Police officers got their first access Thursday to information about exactly what it takes for them to question people they stop about their immigration status.
A video lesson released by the Arizona Police Officers Standards and Training Board spells out what officers should look for in determining whether there is “reasonable suspicion” to believe someone is in this country illegally. That is the mandate on officers in SB 1070, set to take effect July 29.
And Beverly Ginn, an attorney who provides the legal elements of the law, stresses in the video that race, national origin or ethnicity cannot be used as a factor in making that determination.
But it remains to be seen whether the video and training materials do anything to alleviate concerns that the law will lead to racial profiling.
Jon O’Neill, spokesman for the Arizona chapter of the American Civil Liberties Union, pointed out the training video is voluntary.
“There is no guarantee that any officer who would be enforcing SB 1070 will see it,’’ he said. O’Neill said his organization won’t comment beyond that because what’s in the video is likely to become part of the legal challenge the ACLU already has filed to the law.
A hearing on that challenge is set for July 22.
Separately, the video informs officers when they don’t need to inquire, even if they have that suspicion. That is based on language in the law that requires questioning only when “reasonably practicable.”
And Tucson Police Chief Roberto Villasenor, who appears in the video, said he is instructing his officers to use their judgment in deciding whether there is something more important that they should be doing.
Gov. Jan Brewer directed the board to produce the training materials the day she signed SB 1070. The governor said that should go a long way toward alleviating concerns that the measure will be implemented in an unfair way.
Of prime concern is the requirement that says police who stop, detain or arrest someone must inquire about their immigration status if they reasonably suspect the person is an illegal immigrant. That has led to questions of whether, by definition, police will be looking for people who look like foreigners, particularly Hispanics.
“The reality is that the ethnic mix of our community is such that race tell you nothing about whether or not a person is unlawfully in the United States,’’ Ginn said, saying the same is true of ethnicity.
Ginn said the best course for officers to follow is to ask for identification in the circumstances that they would otherwise make such a request. She said if individuals have one of the acceptable forms of ID, including an Arizona driver’s license, tribal ID card or other document that requires proof of legal presence in the country to get, “that’s the end of your inquiry.’’
It’s what happens when someone doesn’t have acceptable identification where it gets trickier — and where police have to look at factors to determine whether there’s reasonable suspicion someone is an illegal immigrant. Ginn said officers can consider a host of other factors, including flight or preparation for flight, engaging in evasive maneuvers, an inability to provide a home address or having a foreign vehicle registration.
Location also is a factor, she said, with police allowed to consider that the person is in an area where illegal immigrants regularly gather and look for work.
And Ginn said how the person is dressed also can be a factor.
While she did not explain further, Hippolito Acosta, a former federal immigration officer who is now a consultant, said there are things that an officer can consider just based on the person’s appearance, especially if it is inconsistent with weather conditions.
“If anyone appears to be wearing multiple layers of clothing or long-sleeved shirts in a hot climate, this might be an indication of their recent arrival in the area,” Acosta said.
Ginn also said that significant difficulty in expressing oneself in English also can be considered. Acosta said, though, officers must be careful.
“A lack of English-speaking ability is not a singular factor that should be used to determine illegal presence in the United States,” he said. But Acosta said that, combined with other factors, can be an “articulable fact” an officer can use to determine whether reasonable suspicion exists that a person is not in the country legally.
While SB 1070 requires police to question those they have stopped in certain circumstances, there also is the escape clause of “reasonably practicable.’’
“What I would want my officers to think about is the call load, the level of violation they’re dealing with, the number of calls holding, the time of day, the day of the week,” Villasenor said. And he suggested he would not be second-guessing his officers.
“I do have confidence they will make the proper decision that, in their judgment, is this really the most important thing for them to do,” Villasenor said.
Brian Livingston, executive director of the Arizona Police Association, said officers need to use their discretion. That includes their obligations to investigate other higher-priority crimes.
To see the training video, go to http://www.azpost.state.az.us/SB1070infocenter.htm
hillstreet posted at 1:19 pm on Thu, Jul 1, 2010.
Race cannot be used, blah, blah, blah. We cops know better. Race WILL be used to harass any "Mexican-looking" people. After watching the training, my fellow officers and I said the same thing; this is a mess and we are staying away from it. If Russell Pearce wants to arrest illegals he can do it himself!
Masterrogue666 posted at 3:45 pm on Thu, Jul 1, 2010.
If hillstreet's a cop, interesting how he thinks he has a right to ignore the law. He fits right in with all the ILLEGAL ALIENS that think it's ok to ignore our laws.
