what are the consequences of withholding evidence in any investigation?
354569
Depends on the country, or state.  In Canada, and in some states, it would potentially lead to a charge of obstructing justice.  Obstruction of justice can lead to jail if you are convicted.
976769
The burden of proof is on you.
991390
You may be able to go down to the local police department if you are a family member and are simply interested. A local historian my also have information that the report may not to talk to him/her if you want any more info. But I don't live out there so I don't know the specific rules that say what you can and can't do regarding information like a coroner's report.
250224
The simple answer is yes. In general, a cased is "closed" when the suspect is found or there is no further information on which to act. \n\nIf someone has reliable, first-hand information (you personally saw something happen, not just heard about it), they should give that information to the police. That still doesn't mean that it is enough info to re-open the case.
268364
present evidence to refute the charges.
1018628
Hey may be guilty, but there's tons of probably doubt. There's no way I'd vote to convict on what little evidence they presented at trial.
742495
The outcome of what was being decided in court is being withheld.  Could be a closed file (closed to the public for whatever reason) or because the judge wants more time to render a decision.
911368
yep\n\nYou dispute it with the reporting agency.  They research it and if it is credible they keep it.. if not they remove it.\n\nhope that helps
1113615
You would have to present evidence that you were detained without probable cause in order to have a case. You don't need to prove beyond reasonable doubt, just a preponderence of the evidence as this is a civil matter. It's hard to tell precisely if you would have a case based on your details, but I would guess that you have an uphill climb if it boils down to your word versus theirs. It might be advisable to consult a lawyer about this, but only if you truly feel that this was a case of police abuse of power.
731808
You need to get a lawyer so they can find out what evidence the police have.
819297
You wont go to jail if thats what your asking but you wont be able to use i as evidence
148877
He's asking about California.  \n\nThe question is nonsense, however.  Section 1538.5 of the Penal Code is the statutory mechanism that allows unlawfully obtained evidence to be suppressed (kept out of court).  A 1538.5 hearing is held at the request of the defendant to determine if the government followed "the rules" when it obtained evidence to be used against a defendant in a criminal case.\n\nFor example, if a defendant is charged with possession of drugs based on a search of his person, the defense may file a 1538.5 motion to challenge the search.  The defendant may take the position that the search was unlawful and ask the Court to exclude the evidence obtained as a result of the unlawful search.  \n\nIn Danny's case, a 1538.5 motion might be filed to contest the legality of the checkpoint, the observations of his sobriety made by the officer who initially detained him, the observations made by the officer who evaluated him and ultimately arrested him, and/or the function of the breath machine or other chemical testing procedure.  There might even be more issues, but those are the significant ones.\n\nSo while the question really doesn't make sense, it at least shows the poster has an idea of what's going on.  A 1538.5 hearing is used to determine if the government did the things it's allowed to do by law and didn't violate anyone's constitutional rights.\n\nDanny - see my other answer to your first question.  I applaud your interest in safeguarding your rights.  However, if you acknowledge (even if only to yourself) that you were driving in violation of the laws in California concerning DUI (driving a motor vehicle with a blood alcohol level of .08% or higher) then I'm left feeling like you need to accept that you potentially could have killed someone (or yourself) that night, and take your lumps.  If you think you can get off on a technicality, go for it if you want.  But really...you know if you were guilty or not, no matter what the legal beagles end up saying, and if you should be punished for making a bad decision, then take it and move on.  I know it's expensive and I know it has a *profound* impact on your life...but the impact you might have had on other lives that night makes your concerns look childish.\n\nEDIT 2/12/06: James F...I know, but that does not stop defendants from filing supppression motions against them.
342019
No, depending on the state, but here in COlorado once you file the DV charges, the state takes over and prosecute's. The only way you can "drop" them is if they go to court and he pleads not guilty, they will go to a jury trial, and all you have to do is not show up then there is no evidence, and nothing happens to you either.
318640
you can bring it up, but without proof you wont be able to do anything
779460
No.... even if you get it expunged.. you would have to report it on your application.  And if you lie and put no, they will eventually find out and you will get bounced and maybe charged criminally.
798355
Nothing.  Nixon taught people not to keep evidence.
539572
yes... obstruction of justice (destroying evidence)