Don't Talk to Cops

[Malcolm2]

Wow, how to get away with committing a crime. This guy from a small town PD will be a good defense attorney, if you call 'good' someone who cares more about getting off a guy who is guilty. How about the victims? It is not a game to be a victim of a violent crime, but it is to the defense atty paid to get the the guilty guy off. How about the truth, do they teach that?
Don't commit a felony, how about that advice?

[BigNick]

I didn't like the throwaway comment from the cop that most police interviews in "Italy, Spain, etc" start with the police beating the suspect up. I doubt if he has any evidence for that. The biggest LE problem in those countries is finding a cop during the the extensive lunch "hour" that they take.

[frank]

Most people would talk to avoid paying the defense attorney fees. I don't know if what you see on tv is true about what they charge to go to court, but if it is the average guy would be in bankruptcy after the first week.

frank

[utrecht]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Nords Over a dozen posts into the discussion... have we heard from an actual police officer yet?

Ask and you shall receive. I real life police officer here.

This guy is a typical slick talking shyster who would probably make a killing selling used cars. He said he would give the cop there with him equal time to contradict anything he said. I wish I was there because there would be plenty of that going on. Just for starters, he said nothing you can ever say to a cop can help you. Wrong. There have been plenty of times when I was leaning towards a certain suspect and would've spent a lot more time investigating him which would caused him a lot of problems both emotionally and monetarily, until I talked to him and he gave me an alibi. The alibi checked out and I was able to clear him and move on.

The lawyer is giving ridiculous examples of why not to talk to cops like the one where he insinuates that you could be arrested for being in possession of a small lobster and not even know you were committing a crime. Does anyone really think a normal person would be prosecuted for having one small lobster? That law is for fishermen who have a boat full of illegal lobster and full well know what they are doing is illegal.

What about the guy who was convicted of choking the lady in the hallway because he talked to the cops? Guess what? Sounds like he was guilty. Basically the lawyer is telling you that you can get away with your crimes if you don't talk to the cops. That's great if its you, but what it you are the victim and the bad guy got away with robbing you, or raping your wife because he didn't talk?

Lawyers should be there to protect their clients from unscrupulous cops and prosecutors, of which there are some....not to figure out a way to get guilty people off. Yes, its true that people do get convicted after they talked to the cops when they probably would have gotten away with it if they had kept their mouth shut. But its because they were guilty. Do we really want to be giving seminars on how to get away with murder? I don't think so.

This lawyer and cop are both making a lot of money going around giving seminars. They wouldn't be able to do that unless their subject matter was controversial. They are scum of the earth in my opinion. They are making money by taking advantage of future victims

Basically it boils down to this. If you are guilty you should keep your mouth shut but if you keep your mouth shut the cops know there's a good chance you are guilty and they are going to spend a lot more time on you.

[Nodak]

Quote:

Originally Posted by utrecht The lawyer is giving ridiculous examples of why not to talk to cops like the one where he insinuates that you could be arrested for being in possession of a small lobster and not even know you were committing a crime. Does anyone really think a normal person would be prosecuted for having one small lobster?

A few years ago a friend of mine picked up an eagle feather from the ground while he was hiking. A couple of days later he had federal agents at his door asking why he was in possession of an eagle feather. They were seriously talking about prosecuting him.

[Lsbcal]

Quote:

Originally Posted by utrecht ...(snip)... This lawyer and cop are both making a lot of money going around giving seminars. They wouldn't be able to do that unless their subject matter was controversial. They are scum of the earth in my opinion. They are making money by taking advantage of future victims Basically it boils down to this. If you are guilty you should keep your mouth shut but if you keep your mouth shut the cops know there's a good chance you are guilty and they are going to spend a lot more time on you.

I appreciate your inputs on this. Maybe I've been reading too many Sue Grafton novels but I tend to be trusting of cops. They have a tough job and that can make them suspicious during encounters, but they are first in line to protect us civilians and our homes.

[utrecht]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Nodak A few years ago a friend of mine picked up an eagle feather from the ground while he was hiking. A couple of days later he had federal agents at his door asking why he was in possession of an eagle feather. They were seriously talking about prosecuting him.

Talking about prosecuting him and doing it are two different things. First of all, Federal Agents cant prosecute anybody. They can present a case to an Assistant US attorney and they make the decision. Do you really think they are going to waste a pile of money for that? Federal prosecutors only take big cases that are worth their time. Ive personally seen them turn down strong cases because they didn't think they were serious enough. They probably said something to your friend to scare him and obviously it worked.

[utrecht]

Just so nobody thinks I'm protecting cops because I am one, I spent several years in the Public Corruption squad investigating cops, firemen, City Councilmen and other City employees that were accused of crimes.

There has been a lot of publicity lately surrounding people getting exonerated of crimes they had served time for. Almost every one of those cases was based on eyewitness testimony that turned out to be wrong, not based on overzealous cops that were trying to railroad someone. Police procedures have changed drastically recently because of a lot of those cases. No cop that I know wants an innocent person going to jail. I've dropped cases myself that where I thought i had the right guy, but wasn't sure enough and didn't want to take any chances.

