Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[Darvi]

Unless, of course, you are a locally licensed attorney yourself.

[Truean]

Unless, of course, you are a locally licensed attorney yourself.

Actually....

"He who represents himself has a fool for a client."

And there are lots of reasons for this.

[Aqizzar]

Unless, of course, you are a locally licensed attorney yourself.

Something something an attorney who represents himself has a fool for a client.

I for one find it a little appalling just how readily anything and everything you say around a police officer can be used to build a case against you, regardless of any other circumstances.  I suppose that's what the whole "Miranda Rights" thing is about, but never once have I heard an officer say during questioning (or an arrest), "You don't have to answer anything."  Heck, when I was arrested, they used every sentence construction they could think of to make it sound like I was required by law to give a written deposition, without actually saying it was required by law.

I keep coming back to the classic "there ought to be a law..." thought, but the only thing I can think of would be some mandatory statute against an officer trying to 'trick' you into making statements.

[Darvi]

Don't they usually say "Everything you say can and will be used against you" or is that just another TV-thing?

[Neonivek]

Don't they usually say "Everything you say can and will be used against you" or is that just another TV-thing?

TV thing... They don't have to say a thing.

Anything you say can be used against you, as you are saying it freely, and they don't have to tell you.

[Truean]

I for one find it a little appalling just how readily anything and everything you say around a police officer can be used to build a case against you, regardless of any other circumstances ... never once have I heard an officer say during questioning (or an arrest), "You don't have to answer anything."

"You have the right to remain silent.
Anything you say can and will be used against you in a court of law."

They don't have to Miranda you right away. Only when you are under "custodial interrogation," which is a pain to explain. Yes, they will sometimes change the wording, but that's the gist.

This is very complex and is without an exaggeration several months of law school and criminal procedure:

"Officer, I am invoking my right to remain silent and want to speak to an attorney." but do not yell or lose your cool, ever.

[Aqizzar]

"You have the right to remain silent.
Anything you say can and will be used against you in a court of law."

That's kind of what I was getting at after that.  Yeah, they say "you have a right to remain silent".  Then they go to great pains to make you think talking will help you, when it never will, using very carefully practiced language that won't legally constitute whatever locally counts as improper procedure.

[Truean]

"You have the right to remain silent.
Anything you say can and will be used against you in a court of law."

That's kind of what I was getting at after that.  Yeah, they say "you have a right to remain silent".  Then they go to great pains to make you think talking will help you, when it never will, using very carefully practiced language that won't legally constitute whatever locally counts as improper procedure.

Yup, but always remember the magic words: "Officer I would like to invoke my right to remain silent and want to see a lawyer." Then remember the magic silence that follows it; don't say anything except perhaps occasionally repeat, "Officer, I would like to invoke my right to remain silent and want to see a lawyer."

Police can legally lie to you. They can say they know things that they categorically don't. They are interrogating you; that's how it works. Their job is to get you to say shit. Don't. "Officer, I would like to invoke my right to remain silent and want to see a lawyer."  That is your best protection. You probably won't be able to out think the police. Don't try it. Dont' say anything else, shut up.

The police officer's job is to find, arrest and help convict you. They are not required to be on your side and "making it easier on you," isn't in the job description. Seriously, those videos on the non profit I linked to: generally good stuff.

[Neonivek]

Interestingly enough the Military realised that as well and thus when soldiers are captured they are only supposed to give their name, rank, and troop number or something along those lines.

[Truean]

Interestingly enough the Military realised that as well and thus when soldiers are captured they are only supposed to give their name, rank, and troop number or something along those lines.

SOP was to give little more than the information on your dog tags. Request to speak to the American Embassy and US command. Follow Geneva standards.

The semi perfect client, Sgt. Schultz who would only be made more perfect if he said nothing at all which he does through most of this video:
"I knowing nothing, nozing.

[Starver]

In the UK it used to be "You do not have to say anything, but anything you do say can(/will?) be taken down and will(/can?) be used against you in a court of law."  Or thereabouts.

These day's it's something like... "You do not have to say anything, but it may harm your defence if you do not mention when questioned something which you later rely on in court. Anything you do say may be given in evidence."

(If it's changed since I stopped watching The Bill, which itself has wandered off the TV screens, I don't know of it.)


It's an interesting change.


My last contact with a policeman, BTW, was a couple of months ago when someone broke into one side of a building I was working out-of-hours in (activating a silent alarm system, or if it wasn't silent, out of my earshot), and one of the officers investigating saw that someone (me) was beavering away in this other side.  It could have gone a lot worse than how it did (cop came in the outer door, triggering the entry beep, I saw it was a cop and let them in and justified my presence and helped give details about who to contact and showed how as I didn't even have an unlocked route to the other area, thus the building being safe from me, and me being safe from whatever villains caused this particular alert).

But apart from an 'off-hand' comment about a colleague searching the building being a K9 unit (I never did see a sign of any dog, I'm betting it was a standard veiled threat designed to provoke a response in the guilty, to which I clearly had no reason to respond so[1]) it was all chummy enough.  I was clearly enough harmless- (and/or scatterbrained-)enough to not require such legal terminology as I mention.  Questions were asked as to why I was working late, I hear, as the investigation progressed, and perhaps if I was in any danger by being so[2].  But face-to-face I had no problem with this police intervention, even while this officer was not affeared of his life as to actively pursue the use of whatever disabling technology he had upon his person (spray, baton, whatever).

In many ways, that last sentence may be grossly inaccurate if such a situation were to be enacted over in the Rebellious Colonies, thanks to the general and all-pervading misunderstanding of the "militia" clause in their quaint constitutional documentation.


[1] But... if I was afraid of dogs?  Could that have given a false-positive response?

[2] Like I said, there's an entry beep on the external door, and I always keep the internal door locked, but in a way that I can escape in an emergency.  And if I were incapable of escape, people would know that I am inside and could break their way in, and if unwanted persons tried to break in while I was conscious I'd be very quickly on the phone to request police assistance.  Most angles are thus covered, although of course we'll never know if they all are until they eventually get put to the test.

[Neonivek]

I once was pulled over by the cops (I was walking) because some kids in the area were taking the hood ornaments off of cars.

They asked if I have been outside in the last halfhour, I said yes, they asked where, I said my front yard... and they left.

I actually later found out who did it. But I assumed at the time they got caught.

[Starver]

Interestingly enough the Military realised that as well and thus when soldiers are captured they are only supposed to give their name, rank, and troop number or something along those lines.

Is that even vaguely related?  I was under the (possibly mis-)apprehension that this was something to do with the fact that soldiers could not be forced to reveal what orders and other tactical information that they had been given, in civilised conflict.  And thus no sides in a conflict need ever feel that they needed to fight to the bitter, bitter end.  (Not that this always worked, but it made battles 'honest' when it wasn't something like the Eastern Front where these principles did break down quite severely, ending up as being grudge match upon grudge match upon grudge match, and knowing that no quarter would be given or taken...)

[Neonivek]

Even the military realise it is easy to coerce someone into saying something they don't want to say.

[ChairmanPoo]

Unless, of course, you are a locally licensed attorney yourself.

Actually....

"He who represents himself has a fool for a client."

And there are lots of reasons for this.

I am curious about one thing: In one info video on youtube some guy commented that it was very important in order to have the attorney as a witness when talking to the police, so that they don't say that you've said stuff you haven't said. Is the adage related to this stuff?