導語：下面是小編整理的關於法律英語的閱讀，感興趣的`同學們速速來圍觀哦。
(一)a police officer told me that if i didn't answer the officer's questions i'd be arrested forloitering. is that legal?
in certain circumstances, it may be. laws in effect in many states generally define loitering as "wandering about from place to place without apparent business, such that the person poses a threat to public safety." under these laws, if a police officer sees a person loitering, the officer can demand identification and an explanation of the person's activities. if the person fails to comply, the officer can arrest the person for loitering. therefore, the refusal to answer questions is only a problem if the officer has also observed the person to be loitering.
case example: officer icia yu is dispatched to upscale meadows after a resident calls the police to complain that a woman has been walking back and forth along the streets for over an hour, with no apparent purpose. from a distance, the officer observes the woman for a few minutes, and sees her stopping occasionally to peer into residents' back yards. believing that she may be planning aburglary, officer yu confronts the woman, asks for identification and asks her to explain what she is doing in the neighborhood. the woman refuses to respond.
question: can officer yu arrest her?
answer: under loitering laws in effect in many states, yes. officer yu had reasonable grounds to believe that the woman posed a danger to the community. since she didn't identify herself or explain why she was in the neighborhood, the officer could arrest her. had the woman responded to officer yu, the officer might not arrest her for loitering. however, she might be subject to arrest for a different offense, such as trespass (unlawful entry on someone else's property).
本節常用法律術語:
1、loitering v.閒蕩, 虛度, 徘徊
2、in effect 生效
3、identification 身份證
4、dispatch 派遣
5、burglary 入室行竊
6、trespass 侵入，侵害：用明顯或隱蔽的武力或暴力對人、財產或他人的權利實施非法傷害，尤指錯誤地侵入另一個人的土地
(二)a police officer wants to talk to me about a crime that i took part in. is it ever a good idea to try to talk my way out of it?
usually, no. the golden rule of defense is that suspects who think that they may be implicated(牽連) in a crime should keep their mouths tightly shut. suspects all too frequently unwittingly reveal information that later can be used as evidence of guilt. the right to not incriminate oneself guaranteed by the fifth amendment to the u.s. constitution is especially powerful in this situation, and a suspect should politely decline to answer questions, at least until consulting with an attorney.
12. a police officer wants to ask me about a crime that a friend or relative of mine committed. what do i risk by providing false information?
a lot. when an individual lies to the police or otherwise intentionally assists a known criminal to avoid arrest, he or she may be charged as an "accessory after the fact(事後從犯)." obviously, the decision as to whether to furnish information leading to the arrest of a relative or close friend is a personal one. however, a person who chooses not to do so should simply decline to answer an officer's questions rather than lie. rarely, if ever, would an individual who simply declines to give information to a police officer qualify as an "accessory after the fact."
case example: cain comes running into his brother abel's house, and tells abel that he, cain, just robbed a market and that the police might be on his tail. a few minutes later, a police officer knocks on abel's door and asks him if cain is in the house. abel responds, "no, he left town permanently to go back east weeks ago."
question: is abel subject to criminal prosecution?
本節題目：
1、rarely, if ever, would an individual who simply declines to give information to a police officer qualify as an "accessory after the fact."
2、question: is abel subject to criminal prosecution?
答案：
1、一個人只是拒絕爲警官提供情報，不構成事後從犯，即使存在也很罕見。
2、yes
