So the
Police would like to Question you?
If a Police officer wants to question you
about a crime, what should you do? Here are some tips.
Refusing to answer a police officer's questions is not a crime. Of
course, people often voluntarily assist the police by supplying
information that might help the police make an arrest. But the Bill
of Rights under the 1987 Constitution guarantees the "right of the
person to remain silent." A police officer generally cannot arrest a
person simply for failure to respond to questions. This means that
unless a police officer has "probable cause" to make an arrest or a
"reasonable suspicion" to conduct a "stop and frisk," a person
approached by the police officer has the legal right to walk away.
But the fact that there may be a legal right to walk away doesn't
mean this is a wise move. This is because there is no real way to
tell what information the officer is using as a basis for his or her
actions. In fact, the officer may have information that gives him or
her a valid legal basis to make an arrest or to conduct a "stop and
frisk," even if the individual is, in truth, innocent of any
wrongdoing. If that is the case, an officer may forcibly detain an
innocent individual who starts to leave the scene of an interview.
Common sense and self-protection suggest that people who intend to
walk away from a police officer make sure that the officer does not
intend to arrest or detain them. A good question might be, "Officer,
I'm in a hurry, and I'd prefer not to talk to you right now. You
won't try to stop me from leaving, right?" If the officer replies
that the person is not free to leave, the person should remain at
the scene and leave the question of whether the detention is correct
to the courts at a later time.
Even though, as a general rule, a person doesn't have to respond to
a police officer's questions, this may not hold true if the officer
suspects the person of loitering or vagrancy. The revised Penal Code
defines vagrancy as "wandering about from place to place without
apparent business, such that the person poses a threat to public
safety." Under this provision, if a police officer sees a person
loitering, the officer can demand identification and an explanation
of the person's activities. If the person fails to comply, the
officer can arrest the person for loitering. Therefore, the refusal
to answer questions is a problem only if the officer has also
observed the person loitering.
Another situation where answers to police questions are usually
required is when drivers are stopped for suspected traffic
violations. Traffic offenses such as speeding and unsafe lane
changes are generally classified as "infractions," for which drivers
are given traffic tickets in lieu of arrest. However, an officer has
the right to demand personal identification -- usually a driver's
license and the vehicle registration. A driver's refusal to supply
the information elevates the situation to a more serious offense,
for which the driver usually can be arrested. The simple refusal to
answer questions is not a crime, but the refusal to supply
identification, combined with the suspected commission of a traffic
offense, is.
Miranda
Rights
People are often surprised to learn that if a person hasn't yet been
arrested, the police may question the person and use the answers in
court without first providing the familiar "Miranda warning" that
advises people of their constitutional right to remain silent to
have an attorney present if they do decide to talk to police
officers. In fact, the Miranda warning is required only if the
person being questioned is in custody or under custodial
investigation.
Deciding
Whether to Answer Pre-Arrest Questions
Whether or not to respond to police questioning generally depends on
the person's possible relationship to criminal activity, the
person's views of his or her civic responsibilities, and the
person's past experiences with the police. If, however, the
questioning involves events that may result in criminal charges
against the person being questioned, the almost universal advice of
criminal lawyers is to keep the old mouth tightly shut. Suspects all
too frequently unwittingly reveal information that can later be used
as evidence of their guilt. The right against self-incrimination or
to not incriminate oneself guaranteed by the 1987 Constitution is
especially powerful in this situation. A person who has reason to
believe that he or she is a potential suspect should politely
decline to answer questions, at least until after your has already
arrived and ready to assist you.
The Right
of the Police to Conduct A Stop and Frisk
A
police officer may stop a person in order to question them if the
officer has a "reasonable suspicion" that the person is engaged in
criminal activity. And for self-protection, the officer can at the
same time carry out a limited pat-down search for weapons (a
"frisk").
Recent cases decided by the Supreme Court interpreted the "stop and
frisk" rule. In one case, the Court ruled that running away from the
police is enough of a reason for the police to stop and frisk the
accused. In another case decided by
the Supreme Court, before the Police could stop and frisk, he or she
must have reasonable grounds to believe that the person to be
arrested must execute an overt act indicating that he has just
committed, is actually committing, or is attempting to commit a
crime in his or her presence (People vs. Binad Sy Chua, February 4,
2003 G.R. 136006-67).
Also in recent American Jurisprudence, the US Supreme Court ruled
that an anonymous tip that a suspect might be armed was insufficient
justification for the police to conduct stop and frisk, absent other
facts demonstrating the reliability of the tip. (Florida
v. J.L, No. 98-1993 (March 28, 2000).)
Contact Us
___________________________________
You're invited to call us to discuss
your Philippine Criminal Law concerns. We shall be glad to talk with you over
the telephone, or in our office or yours, whichever is easiest for
you. You can also e-mail us at
gtalaw@gtalawphil.com and we shall get back to you
immediately.
GUZMAN TAŅEDO & ACAIN
Mile Long Building 316
Legaspi Village
Amorsolo Street
Makati City
Telephone: 8941441
TeleFax: 8124296
e-mail:
gtalaw@gtalawphil.com
|
