Your Rights

When the FBI or police come knocking, you have very little time to protect your constitutional rights. Call Patrick or Shelley Peters immediately.

YOUR FIRST WORDS SHOULD BE "I want to talk to my attorney Patrick or Shelley Peters." At that point, by law, all questioning should stop. But it won't. The officer will tell you that you aren't in trouble, he just wants to talk to you. Or he'll say he just wants to hear your side of the story. DO NOT ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS. For details on why you NEVER talk to the police without an attorney, click here.

"CAN WE SEARCH YOUR CAR?" NO! I want to talk to my attorney Patrick or Shelley Peters. Never agree or consent to a search of your car, your house or your person without talking to your attorney. You have a constitutional right to refuse permission and require the police to get a search warrant. A simple example shows why: you're driving home after dropping friends off from a ball game. Unknown to you, one of your friends has dropped a marijuana joint in the seat. The police stop you and you foolishly CONSENT to a search. The marijuana is found and you are arrested. For details on why you NEVER consent to a search of yourself, your house or your car, click here.

Never talk to the police without an attorney.

Ever wonder why police officers don't record their interviews and interrogations? It's because it is much easier for the police or agents to simply write down what they want instead of letting a judge or jury know what really went on.

The reason court reporters record every word in a trial is so that there is a record of what was said. Well-meaning people can't remember the exact words they heard 10 minutes earlier. Police and agents write a "summary" of the interview and the witness or suspect isn't shown the summary. In fact, it's prepared long after the interview is completed. Then, a year or more after the interview, the police use the summary to tell the jury exactly what was said. Of course it's not exact. Usually not even close (like a three sentence summary of a 30 minute interview). And sometimes, it's deliberately misleading, wrong or false.

In recent years, more and more police agencies are driven by statistics. The more cases filed, the more funding they receive. Instead of solving crimes or investigating thoroughly, there is a tendency to charge someone . . . anyone . . . with a crime . . . any crime. In a recent case Patrick tried, each and every witness told the detective that a shooting was accidental. Even the victim said the shooting was accidental. The detective, writing his summaries, "neglected" to include the accidental part. He knew that if it was an accident, no charges would be filed, no credit given, no statistics improved. Since the interviews were not recorded, no one can prove that the detective cheated. And, without recordings, he can continue to cheat.

Never consent to a search.

Police do not have a right to search you, your car or your house. You should always refuse to consent to a search. As already described, if you consent to a search, you run the risk that something illegal will be found or, rarely, that something illegal will be planted.

A TYPICAL SCENARIO. You're driving in your car and get stopped for speeding. The officer asks "Can I search your car." You correctly answer "NO." The officer then says: "You must have something to hide if you won't let me search." The correct response is "I want to talk to my attorney, Patrick or Shelley Peters." The officer then says: "O.K., I guess you'll just have to sit here and wait while we get a search warrant or the drug dog to come." Your response again is "I want to talk to my attorney, Patrick or Shelley Peters."