“I gave you a written declaration,” I said.

“I need to know if you want to amend that written declaration,” he said. “I need to know if there’s anything undeclared in these bags.”

I stood silently.

Visibly frustrated, he turned to a superior, who had been watching, and said that I refused to answer his questions.

“Just inspect his bags,” the senior officer said. “He has a right to remain silent.”

Finally! It took half an hour and five federal officers before one of them acknowledged that I had a right not to answer their questions.

The junior officer inspected my bags in some detail, found nothing of interest, and told me I could leave.

* * *

Principal Take-Aways

1. Cops Really Don’t Like It When You Refuse To Answer Their Questions. The passport control officer was aghast when I told her that my visit to China was none of her business. This must not happen often, because several of the officers involved seemed thrown by my refusal to meekly bend to their whim.

2. They’re Keeping Records. A federal, computer-searchable file exists on my refusal to answer questions.

3. This Is About Power, Not Security. The CBP goons want U.S. citizens to answer their questions as a ritualistic bow to their power. Well, CBP has no power over me. I am a law-abiding citizen, and, as such, I am the master, and the federal cops are my servants. They would do well to remember that.

4. U.S. Citizens Have No Obligation To Answer Questions. Ultimately, the cops let me go, because there was nothing they could do. A returning U.S. citizen has an obligation to provide proof of citizenship, and the officer has legitimate reasons to investigate if she suspects the veracity of the citizenship claim. A U.S. citizen returning with goods also has an obligation to complete a written customs declaration. But that’s it. You don’t have to answer questions about where you went, why you went, who you saw, etc.

Of course, if you don’t, you get hassled.

But that’s a small price to pay to remind these thugs that their powers are limited and restricted.
OK, this guy sounds like a tool, but he's right and it's an interesting experiment.

Thoughts?
"There is only one basic human right, the right to do as you damn well please. And with it comes the only basic human duty, the duty to take the consequences." - PJ O'Rourke
_____________
"Men and women range themselves into three classes or orders of intelligence; you can tell the lowest class by their habit of always talking about persons; the next by the fact that their habit is always to converse about things; the highest by their preference for the discussion of ideas." - Charles Stewart
_____________
"I believe there are more instances of the abridgment of the freedom of the people by gradual and silent encroachments of those in power than by violent and sudden usurpations." - James Madison
_____________
User avatar
Kil Tyme
The Gap Into Spam
Posts: 1319
Joined: Sat Jul 29, 2006 3:07 pm
Location: Washington, DC

Post by Kil Tyme »

This guy was looking for something to write about and I guess he found it. It is a standard question when re-entering the country. Back from business or pleasure? Big stink; they aren't taking notes when you reply. Other countries ask the same question when you enter their country. Much ado about nuthin. fyi: my favorite part when I am re-entering the country and they are done with the stamping and the softball question, and I always wait for it like a kid who is waiting to be given an ice cream cone, is "Welcome back home."
Cowboy: Why you doin' this, Doc?
Doc Holliday: Because Wyatt Earp is my friend.
Cowboy: Friend? Hell, I got lots of friends.
Doc Holliday: ... I don't.
User avatar
sindatur
The Gap Into Spam
Posts: 6503
Joined: Wed May 14, 2003 7:57 pm

Post by sindatur »

Definitely a TOOL.

It's true he has the right to refuse, but, I disagree with giving that right, I'm willing to forego that right. There's no reason to refuse to answer the questions asked than to be obstinate (unless you really are on a legitimate Top Secret Mission, in which case, it can be handled privately).

If someone who does some terrorism or major crime in the future is found to have not been properly screened, many would hold the Screeners responsible.

As KT says, it's not like you didn't go through the same questioning (or deeper probing) entering the Country you visited
I Never Fail To Be Astounded By The Things We Do For Promises - Ronnie James Dio (All The Fools Sailed Away)

Remember, everytime you drag someone through the mud, you're down in the mud with them

Life isn't about waiting for the storm to pass...
It's about learning to dance in the rain

Where are we going...and... WHY are we in a handbasket?

Image
User avatar
[Syl]
Unfettered One
Posts: 13020
Joined: Sat Oct 26, 2002 12:36 am
Has thanked: 1 time
Been thanked: 1 time

Post by [Syl] »

Yeah, he sounds like a tool, but he has the law on his side and some brass ones to go with it.

