Homeland Security strikes again

[Dale]

Once you request an attorney any interrogation, questioning or interview must stop. Where people get in trouble is they request an attorney but cannot resist telling their side of the story and once you start to speak questioning can resume again because it is then presumed you have now waived this right. Sharp interrogators know all the tricks, they also can size up a persons personality quickly and make those statements - not questioning - that just pushes a persons buttons and the accused wants to make a statement, etc. etc. you can't beat a sharp interrogator, it just doesn't work that way.

I had many situations where the recording (when recorded or videotaped) went missing or was not on during something crucial the client or defendant said was happening. It is hard to learn you can't beat them at their own game, otherwise, the only words out of everyone's mouth would always be "I want an attorney" and then keep quiet. Also, there are exceptions to the questioning rule but only an experienced attorney would know these exceptions, therefore, best to request an attorney and wait for his arrival before considering making any statements.

[flyboy0681]

Also, there are exceptions to the questioning rule but only an experienced attorney would know these exceptions, therefore, best to request an attorney and wait for his arrival before considering making any statements.

 

Most interesting. If a situation like this happens when away from the home airport, how does one retain an attorney? Ask for the Yellow Pages?

 

I always knew that it's a poor schnook against a seasoned pro in situations like this, and is no different than a friend saying that they wore down the car salesman and got a great deal. In those situations I ask, who had the upper hand, the guy who sells five cars a day or the guy that buys a car once every seven years?

[fantom]

My son is a cop and he's given me exactly the same advise Dale is offering.

Request an attorney immediately, and zip your mouth tight.

Of course if you're a smiling yankee dent, talk like crazy

[rockydoc]

So Dale, I very much appreciate your expert opinion.  I have a couple of questions.  First, Since a ramp check is mandated by FAR's, while we can put it off and refuse the inspector admittance to the inside of our airplane, the only legally mandated information we have to give is to produce our documents.  Right?

Second, I have been under the impression that if you are being questioned or detained by Homeland Security that you do not have the right to have an attorney nor do you have the right to notify anyone where you are being held.  If that is the case, how is the best way to deal with Homeland Security should they start questioning you and decide to detain you if you don't answer their questions?  thanks

[Marauder]

I want an attorney. Silence, silence, silence... OKAY, I can't take it anymore! I did it! I did it! You satisfied?! I did it!

[Dale]

The rules have continue to evolve after 911.  There are situations where an attorney does not need to be provided or where you need to provide basic information or documents.  Two exceptions come to mind, First, in some states you are required to give your name (stop & identify statutes in many states) and general paperwork such as driver's license and registration.  However, you are not required to answer further questions.  Same goes for an accident investigation, depending on the State your are in, you may be required to answer certain questions that pertain to a traffic accident, once the officer changes hats and starts a criminal investigation, you do not have to answer questions.  A limited immunity for questioning for traffic accidents is generally given in these situations.

 

It gets much a bit more murky after this, especially when you are at a place of travel or on the high seas and it is a customs agent, TSA agent, etc.  Please understand, this is not my area of practice, although I still read the cases when they come out.  There are still a number of cases winding their way through the appellate system, that will clarify some of these issues.  My understanding is that at ports of entry and/or airports, when requested by a TSA or customs officers you may be required to respond to questions such as what property you have with you, are you carrying dangerous weapons or drugs and your travel itinerary.  Beyond basic safety issues going to Homeland Security, you have a right not to answer and to request an attorney.  Also, at ports of entry or on the high seas, you can be searched without your consent.  Most people do not know their rights or what they can or cannot be asked.  A recent case is going through the appellate system that will discuss what happens when a person asks an officer (at an airport) what rights he has while being questioned and the officer says he can't tell him.  In general, other than giving basic information such as your name and the basic paperwork you have in your possession, you have a right to an attorney and a right to remain silent.  Requesting an attorney, or refusing to answer questions when in custody, cannot be used against you in court.  Officers almost universally will tell you that if you have nothing to hide, you should speak to them or they tell you the conversation is off the record.  Common tactics to get people to speak with them voluntarily and the information will always be used against you in court, NOTHING is off the record when you are speaking with the authorities.  Sorry.  I have had an attorney friend of mine, when confronted by officers asking questions simply asked the officer if he was free to leave, if he was, then he simply left, if not then he was being detained or in custody, and this may require additional constitutional protections, such as Miranda warnings before any further interrogation, etc. 

