N.J. schools would teach kids how to interact with police under proposed law

TRENTON — New Jersey schools would be required to teach students how they should interact with police officers under proposed legislation a sponsor says could protect both kids and cops.

The bill, (A4130), introduced last week, would require school districts to come up with instructions for students as part of their Social Studies Core Curriculum Content Standards that would include "the role and responsibilities of a law enforcement official in providing for public safety" and "an individual's responsibilities to comply with a directive from a law enforcement official."

Any training on tap as to how the officers should conduct themselves or are they to consider it open season if someone offends their sensibilities by not falling face down before their awesome power?

That said, the job is more dangerous than ever. I saw a news bit on TV this morning about the authorities going to houses of kids who have been exhibiting high absentee rates from school - had a school official accompanied by a cop when knocking at the door...

“Do we teach our children to be truthful or to impede the course of justice?”

We should teach our children that they have constitutional rights. Is it a good idea to teach kids to be respectful? Of course. A “yes sir” and “no mam” goes a long way. However, the police investigate crime and arrest. They aren’t social workers and they aren’t your “friends”. A simple, “I would rather speak to my parents since I AM A JUVENILE” means the conversation is over. A “I’d rather seek legal counsel” means the conversation is over.

With respect to “ to be truthful”... the police can and will threaten an arrest as a bluff. They are allowed to do so. They can state they have evidence against you and NOT. They can also say a warrant will be issued when they have no intention of doing so. All of this is completely legal. Any person (adult or juvenile) who thinks they should be the “truthful” person and allow any sort of search and answer every question is ignorant not only of their constitutional rights but how the police interact with the public in doing their jobs. Ask any criminal attorney and he/she will tell you (innocent or guilty) to keep your mouth shut, act respectful and always state you want to speak to an attorney (or if you are a juvenile.. you want your parents).

“Do we teach our children to be truthful or to impede the course of justice?”

When one goes to a criminal attorney, one should expect that attorney is likely assuming you are guilty and remaining silent is the best course of action. Lack of cooperation during the investigatory phase of a crime may send the signal one is attempting to hide something and may be a sign of guilt.

If you are totally innocent withholding information may result in a killer or other violent crimial walking free to commit more violent crimes.

Common sense is that just because a right exists it does not have to be asserted and if one needlessly asserts a right and justice is not allowed to place all of society may suffer. How would your child feel if he or she withheld information that would have convicted a violent criminal and the freed criminal committed one or more murders.

You and I are speaking about two different things. One is if your child may be suspected of a crime. The other is if your child is a witness to a crime/or knows about a crime that has occurred or is going to occur. Both examples are extremely different. If I am pulled over for a broken tail light, I will not submit to a search. However, if I see a car mow down a pedestrian and obtain the license, I am a witness and will provide the information.

A child should NOT talk to the police without informing his or her parents first. No way, no how. Not if he is a witness or a suspect. A parent needs to be present during any and all interviewing. The same child that may go to the police because he “heard” someone was going to commit a murder, may be the same child that is interviewed as a part of that murder. Think it doesn’t happen? It does.

With respect to “may send the signal one is attempting to hide something”. An arrest can’t be made on a signal. A conviction cannot be made on a signal. For what it is worth, even if my child knew about a crime in the most innocent manner, you would bet that I’d hire an attorney to be present during the questioning.

Obviously no one is telling these kids that trying to steal the cop’s gun or charging the cop when they tell you to stop is a sure fire way of getting your parents rich through t-shirt sales, book deals, and paid for visits to foreign countries to bitch about the cops killing your kid.

I agree 100% with the three items on your list.

But, I would add a fourth.

If the Cops give ANY indication that you might be a suspect in a crime, then make no statement and request a lawyer, even if you are not guilty.

Re: “Do we teach our children be truthful or to impede the course of justice?”

That’s a false choice.

The “Right to remain silent” is guaranteed by the Constitution, which was created to be a guarantor of inalienable rights and justice.

In any event, within the foreseeable future, technology will bring an end to most criminal activity.

Only the worst sociopaths and addicts will continue to break the law in a world that has a database of most DNA and fingerprints, GPS in every vehicle, wearable GPS on most parolees and recidivists, universal high definition surveillance, billions of camera phones, and records of every phone call and email.

Everyone else will have to plead guilty in the face of overwhelming physical evidence, whether they talk to the Police, or not.

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.