And it makes you wonder: if these questions are so common and trivial, why bother with them? The fact is, they're just looking for someone to incriminate themselves. All well and good, but we shouldn't be inconvenienced for it. More people could stand to be assholes in this kind of situation.
"It is not the literal past that rules us, save, possibly, in a biological sense. It is images of the past. Each new historical era mirrors itself in the picture and active mythology of its past or of a past borrowed from other cultures. It tests its sense of identity, of regress or new achievement against that past.”
-George Steiner
User avatar
sindatur
The Gap Into Spam
Posts: 6503
Joined: Wed May 14, 2003 7:57 pm

Post by sindatur »

Syl, I understand what you say about Commonality of the questions. I disagree, however, with the conclusion they are trivial. No mater what profession you choose, if you're good at it, you gain an insight when people answer common questions:

Teachers of Children -how they might react to certain teaching stimuli
Social Workers - Who is most likely to climb out of their situation
Real Estate or Wall Street Magnate - What will turn around for a profit quickly (Or be a wise long term investment)
Salesman - How to manuever/please the Customer
Border Agent
Airport Screener
Etc

They may be common questions, but you get a gut reaction from the way the questions are answered.

Many professional people who came in contact with the 9/11 Perpetrators noticed something wrong about them (The neighbors never saw anything, but, the "merchants" did). Major Hasan, Superiors felt something was off. If the obvious questions were asked in either case, might we have avoided some damage?
I Never Fail To Be Astounded By The Things We Do For Promises - Ronnie James Dio (All The Fools Sailed Away)

Remember, everytime you drag someone through the mud, you're down in the mud with them

Life isn't about waiting for the storm to pass...
It's about learning to dance in the rain

Where are we going...and... WHY are we in a handbasket?

Image
User avatar
Avatar
Immanentizing The Eschaton
Posts: 61711
Joined: Mon Aug 02, 2004 9:17 am
Location: Johannesburg, South Africa
Has thanked: 15 times
Been thanked: 21 times

Post by Avatar »

Hey, I give him kudos for having the determination to go through with it. I don't really see the point, (i.e. nothing was actually achieved except for giving the authorities the finger), but it was probably fun to see.

Personally, I'd rather save myself the trouble. But that 'cause I'm lazy and don't feel like wasting my time.

--A
User avatar
SerScot
The Gap Into Spam
Posts: 4678
Joined: Tue Oct 23, 2007 9:37 pm

Post by SerScot »

I'm impressed that did take cast iron cajones.
"Futility is the defining characteristic of life. Pain is proof of existence" - Thomas Covenant
User avatar
aliantha
blueberries on steroids
Posts: 17865
Joined: Tue Mar 05, 2002 7:50 pm
Location: NOT opening up a restaurant in Santa Fe

Post by aliantha »

Entertaining, if nothing else. :lol: But the guy's got a point. If the authorities want to pump him for information about his overseas trips and any terrorists he may or may not have met with, they ought to follow proper procedures (arrest him and let him call his lawyer), not detain him at the airport without probable cause.

Altho answering "none of your business" to start with seems to indicate he was looking for a confrontation...

When you guys say he's a tool -- are you saying someone else put him up to it? Just clarifying. I don't think I've ever heard it used that way before.
Image
Image

EZ Board Survivor

"Dreaming isn't good for you unless you do the things it tells you to." -- Three Dog Night (via the GI)

https://www.hearth-myth.com/
User avatar
SerScot
The Gap Into Spam
Posts: 4678
Joined: Tue Oct 23, 2007 9:37 pm

Post by SerScot »

Aliantha,

They have to have probable cause to arrest him, first. The authorities are not supposed to be able to arrest you because their panties are in a wad.
"Futility is the defining characteristic of life. Pain is proof of existence" - Thomas Covenant
User avatar
sindatur
The Gap Into Spam
Posts: 6503
Joined: Wed May 14, 2003 7:57 pm

Post by sindatur »

aliantha wrote:Entertaining, if nothing else. :lol: But the guy's got a point. If the authorities want to pump him for information about his overseas trips and any terrorists he may or may not have met with, they ought to follow proper procedures (arrest him and let him call his lawyer), not detain him at the airport without probable cause.

