Scenario 2

[Jynkxxie]

O.k. Lets do something fun again...

A dark-haired woman wearing sunglasses robbed the First National Band of Ames at gunpoint. One of the tellers sent an alarm to the police. One officer saw a car traveling away from the bank at a high rate of speed, so he stopped the car. Ursula, who had sunglasses and was dark-haired, drove the car. The officer made a warrantless arrest. (Assume no violation of the 4th Amendment) The officer took Ursula to the police station. It was too late in the day to take her before a magistrate, so she had to stay in jail over night. The police decided to conduct a lineup while the witnesses' memories were fresh. The police put Ursula in a lineup with five other women of appoximately similar appearance and asked two of the bank tellers to see if they could pick out the robber. Ursula protested prior to and during the lineup that she wanted to have her lawyer present during the lineup, but the police refused, telling Ursula that her lawyer would only delay the proceeding and make trouble. One of the tellers, Arlene, picked Ursula out of the lineup. At the trial, Ursula seeks to have this lineup identification excluded from the evidence against her on the grounds that the refusal of thepolice to allow her attorney to be present violated her right to counsel. Should the lineup be excluded on the ground? Should the in-court Identification be excluded?

[Darin]

Hmmm very good scenario T-dogg. My guess would be that the line up should be excluded and her right to counsel was violated.

[Drew27k9]

First thing the police should have done, is when they had the car stop, bring the witness to the scene to make the identification. Once the police made the arrest, the woman asked for a lawyer, and I say that the courts would throw out the line up.

[wpd11]

Her attorney could not stop the line up but should have been called to the station. The attorney would of made sure that everyone in the line up had the same characteristics and appeared to look alike somehow. The attorney had the right to be called. This would be thrown out.

[BHG]

well to me what would solve the crime is did she have a gun and the money in the car from the bank? I dont recall reading that.

[gdowkpc]

BHG, this is not about solving a crime, but a question about rights.

We don't use line-ups, but the show up would be the appropriate course of action.

If going strictly by the scenario, I don't think the presence of the attorney makes a difference. What good to the defendant would having the attorney there do?

[wpd11]

What do you mean what good would it do to have the attorney there? If I was the defendant you could bet your last dollar that I would have them there.

reason 1: It is my right to have the attorney there.

reason 2: Attorney has the right to make sure everything is fair as for the line up.

reason 3: I would want my attorney to tear your line-up apart.

reason 4: This is like saying why would you want to have an attorney while I ask you a few questions for?

[wpd11]

BHG, this is not about solving a crime, but a question about rights.

If going strictly by the scenario, I don't think the presence of the attorney makes a difference. What good to the defendant would having the attorney there do?

You even said it above ( this is not about solving a crime, but a question about rights )

It is all about peoples rights. This is why the attorney should be there. Because he has the right to be there.

[Drew27k9]

I'm not positive, but once the person is arrested like the woman in this case, I don't believe that you could force her into a physical line up. You could make a photo line up with her mug shot, but physically forcing her into a line up, I don't think so..hell maybe I'm wrong, won't be the first time.

[Scruit]

I don't believe it's a given that the lineup will be thrown out, but the police had better have plenty documentation to refute any allegations of an unfair lineup that the defense lawyer comes out with.

Were the people all of approximate height? "Yes, 5'6", 5'5", 5'7", 5'6" and 5'7"
Were the people all of similar appearance? "Yes, here's a photo of the lineup showing that the witness had to choose from."

Did the officer make any statement to the victim that would influence her decision? like 'You can choose either 1, 2..... *THREEE*.... 4 or 5'

Did the police walk the suspect in an area where the victim could see him wearing handcuffs. In the lineup is the suspect wearing handcuffs or not? If so, are they all wearing handcuffs?

There's a million different ways of intentionally and unintentionally influencing the lineup... and that's the kind of thing that a defense lawyer needs to be present for. I would say that a judge should throw out the lineup unless the police can convince him/her it was fair.


Having said that - if I'm forced into a lineup that I don't want to participate in and refused a lawyer then when the witness is viewing the lineup then I guess I could try to sabotage it... Like yelling out; "This lineup is bull****!". It would be pretty difficult for the police to argue the witness wasn't unduly influenced by it.

[Scruit]

I thought showups were worse than lineups. You get a 50/50 chance, unless the victim was calm enough to remember him.

I was in a showup once... (as the 'victim'). I saw two kids try to steal a car and I called the police. When they arrived one kid was arrested walking down the street and the other jumped into some bushed behind a house. I went out to speak with the officers when they had control of both subjects and they walked him right up to me and said 'Is this him?'. I looked at the distinctive green striped shirt he was wearing and said; "Yes, that's him. Definitely." Now, if they'd brought another kid wearing the saem shirt then I'd have said the same thing. I was too far away to be sure of his face but the shirt and his hair were both very distinctive.

[coucousis]

First thing the police should have done, is when they had the car stop, bring the witness to the scene to make the identification. .

I don't know about down there Drew but up here (in Canada) it would have been a mistake .... Bringing the witness there and showing her a sole individual would be thrown out.... Because most witness could say Yes to police just because the personne was the one identified by the POLICE.... Some identification have been thrown out of court like that because the officer did not pull up the suspect with other similar individual...
For most witness if we bring an individual with the corresponding physical caracteristic and a pair of handcuff.... you have fair chances that the witness could be influenced....

I may be wrong also .... since I did proceed like you said before and the ID was admitted without being challenge.... However I would not trust that procedure on a murder case before I establish the legality of such street identification...
It is very different to present a suspect to the witness or when the witness recognize a suspect at first sight... I think that driving with the suspect around would be more accepted then presenting the alledge suspect to the witness while he is in police custody.

I don't know may be others can tell us if we are wrong or rigth!!! :confused:

[Lfpdlieu302]

BHG, this is not about solving a crime, but a question about rights.

We don't use line-ups, but the show up would be the appropriate course of action.

If going strictly by the scenario, I don't think the presence of the attorney makes a difference. What good to the defendant would having the attorney there do?

i agree. the suspect has a right to have an attorney present during any questioning. the suspect wasnt questioned. they were only told to participate in a police lineup. now, with that in mind, can a defense attorney tear the line up apart on the stand, sure. but will the line up be thrown out of court? no.

[Drew27k9]

I don't know about down there Drew but up here (in Canada) it would have been a mistake .... Bringing the witness there and showing her a sole individual would be thrown out.

Yeah like I said, I know Pa. law, not everyone elses..lol I wish I did.
Here in Pa. if you have a robbery, murder, theft, anything where the actor leaves the scene, and the police stop someone fitting that description, within a reasonable time after the crime, the police have a right to detain that person. Now the police are allowed to have the victim/witness come to the scene and have the victim/witness, I.D. the person. The police are not allowed to take the actor back to the location of the crime. The victim/witness have to come to the place where the police have the person stopped. ( there is court cases on this one.) If the victim/witness gives a positive identification as to that person being the one who committed the crime, then the police can make the arrest then.

[wreckageelite]

according to my text book a suspects refusal to participate in a line up may be used against him or her in court