CHEAT SHEET ON THE CONSTITUTION FOR POLITICIANS AND REPORTERS

OK, I have had it. Elected officials and reporters are getting it wrong....almost all of the time. Many of them are attorneys and ought to know better. I can understand their lack of a good legal education if they went to Standford, Yale, Princton, or Harvard, where their "legal fundementals" are classes like: "Social Justice and the Constitution", "Law of Women and Minorities", or "Insider Trading Made Easy" The criminal law course was more about the professors view of social justice, than murder. The rest of us actually had to learn the law. Here is a quick check list for the above individuals who despite a legal education, don't know a friggin thing about the law.I am not going to cite case law here since this blog is for non lawyers. Even if many looked the case up and read it, they likely would not understand many of the words of art and the legal premise of much of the holding without law school, so I am going to make this simple enough for Geraldo (who is a lawyer, by the way) or an MSNBC reporter.

1. "That Racist Cop Searched Me Without a Warrant"

Yep, he did, and he can under the constitution. Actually, that racist cop can search you in a number of ways without a warrant. First, if he reasonably suspects you are engaged in or about to engage in a public offense, he can detain you. Yep, you cannot leave. If he has reasonable suspicion (a legal term which means a hunch with a little more, maybe), he can detain you for as long as it is reasonable necessary to confirm or dispel his educated hunch. Now in the course of this detention, information is developed based on anything almost, that you are armed, he can pat down your outer clothing for a weapon. So, yes, given the above he can search (sort of) you without a warrant.

2. "That Cop Arrested Me Without a Warrant"

Again, yes he did, and he can under the law and the constitution. Having a warrant to arrest a person is not required under the law (except for when you are home in your house) If the cop has probable cause to believe you have committed a public offense, he has the power to take you into custody. And, now he can REALLY search you. Any illegal item he finds during this search "incident to his or her arrest" that is illegal or fattening (just kidding) can be used as evidence against you.....All without a warrant of arrest.

3. "That Cop Did Not Read Me My Rights, So The Case Is No Good"

Wrong Kemosabi. You have no right to be advised to shut the hell up and if you don't, what you say can be used against you. Miranda says only that a person must be advised of their Miranda rights if and when "custodial interrogation" is conducted. That ain't "where do you live; what is your date of birth, blood type, etc" Being arrested does not trigger a requirement a person be advised of any so-called "constitutional" right.

4. "They Can't Charge Me With Murder Because I did Not Premeditate The Killing"

Wrong again. Murder is the killing of a human being with malice. Malice here does not mean hatred, it most simply means ill will. Malice for murder can be shown any one of four ways, but premeditation is not a requirement to be convicted of murder. (Pay attention Geraldo, you're getting it wrong daily on national TV). Premeditation can make the murder first degree, but it is not required to prove common law (murder, second degree) murder.

5. "That Cop Searched My Car Without A Warrant" "He Can't Use My Machine Gun Against Me"

Again, wrong. If the police have probable cause to believe your car contains evidence of a crime, they do not need a warrant. They can search anywhere in your vehicle, including the trunk and even inside your spare tire. Period. It is called the Automobile Exception (to the warrant requirement)

6. "I was Charged With XXX Even Though I Didn't: (fill in the blank, like shoot the gun or break into the house). I Will Beat The Rap"

Probably not. If you assist someone to commit a crime with the intent to provide that assistance, you are just as guilty as the doer and face the same penalty. People who help other people to commit a crime are treated as a "principle" and, as such, are equally liable.

7. "I wasn't even there, and they charged me with the same crime, I'm Getting Off!"

Perhaps not. You see, when two or more people agree to commit a crime and each one does some small act in furtherance of the objective, they are "co-conspirators" Under these rules, co-conspirators are liable for any crime committed by another member of the conspiracy, and even crime not discussed in the agreement as long as the crime was reasonably foreseeable.


There are many, many other legal issues the elected officials and the reporters are getting wrong every day. Too many for this entry. Please, do not get your legal training from TV, even if it is Judge Judy. The odds are they are wrong, more often than not. I just wish the electeds and the reporters would either get some small level of legal knowledge. It seems only reasonable since they protray themselves as all knowing on TV and the papers. It is not too much to ask.