Public Defender Arrested For Intervening Between Police And Her Client

[Jimzz]

San Francisco Deputy Public Defender Arrested For Intervening Between Police And Her Client
http://sanfrancisco.cbslocal.com/20...or-intervening-between-police-and-her-client/


Well duh, what did you think was going to happen Ms. lawyer when you tired to follow the law and represent your client. The police ARE the law you should just ignore your clients rights and let the police do as they want. /s


"According to Public Defender Jeff Adachi, Stansbury arrested Tillotson for refusing to let her client be questioned without the presence of his attorney."


UPDATE:
S.F. won’t press charges against deputy public defender
http://www.sfgate.com/crime/article/S-F-police-won-t-press-charges-against-6063816.php

At least the DAs office is not as dumb as the police in this case.

 

[Genx87]

Murrica 15

 

[Subyman]

The case will likely be thrown out. She wouldn't let them take a picture of her client for some reason, so they arrested her for "resisting arrest", but they had to cook up a reason to arrest her before she could resist the arrest after the fact. Strange.

 

[waggy]

yeah. i wonder what will happen with that case. odds are thrown out.

 

[GarfieldtheCat]

Just another isolated bad apple....Merg and others assure us that the cops are good and don't break the law.

On a serious note, this is what you get when you basically allow cops to do whatever they want over a long period of time. They know they won't get in trouble, so why bother to follow the law?

 

[PokerGuy]

What a horribly written article, it's completely unclear what happened and what the points of contention are. Does the police have a right to take a picture of someone without their lawyer present? She's saying she was arrested for not allowing her client to be questioned without her being present, but the cop wanted to take a picture, I didn't see anything about questioning. Representing your client doesn't mean you can interfere with lawful activities. The question is, was the activity lawful, and did she have a right to not allow it?

 

[smackababy]

Just another isolated bad apple....Merg and others assure us that the cops are good and don't break the law.

So, when a relative few Muslims are extremists, we continuously hear not to paint the entirety of Islam as them. When a few people of a race commit crimes, we are urged not to base our views of that race on the relative few. When a cop does something illegal, we get to paint all cops as lawbreaking thugs!

P&N, am I doing this right?

What a horribly written article, it's completely unclear what happened and what the points of contention are. Does the police have a right to take a picture of someone without their lawyer present? She's saying she was arrested for not allowing her client to be questioned without her being present, but the cop wanted to take a picture, I didn't see anything about questioning. Representing your client doesn't mean you can interfere with lawful activities. The question is, was the activity lawful, and did she have a right to not allow it?

On a serious note, I believe if a suspect is in custody, yes they have the rights to take pictures. However, I believe if he is voluntarily there, they have to obtain a warrant.

 

[Sulaco]

So, when a relative few Muslims are extremists, we continuously hear not to paint the entirety of Islam as them. When a few people of a race commit crimes, we are urged not to base our views of that race on the relative few. When a cop does something illegal, we get to paint all cops as lawbreaking thugs!

P&N, am I doing this right?

Shut up you pig-loving racist! Stop shitting all over the P&N CopHateCircleJerk™

I....was....so......close!

 

[rudeguy]

yeah. i wonder what will happen with that case. odds are thrown out.

Who cares if its thrown out?

That is false arrest, kidnapping, filing a false report and a few other civil rights violations. The cops need to be fired, arrested, sued, thrown in jail, surrender all pension to the victim.

 

[PokerGuy]

Just another isolated bad apple....Merg and others assure us that the cops are good and don't break the law.

I don't think anyone has ever said that cops don't break the law. There are hundreds of thousands of LEO's, what percentage are bad? I don't know the answer to that, but the percentage that's 'bad' certainly appears higher than it appeared in the past.

On a serious note, this is what you get when you basically allow cops to do whatever they want over a long period of time. They know they won't get in trouble, so why bother to follow the law?

I agree. Not only should they not be able to get away with more than the average citizen, they should be held to a higher standard than the average citizen because they are granted more power by the state.

 

[Genx87]

What a horribly written article, it's completely unclear what happened and what the points of contention are. Does the police have a right to take a picture of someone without their lawyer present? She's saying she was arrested for not allowing her client to be questioned without her being present, but the cop wanted to take a picture, I didn't see anything about questioning. Representing your client doesn't mean you can interfere with lawful activities. The question is, was the activity lawful, and did she have a right to not allow it?

This is from the article.

During the time Tillotson was not present, Stanbury photographed and questioned her client and another man who did not have an attorney present, acccording to Adachi. The officers refused to tell the men.

Second does blocking the ability of a cop to take a picture of somebody in public constitute a criminal offense?

 

[GarfieldtheCat]

What a horribly written article, it's completely unclear what happened and what the points of contention are. Does the police have a right to take a picture of someone without their lawyer present? She's saying she was arrested for not allowing her client to be questioned without her being present, but the cop wanted to take a picture, I didn't see anything about questioning. Representing your client doesn't mean you can interfere with lawful activities. The question is, was the activity lawful, and did she have a right to not allow it?

Did you RTFA?

During the time Tillotson was not present, Stanbury photographed and questioned her client and another man who did not have an attorney present, acccording to Adachi.