 

I don't know if I have made any of this clearer or murkier.  The best advice is what was presented in the video, ask for your attorney and keep quiet.  If it ever gets to court, (which most will not) if needed your attorney can always explain that you would have loved to speak with the officers in depth but as a nonattorney you were unsure of your rights and wanted your attorney present to discuss those rights.  The attorney can really run with this with most judges anyway.

[mikerocosm]

I'm pretty sure that ramp checks are the FAA's purview, not Homeland Security's. It's not clear from the article what the DHS guys claimed to be doing, or under what authority, but it wasn't a ramp check. Nor is Oklahoma close enough to a border to warrant a suspension of the fourth amendment for customs' purposes.

 

And while picking nits, I'm pretty sure Mr. Silverstein's hair does not fall into the pot-scented dreadlocks category, but is probably more characteristic of that worn by some Jews honoring the admonition in Leviticus (19:27) to wit: "Ye shall not round the corners of your heads, neither shalt thou mar the corners of thy beard." Jews refer to these as "sidelocks."

 

Under any circumstances, the DHS guys were, in my opinion, way over the line not only in what they demanded, but in the aggressively ignorant way they acted. It's reminiscent of what happened to that glider pilot over the nuclear reactor . . . At least Barney Fife was funny.

 

Standing up for your rights (and everybody else's, by extension) is almost never easy, but always worth it.

[fantom]

Standing up for your rights (and everybody else's, by extension) is almost never easy, but always worth it.

 

Not easy, not simple, not immediately rewarding, many times never a tangible return, not painless, usually not supported by many others.....BUT the right thing to DO.

 

Too many these days would rather just whine, complain, and pontificate.

 

Sad and gutless, IMHO.

[rockydoc]

Reading these comments by my fellow forum members encourages me greatly.  The principals our country was founded on are alive.  Hooray!

[carusoam]

Choosing freedom is not always going to be easy...

As you guys have so elegantly pointed out.

So, if I have my arow documents available, do I readily hand them over, and stop with that. Or are you suggesting wait for an attorney before ever handing over these docs? Or it depends on whether it's the FAA or someone else?

Best regards,

-a-

[chrisk]

So, if I have my arow documents available, do I readily hand them over, and stop with that. Or are you suggesting wait for an attorney before ever handing over these docs? Or it depends on whether it's the FAA or someone else?

Best regards,

-a-

Personally, I would hand over AROW documents at a ramp check and not worry about it.   On the other hand, if someone wants more than that, I'm not inclined to participate. 

[1964-M20E]

I'm not a lawyer but I agree ARROW docs, your medical, and PPL can be reasonably asked for by DHS, FAA, local LEO and it is reasonable for your tor present them. This is not much different than when you get pulled over by the police on the highway.<br />From my training as a LEO to search your interior of your personal vehicle or residence without probable cause PC is protected by the 4th amendment. What is in plain sight by looking through the window or open door or smell is fair game and if something is seen that can reasonably ascertained without touching it to be “contraband” then that gives the officer PC to proceed and search the vehicle without your consent. Otherwise your consent or warrant is needed to do a detailed search of the vehicle. Furthermore, the search must be relevant to what is being searched for under the warrant. You cannot look for an elephant in a jewelry box.<br />

[rockydoc]

Personally, I would hand over AROW documents at a ramp check and not worry about it.   On the other hand, if someone wants more than that, I'm not inclined to participate. 

Seems like that would probably work with an FAA ramp check, but

1)  would your give the FAA inspector permission to enter your airplane?

2)  how about dealing with Homeland Security like the prior experiences of several.  i.e.  Would you just say, "I want a lawyer."  

[flyboy0681]

What I've walked away with from these posts is that one should cooperate during a ramp check but keep the talk to a minimum if DHS stops you for whatever reason.