What I find funny is that everyones so afraid that the law "MAY" be used incorrectly, they forget that MILLIONS ignored our laws every day.
If you are driving a car, you are REQUIRED to have ID, et al. If you don't have it, you should be considered a possible ILLEGAL ALIEN, race notwithstanding....
hillstreet posted at 4:35 pm on Thu, Jul 1, 2010.
It is called police discretion; officers ignore hundreds of law violations every day. How many times has a cop spotted you speeding and chose to disregard it? Happens all the time. Just because Brewer and Pearce are obsessed with illegals does not mean my department will be also. I joined the force to fight real crime not to do the job of the Border Patrol. Let BP go hang out at Home Depot. :-).
Masterrogue666 posted at 8:58 pm on Thu, Jul 1, 2010.
hillstreet: I suppose that the Chandler rapist wasn't a real criminal? Try to explain that to three innocent little girls.
And by the way, you said "it's a mess and we are staying away from it". Don't try to crawfish and use the word "discretion". Besides, SB 1070 DOES give the officer that choice. You've made it clear where you stand....
retired03 posted at 4:49 am on Fri, Jul 2, 2010.
Being a former cop in the valley of 25 years, I hear what hillstreet is talking about. But, I agree more with Tucson's chief. You pick your battles. What's going on? Is it Friday night and fight call after fight call is coming out and on the way to a fight, you see what appears to be a group that are acting suspiciously and could be illegals? Are you going to stop and ignore a violent crime? I think not. you may call it in and return after the "hot" call. Citizens that are passionate about arresting illegals are going to have to get used to that idea. First and foremost, this is an unfunded bill. That means no extra cops for this so PD's are going to have to do more with less. This is no different than any other crime on the books with the exception of the obvious, violent crimes and other part one crimes. You don’t have the discretion. And although Arizonans are at there breaking point as far as illegals, stopping to check out a group who are doing nothing else is not a high priority on a busy night. It has nothing to do with ignoring the law as rogue master suggests. I think hillstreets reaction is more prevalent than people might suspect. It is one more task they have to perform without any help. Please though, don’t lecture me either about arpaio not needing help. He has put his task force together by taking his deputies off the street. In addition, his money getting that done is suspect. That cannot be done in a municipal setting.
Masterrogue666 posted at 8:33 am on Fri, Jul 2, 2010.
retired03: I understand and agree with your point. Get the most violent off the street first. However, in past dealings, hillstreet always claimed to be an officer, yet many think he's not. In any event, hillstreet as much as stated he won't comply with the law, period. That is where I have a problem.
hillstreet posted at 9:16 am on Fri, Jul 2, 2010.
As I told you before, Mr. Pirate, most cops are not going to spend our precious little available time chasing after illegals at Home Depot or looking for gardeners. Retired cop told you the way things are. I just spent 95 minutes watching so called "training" that involved everyone covering their butts and hemming and hawing about the FACT that, regardless of what Brewer, Pearce, and AZPOST say, the ultimate discretion in enforcing this unconstitutional law is up to each department. A quickie review of fed law and documents on a DVD is not going to replace the weeks of training federal officers attend at FLETC and other places and is not going to make any local cop proficient on enforcing federal laws.
If the word “discretion” bothers you, check with your local police academy and see if they’ll let you sit in on the block that discusses discretion; maybe then you’ll understand what I am referring to. It is a part of policing. Sorry to burst your bubble but cops ignore laws all the time; it is called priorities.
You may not like this fact because you and many others run around with a woody about illegals, but most cops are pragmatic, they recognize a mess when they see one and we are staying away from this one. I do have discretion, as I explained to you before, on which stupid laws to enforce, and I, and most of my brethren, are not going to be enforcing this one. We are NOT going around after July 29 doing the job of the Border Patrol and ICE; they do not do mine.
By the way, ask any cop what response they will be getting when they start rounding up illegals and calling ICE. The same response we get now…”we are too busy.”
I hate to shatter your dream of buses full of brown faces heading south. The great majority of the few instances when cops actually arrest illegals will result in a field release because local jails are full and no one wants to pay the incarceration daily fee. You did not know that either, did you? County jails are only obligated, by law, to accept felony prisoners at no charge to the arresting agency. But, since 13-1509 is a misdemeanor, guess who pays the daily incarceration fee (up to $90 and beyond in some counties)? The arresting agency.