Altho answering "none of your business" to start with seems to indicate he was looking for a confrontation...

When you guys say he's a tool -- are you saying someone else put him up to it? Just clarifying. I don't think I've ever heard it used that way before.
I was using Tool as "male organ" not as "Someone else's tool" IE: He was being a Dick
I Never Fail To Be Astounded By The Things We Do For Promises - Ronnie James Dio (All The Fools Sailed Away)

Remember, everytime you drag someone through the mud, you're down in the mud with them

Life isn't about waiting for the storm to pass...
It's about learning to dance in the rain

Where are we going...and... WHY are we in a handbasket?

Image
User avatar
Damelon
Lord
Posts: 8545
Joined: Fri Dec 13, 2002 10:40 pm
Location: Illinois
Has thanked: 2 times
Been thanked: 4 times

Post by Damelon »

I take it he doesn't like law enforcement.

He's right, but if everyone acted like that it'd take twelve hours to get through customs.
Image
User avatar
SerScot
The Gap Into Spam
Posts: 4678
Joined: Tue Oct 23, 2007 9:37 pm

Post by SerScot »

This is a post from the other board I frequent "Westeros":
My favorite customs story:

Midnight arrival, long queues, and a pissed and sleepyhead me. The inefficient customs lady - the queues were horrible, they didn't even try to manage it - asked me, anything to declare? I said no, none, nada. When I was a few steps behind her, I turned back and yelled to my friend, who was in front of the lady now. "Hey, Helen, I got deadly weapons to declare....my hands!!!!"

Customs lady stopped what she was doing and looked/glared at me, I swear, in slow-mo. By this time, I was waving my hands in the air, jumping up and down, looking like a lunatic. She probably realized, Nah, not a terrorist. Just a crazy person.

Helen refused to look at me until we were out of the doors.

I've always wanted to do this, but mind, I don't think I can do this again.
(Cail please forgive me for stealing your thread idea for the other board)
"Futility is the defining characteristic of life. Pain is proof of existence" - Thomas Covenant
User avatar
[Syl]
Unfettered One
Posts: 13020
Joined: Sat Oct 26, 2002 12:36 am
Has thanked: 1 time
Been thanked: 1 time

Post by [Syl] »

sindatur wrote:If the obvious questions were asked in either case, might we have avoided some damage?
Sure, but these things have to be balanced, and if there's any uncertainty, I feel, in this country, the error should be to the side of the individual. How many questions and of what nature? You interrogate someone long enough with varied questions, you'll probably find something. But where does that get into the realm of due process? True, the questions the guy were asked were short, simple, and routine. However, a declination to answer (again, in this country) should be accepted the same as a 'correct' answer. The simple fact is that it's always in your best interest not to answer. Unless, of course, the system bullies you away from your best interests, and that should alarm us all.

www.youtube.com/watch?v=i8z7NC5sgik
"It is not the literal past that rules us, save, possibly, in a biological sense. It is images of the past. Each new historical era mirrors itself in the picture and active mythology of its past or of a past borrowed from other cultures. It tests its sense of identity, of regress or new achievement against that past.”
-George Steiner
User avatar
aliantha
blueberries on steroids
Posts: 17865
Joined: Tue Mar 05, 2002 7:50 pm
Location: NOT opening up a restaurant in Santa Fe

Post by aliantha »

Sindatur, thanks for the terminology clarification. Never woulda thought of that....
SerScot wrote:Aliantha,

They have to have probable cause to arrest him, first. The authorities are not supposed to be able to arrest you because their panties are in a wad.
Exactly my point. If they have no probable cause, other than the fact that the guy is silent, then they need to leave him alone.
Image
Image

EZ Board Survivor

"Dreaming isn't good for you unless you do the things it tells you to." -- Three Dog Night (via the GI)

https://www.hearth-myth.com/
User avatar
dlbpharmd
Lord
Posts: 14460
Joined: Thu Sep 11, 2003 9:27 am
Been thanked: 2 times

Post by dlbpharmd »