[Bennett]

This is my third attempt to post a reply to this thread. Everytime I finish, the program sends the reply to limbo. Short attempt:

see: http://www.theatlantic.com/national/archive/2013/05/annals-of-the-security-state-more-airplane-stories/276018/

Articles are a bit long (first pilot) but worth reading. Ultimately the first pilot

stood his ground, and I would have done the same in the same circumstances.

Too many of these "incidents", and these two pilots are obviously not flakes. Hadn't

heard about either one until AOPA mentioned the Atlantic link in today's eBrief.

[sleepingsquirrel]

Evoke every right one has.

 

I do not consent to a search

I refuse to answer

I request an attorney

Shut up, lock up and walk away if not under arrest.

[sleepingsquirrel]

I was once boarded by the F.B.I. off the coast of Georgia. They came in on a beeline in an unmarked derelect looking powerboat with Fl. registration. At first they pulled up alongside a respectable distance away . They asked where I was going and if I was alone.

When they asked if I was alone , I lied and said no.

 Then one of them said we're the F.B.I. and we're gong to board you.

 

 When I asked to see their I.D. the helmsman whipped the helm  hardover and came  down on my boat with something to the effect I 'll show you a badge or I don't have to show you a badge. 

 I was going below to get my shotgun when I saw through the port light , someone handing life jackets from below, stenciled on the vest was ," work vest only".

I was boarded and only in a split second did I save my life and possibly others by realizing thugs would not don a life jacket. It was really the stencil "work vest only " that gave me any idea that they were who they said they were ,Government.The jackass at the helm endangered everyone that day by not acting professionally.

They looked me and the boat over, took the serial # off the shotgun, showed me I.D. and one of them gave me his card, which I have to this day.

I was told that "I FIT THE DESCRIPTION OF SOMEONE THEY WERE LOOKING FOR".

 

I tell this story because I know how quickly these things can spin out of control, NO , I was not being a smartass by asking to see I.D. It's my right to defend myself on the high seas.

[rockydoc]

After reading all of these postings and the articles, i have come to a conclusion.  i.e. should I ever be approached by the FAA for a ramp inspection, I will tell them I don't have time right now and I want them to schedule an appointment with me for a more convenient time.  Also, I will refuse them entry to my airplane.  Secondly, I do a lot of cross country flying (west to east, east to west), should i ever be approached by the FBI, DEA, Homeland Security or any other law enforcement agency, I will IMMEDIATELY ask them if i am free to leave.  If they say yes, I will leave.  if they say no, I will IMMEDIATELY tell them I want a lawyer to be provided for me.  I am at peace with this decision.  Thank all of you for your input on helping me to arrive at this decision.

[flyboy0681]

  If they say yes, I will leave.  if they say no, I will IMMEDIATELY tell them I want a lawyer to be provided for me.  I am at peace with this decision.  Thank all of you for your input on helping me to arrive at this decision.

 

Is it the government's responsibility to supply an attorney if requested or the person being interviewed, at their expense?

[rockydoc]

Is it the government's responsibility to supply an attorney if requested or the person being interviewed, at their expense?

The government.

[flyboy0681]

It seems that the AOPA is scratching their heads too when it comes to these interdiction's. The scary part of it all is that the AOPA really doesn't have any advice for pilots yet who find themselves in this situation and the Feds are not answering their request for information.

 

http://www.aopa.org/advocacy/articles/2013/130523fresh-reports-of-aircraft-searches-cbp-has-little-to-s.html?CMP=News:S1RM

 

I've been reading a lot about the subject over the past few days and learned that the Patriot Act has given law enforcement agencies more leeway than we are aware of when it comes to these incidents. Those of us who are under the impression that you only have to show your license and aircraft documents only to the FAA are sorely mistaken. And those that think that they can simply ask if they are being detained and can simply climb back in and fly off if the officer says no are also in for a rude awakening.

 

One thing that I've come away with after reading accounts of these incidents from our fellow pilots that have been through them is that no matter how well you think you can stand up to law enforcement, all reported that it was scary as hell and they came away shaking instead of holding their head up high John Wayne style. Many times they were faced by an army of agents with machine guns, they don't answer questions that you present to them, if you try to be assertive in your questioning to the head honcho he will become agitated and pour it on even heavier. It Border Patrol stops you they can board the aircraft without a warrant but in all cases they first asked the pilot for permission. If you think you can simply get on the phone with someone when you are stopped, think again as most times they will instantly confiscate it the moment you take it out until the ordeal is over (maybe they are afraid you will video the event).