Tell me again how many cops you think you’ll see arresting illegals? See, ignorant civilians sit around mouthing off about illegals but are clueless about the cost. Most cities are broke. Do u think Reichsführer Pearce knew the costs involved? Of course he knew, he was a cop. Brewer probably didn’t, she is pretty ignorant. But Hispanic hate seems to garner votes; Brewer wants to get re-elected and Pearce wants higher office. It is called a populist appeal.
Still think I am not a real cop? :-)
Rich posted at 10:39 am on Fri, Jul 2, 2010.
MR 666
If Hillstreet 'arrests' an 'illegal' and the law is declared unconstitutional he will have broken international law. We hung Germans for less. After Nuremburg, the moral imperative trumps the 'superior orders.' The law is obviously racist if it requires a CYA video. The video proves it is. The law is simply ambitious politicos wanting more power and more of your money. Nothing else. They aren't going home, and you aren't going to make that happen with a thousand laws and recalling all of the troops to guard the border. Get used to the idea and try to find a way it works for all of us. The racism is, at this point, just obvious and ugly.
Masterrogue666 posted at 10:23 pm on Fri, Jul 2, 2010.
Rich: Wow, I'm a racist? Gee, I thought I was a law abiding citizen. Let's check the definition of "Racist":
The link: http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/racism
1 : a belief that race is the primary determinant of human traits and capacities and that racial differences produce an inherent superiority of a particular race
2 : racial prejudice or discrimination
Show me one time where I put down a person of ANY RACE. We both know you can't. Do I detest ILLEGAL ALIENS? Yes. However, I don't care if the come from China, Canada, Mexico, or Outer Mongolia. I detest all ILLEGAL ALIENS, race notwithstanding.
It saddens me that you don't have the grey matter to understand that it not race, but legal standing.
By the way, I don't have to "get use to the idea". It seems many US CITIZENS also are tired of the "it's owed to us" attitude.
By the way, once, about a year ago, I offered to work with forkedlift to see if some middle ground could be reached. Before I was willing to give him my ideas, I asked him one question: Do you think that ILLEGAL ALIENS have the same rights as US citizens. He didn't answer the question, which is an answer if you think about it.
Laws can be changed. I am allowed my opinion, as you are allowed yours. I've decided to fight it. And each time someone like you attempts to insult me, or calls me a racist, I know that's all you got to offer.
Each time you express you opinion of me, it only helps to prove you don't have any clue as to the kind of person I am....
forkedlift1 posted at 8:21 am on Sat, Jul 3, 2010.
Hillstreet and retired03,
Your very informed and informative posts that got right down to the nitty-gritty of what this ill-conceived law is all about should be required reading for everyone.
Two of the first lawsuits challenging this law were filed separately by two police officers, one from Phoenix, one from Tucson. That in itself was a red flag about the contents of this law. Shortly after the Brewer signed the measure, I also recall seeing and hearing a knowledgeable Pima County law enforcement official (could have been the Tucson chief or Pima County sheriff) mincing no words about the law's absurdity.
Russell Pearce, his law's out-of-state author Kris Kobach, and Brewer, have done all humanly possible to convince themselves and others that they had built a better mousetrap....oblivious to the reality that their incredible invention is designed to cut off the fingers of those charged with using it.
Particularly noteworthy is the action taken last Wednesday by the nationwide American Bar Association. The ABA filed with the court an amicus brief for a preliminary injunction to halt this horrid law from going into effect until the multitude of constitutional issues were addressed and ruled upon.
In his speech to Congress and the American publIc the other day on the country's dire need for immigration reform, even the president addressed Arizona's reckless action.
"[S]tates like Arizona have decided to take matters into their own hands. ... But it is also ill-conceived. And it's not just that the law Arizona passed is divisive -- although it has fanned the flames of an already contentious debate. Laws like Arizona's put huge pressures on local law enforcement to enforce rules that are ultimately unenforceable. It puts pressure on already hard-strapped state and local budgets. It makes it difficult for people here illegally to report crimes -- driving a wedge between communities and law enforcement, making our streets more dangerous and the jobs of our police officers more difficult.
And you don't have to take my word for this. You can speak to the police chiefs and others from law enforcement here today who will tell you the same thing.
These laws also have the potential of violating the rights of innocent American citizens and legal residents, making them subject to possible stops or questioning because of what they look like or how they sound. And as other states and localities go their own ways, we face the prospect that different rules for immigration will apply in different parts of the country -- a patchwork of local immigration rules where we all know one clear national standard is needed."
Thanks again Hillstreet and Retired03. The education from those who know is invaluable.
msk8te posted at 3:37 pm on Fri, Jul 30, 2010.
www.keepazsafe.com - donate to it