Interesting thread. I wonder: instead of saying "none of your business," what would happen if he replied, "I exercise my 5th Amendment rights?"
Image
User avatar
shadowbinding shoe
The Gap Into Spam
Posts: 1477
Joined: Sat Mar 15, 2008 6:33 am

Post by shadowbinding shoe »

The problem with the right to remain silent in all its various forms is that while it may help you individually (or may not) if a lot of people will do it the system will probably collapse. Or I suppose we'll end up with a system devoid of human testimonies. It already has a lot going for it but shouldn't we want the human voice to be heard in the system dealing with such humans?
A little knowledge is still better than no knowledge.
User avatar
Avatar
Immanentizing The Eschaton
Posts: 61711
Joined: Mon Aug 02, 2004 9:17 am
Location: Johannesburg, South Africa
Has thanked: 15 times
Been thanked: 21 times

Post by Avatar »

Interesting idea SS. Since human testimony is about the most unreliable form of "evidence" though, maybe less of it wouldn't be a bad thing...

--A
User avatar
shadowbinding shoe
The Gap Into Spam
Posts: 1477
Joined: Sat Mar 15, 2008 6:33 am

Post by shadowbinding shoe »

Avatar wrote:Interesting idea SS. Since human testimony is about the most unreliable form of "evidence" though, maybe less of it wouldn't be a bad thing...

--A
That's true. It's an attractive idea though people tend to ignore that hard evidence can be tampered with as well (*)

The problem is that that proponents of the hard evidence want to have easily accessible hard evidence. Along the way the rights to privacy tend to be tramped. Privacy is not an absolute right. Pretty much all other rights tend to trump it. But it shouldn't be done away with altogether.

Again we return to the impartial body that would be able to have access to invasive hard evidence without abusing it or being corrupted by it.



(*) DNA fingertips are quite easy to fake nowadays when the associated technology is becoming cheaper and more common all the time.
User avatar
SerScot
The Gap Into Spam
Posts: 4678
Joined: Tue Oct 23, 2007 9:37 pm

Post by SerScot »

Shadowbinging Shoe,

Have fun lobbying for a constitutional amendment to force people to incriminate themselves. Personally, I'm not fond of the idea particularly in light of recent administrations fondness for bending the rules regarding torture or claiming that because torture isn't "punishment" it's within the powers of the U.S. government to torture people.
"Futility is the defining characteristic of life. Pain is proof of existence" - Thomas Covenant
User avatar
shadowbinding shoe
The Gap Into Spam
Posts: 1477
Joined: Sat Mar 15, 2008 6:33 am

Post by shadowbinding shoe »

SerScot wrote:Shadowbinging Shoe,

Have fun lobbying for a constitutional amendment to force people to incriminate themselves. Personally, I'm not fond of the idea particularly in light of recent administrations fondness for bending the rules regarding torture or claiming that because torture isn't "punishment" it's within the powers of the U.S. government to torture people.
Nice of you to give a negative twist to my words. An Obligation to tell the truth when appropriately asked to by the proper authorities is not the same as forcing people to incriminate themselves.

But just for the heck of it, I remember a story I was given as an example of why we should use our right to refuse examination: Our buddy, who is not a lawyer, drives home from a party. A police car stops him and asks to examine him to determine if he's drunk. He calls us and ask us lawyer experts what to do. We ask him: "Have you been drinking?" and he tells us "I'm pissed out of my skull!" and we lawyers tell him to refuse.(*)

I have no sympathy for him, his right to hide his criminal drunkenness, or his lawyer buddies who help him drive safe (from police harassment) while drunk. But I suppose you disagree with me.



Edit to add - (*) It was actually a little more complicated now that I think about it. The police make him do a straight-walk and inhalation test on the spot, these being considered minor infractions on his rights and when he turns positive, i.e. drunk, they take him in. He makes the call from the police holding cell after they ask him to go through a urine and perhaps a blood test to strengthen their case against him. Presumably we, his friends, will manage to convince a judge that he wasn't drunk at all. He just had a tick in his leg and that's why he walked funny and the smell was simply from a friend splattering his shirt with his drink and everyone knows those inhalation testers are not 100% accurate.


Edit edit to add- do you too take offense at the use of the acronym SS to denote either one of us, this being a not specific enough acronym to distinguish between the two of us?
Locked

Return to “Coercri”