 

One thing still holds up however, you do have the right to remain silent, however, it will cost you dearly in terms of time since they will most likely take you "downtown".

 

Moving forward I'm wondering if the AOPA will have enough influence to get their foot in the door to at least address some of our concerns. Hopefully Craig Fuller's successor will be a pilot and Washington insider who knows his or her way around.

[rockydoc]

It seems that the AOPA is scratching their heads too when it comes to these interdiction's. The scary part of it all is that the AOPA really doesn't have any advice for pilots yet who find themselves in this situation and the Feds are not answering their request for information.

 

http://www.aopa.org/advocacy/articles/2013/130523fresh-reports-of-aircraft-searches-cbp-has-little-to-s.html?CMP=News:S1RM

 

I've been reading a lot about the subject over the past few days and learned that the Patriot Act has given law enforcement agencies more leeway than we are aware of when it comes to these incidents. Those of us who are under the impression that you only have to show your license and aircraft documents only to the FAA are sorely mistaken. And those that think that they can simply ask if they are being detained and can simply climb back in and fly off if the officer says no are also in for a rude awakening.

 

One thing that I've come away with after reading accounts of these incidents from our fellow pilots that have been through them is that no matter how well you think you can stand up to law enforcement, all reported that it was scary as hell and they came away shaking instead of holding their head up high John Wayne style. Many times they were faced by an army of agents with machine guns, they don't answer questions that you present to them, if you try to be assertive in your questioning to the head honcho he will become agitated and pour it on even heavier. It Border Patrol stops you they can board the aircraft without a warrant but in all cases they first asked the pilot for permission. If you think you can simply get on the phone with someone when you are stopped, think again as most times they will instantly confiscate it the moment you take it out until the ordeal is over (maybe they are afraid you will video the event).

 

One thing still holds up however, you do have the right to remain silent, however, it will cost you dearly in terms of time since they will most likely take you "downtown".

 

Moving forward I'm wondering if the AOPA will have enough influence to get their foot in the door to at least address some of our concerns. Hopefully Craig Fuller's successor will be a pilot and Washington insider who knows his or her way around.

I very much liked the way you put it.  Plain and simple.  Our government is using heavy handed tactics to intimidate us.  I feel the only reason they continue to do this is because not enough of us are challenging them.  Most of us know we're innocent of any wrong doing so we tolerate such abusive tactics feeling that that is the best way to put it behind us.  The common man doesn't have an advocate in these kind of situations.  I have been a member of the AOPA for years.  I have reaped much benefit from that membership.  I would hope that they could take this on as a "cause" and have their legal department consistently file objections to this kind of "disrespectful" treatment.  I am not overly hopeful this will happen, but "hope springs eternal."

[rockydoc]

I just sent an email to the AOPA asking them if they will provide us with legal services should we find ourselves in this situation and refuse  to say anything until we have a lawyer present.  Maybe others of this forum could do the same thing.  Possibly this could heighten the awareness of the AOPA to the importance of this issue with its members.

[flyboy0681]

The good news is that cases like this are (for now) very rare and one should probably play the lottery since they bring better odds.

 

But let's not lose sight of the fact that your government is using {severe} strong-arm tactics at a time when a cordial conversation would probably net better results. Think John and Martha.

[Z W]

I'm an attorney familiar with these issues.  If anybody wants my cell phone number to put in their phone, send me a PM.  I don't want to post it in the public search-able forum, but I'm happy to give it out to fellow pilots.

 

If you ever find yourself accosted by Homeland Security, the FBI, Border Patrol, or anybody else, ask to call an attorney, and call me.  No charge.

 

Attorneys, including me and those hired by the AOPA, cannot post general guidance for what to do.  It's not smart or even legal to give generalized legal advice like that.  But if you get me on the phone, I can advise you for your current situation, and I would be happy to.  If it results in a few more pilots exercising their constitutional rights in a smart, respectful manner, it will be time well spent.