They were questioning him, and questioned him again after his PD was taken away.

 

[smackababy]

Second does blocking the ability of a cop to take a picture of somebody in public constitute a criminal offense?

If the taking of pictures is in the process of collecting evidence, I guess it would be obstruction of justice for preventing that from happening.

 

[GarfieldtheCat]

So, when a relative few Muslims are extremists, we continuously hear not to paint the entirety of Islam as them. When a few people of a race commit crimes, we are urged not to base our views of that race on the relative few. When a cop does something illegal, we get to paint all cops as lawbreaking thugs!

P&N, am I doing this right?

For a troll post, yes you are. But given there are about 1.5 BILLION Muslims, the percentage of non terrorist Muslims is about 99.9%.

Anyone want to guess the percentage of cops that commit abuse? No records kept AFAIK. Maybe 1 million? So holding to the same standard, that is 1000 bad cops. I think we have more then 1000 instances of cop abuse a year.

 

[PokerGuy]

This is from the article.

Second does blocking the ability of a cop to take a picture of somebody in public constitute a criminal offense?

As I said, horribly written article. "the officers refused to tell the men". Refused to tell them what?

And yes, blocking the ability of the cop to take any lawful action can constitute a criminal offense. The question is, was the action lawful.

Did you RTFA?

Yes. It is horribly written and the details are completely unclear.

They were questioning him, and questioned him again after his PD was taken away.

They were trying to take a picture, not questioning him - at least that's what the cop said. They arrested her when she wouldn't allow them to take the pictures.

 

[PokerGuy]

For a troll post, yes you are. But given there are about 1.5 BILLION Muslims, the percentage of non terrorist Muslims is about 99.9%.

Anyone want to guess the percentage of cops that commit abuse? No records kept AFAIK. Maybe 1 million? So holding to the same standard, that is 1000 bad cops. I think we have more then 1000 instances of cop abuse a year.

So, do you have some sort of guideline as to when it's OK to apply the broad brush? What's the appropriate percentage?

 

[Genx87]

If the taking of pictures is in the process of collecting evidence, I guess it would be obstruction of justice for preventing that from happening.

Sure, but this was clearly not a place to collect evidence. No crime was committed by the target of the photograph.

 

[Londo_Jowo]

Interesting comments in the SFGate article.

http://www.sfgate.com/bayarea/article/S-F-public-defender-detained-outside-court-6046088.php

The public defender’s office is arguing that Tillotson’s client had a right to counsel. But Aviram said that for the right to counsel to apply to this situation, the officers would have to be questioning Tillotson’s client about the theft case for which she was representing him.

 

[Jimzz]

Interesting comments in the SFGate article.

http://www.sfgate.com/bayarea/article/S-F-public-defender-detained-outside-court-6046088.php

She could represent him personally on any other case as well, nothing stopping that. That and how was she to know it was not about the current case? That was her client and she was representing him, that's all the police needed to know and should have stopped trying to talk or harass him.

 

[Londo_Jowo]

She could represent him personally on any other case as well, nothing stopping that. That and how was she to know it was not about the current case? That was her client and she was representing him, that's all the police needed to know and should have stopped trying to talk or harass him.

That's not what was said in the article and according to the police she was aware it was concerning a different case.

As far as I know public defenders are assigned by the court to handle specific cases.

 

[runzwithsizorz]

That's not what was said in the article and according to the police she was aware it was concerning a different case.

As far as I know public defenders are assigned by the court to handle specific cases.

This case, that case, unrelated or not, it doesn't matter!! Don't talk to the police, and don't talk to my client PERIOD! You think the cop just wanted to know the price of tea in Chinatown??

 

[Brainonska511]

Interesting comments in the SFGate article.

http://www.sfgate.com/bayarea/article/S-F-public-defender-detained-outside-court-6046088.php

Sounds like they're trying to split hairs and erode people's right to counsel.

 

[Londo_Jowo]

This case, that case, unrelated or not, it doesn't matter!! Don't talk to the police, and don't talk to my client PERIOD! You think the cop just wanted to know the price of tea in Chinatown??

According to the article the police wanted to know their names and take their pictures.

“What I saw from the video was the cops asking their names and taking their pictures from angles that lead me to believe that they were putting together a lineup for another offense,” Aviram said. “Presumably they can do this, but ordinarily they wouldn’t grab you from a courtroom hallway.”

This is not a violation of the law nor a person's constitutional rights.

 

[rudeguy]

According to the article the police wanted to know their names and take their pictures.



This is not a violation of the law nor a person's constitutional rights.

No but false arrest is. The police are not entitled to take pictures or question people.

It doesn't matter if the lawyer was representing the defendant on a different case. If the police came up and asked him if he had committed a murder and the lawyer told him not to answer, would she be guilty of a crime?

Cops need to respect our rights.

 

[Londo_Jowo]

No but false arrest is. The police are not entitled to take pictures or question people.

It doesn't matter if the lawyer was representing the defendant on a different case. If the police came up and asked him if he had committed a murder and the lawyer told him not to answer, would she be guilty of a crime?

Cops need to respect our rights.

I think I listen to someone who understands law rather than a self proclaimed know it all on the itarwebs.