As I said before it boils down to the fact that it's not smart to talk to the cops if you are guilty because no matter how smart you think you are, you are going to say something you will wish you hadn't but why are we training people how to be better criminals? If you are innocent, chances are very slim that you are going to talk you way into a conviction.

[Original Wally]

***If you are guilty you should keep your mouth shut but if you keep your mouth shut the cops know there's a good chance you are guilty and they are going to spend a lot more time on you***


WOW.

That reminds me of the old saw... a cop sez "if you didn't do anything wrong, then why am I standing here talking to you?"

Oficer utrecht, First - thank you for your service. I mean that. Those on the front line are SO important to society. Second - I remain even more convinced than ever - with the following clarification... NEVER talk to a police officer WITHOUT THE PRESENCE OF AN ATTORNEY.

Your example about an alibi minimizing the time spend with an individual cuts both ways... Since I am innocent, there is no real harm in delaying an "interview" until I can have an attorney present, is there?

Also, would you kindly confirm that exculpatory comments made to a peace officer are inadmissible in court?

[utrecht]

The video says never talk to a cop under any circumstances. I never heard him say to wait for an attorney and then talk to the cops. Actually I believe the guy is talking to a room full of lawyers and is telling them to never let their clients talk to the cops under any circumstances. Like I said, he is stretching the truth and using scare tactics to justify the need for him to give seminars and make 1000s of dollars.

I'm not a lawyer and to be honest, I'm not sure whether or not exculpatory comments made to a cop are inadmissible in court. It makes no sense though. I've never had it come up in a case I worked. If someone made exculpatory comments to me which means his comments could be used to clear him of the crime (such as an alibi) I would follow up on the comments. If they really were exculpatory then I most likely cleared him and moved on. I'm looking for the truth, not to find someone and arrest him and say "close enough". I'd like to hear a real life example of exculpatory comments that were true and really indicated the suspects innocence being inadmissible in court to believe this was the case.

The guy talks about people confessing to crimes they didn't commit. Both examples he gives are from people who are mentally challenged. Whatever cops took those confessions and didn't verify specific statements given during those confessions to see whether or not they were real confessions, need to be locked up themselves. Those same crooked and / or incompetent cops most likely would've found a way to bad rap those guys even without the confessions. Saying don't talk to the cops under any circumstances because you heard about a horrific situation like that is like saying don't go to the doctor when you're having chest pains because you saw a guy on Dateline who went to the doctor to have his appendix removed and they took his kidney out instead.

[Rustward]

Quote:

Originally Posted by utrecht Like I said, he is stretching the truth and using scare tactics to justify the need for him to give seminars and make 1000s of dollars.

This is the third time you mentioned "seminar". The venue appeared to be a law school classroom lecture, not a for-profit seminar. The presenter in part I was the law professor. The presenter in part II was the cop.

What gives you the impression that this was a for-profit seminar making "1000s of dollars"?

I believe you are making this into something that it is not.

[utrecht]

I don't think you can really tell what the venue is. It appears to me to be a seminar. Maybe its not. It does appear to be well rehearsed and that they have done this lecture or seminar many times before. Unless the cop is getting some sort of school credit, hes getting paid.

Either way, all they are doing is teaching lawyers how to get their guilty clients off. I sure hope that whoever is fine with that never is the victim of a serious crime and has to watch the guilty person walk. I believe our forefathers wanted to make sure people were given a fair trial and weren't unfairly prosecuted. I don't think they wanted lawyers to feel pride and laugh about figuring out ways to keep criminals on the streets.

[frayne]

My take is, if you haven't done anything wrong, there should be no problem talking to the police. I have had a number of friends in law enforcement and they are good people doing a difficult job. The videos are probably good information if you are a criminal, otherwise feel free to line your lawyers pockets. I also have an uncle and cousin who are attorneys who are good people.

[Koolau]

utrecht, There are at least 2 tenants of criminal "justice" which DEMAND rigorous defense (even of the "guilty"). 1) If a prosecutor can overcome a rigorous defense, there is very little doubt of someone's guilt. 2) Our system is based on the concept that it's better for a few guilty folks to go free (primarily due to a rigorous defense) than for ONE person to be falsely convicted. I don't blame you for not liking it when a defense attorney "brags" about getting some low-life off. Still a piece of me also cheers with him because the "little guy" won. Imagine being charged with a crime. The state has virtually infinite money, infinite investigative powers and the ability to "bribe" witnesses. You as the defendant have very little of that (certainly, you can't bribe witness as prosecutors can.)

utrecht, I too honor your profession and think you have a tough j*b to do. BUT, if I'm ever accused of a crime (whether I'm guilty or not) I'm going to bloody well hire the best defense attorney I can afford.

Your example that they don't actually arrest people for those little technical violations (e.g., the weird lobster) is totally untrue. They do it for two reasons (at least). First, if you p!$$ off the wrong person, they can "get" you for it legally. But, primarily, they do it to "trade up". They THINK you've done something actually "bad", so they charge you with taking a lobster you should not have. The problem is - the lobster crime has real teeth. Even when they figure out that you are innocent of the "real crime" they thought you committed, you could still be stuck (by circumstances) defending one of the ridiculous "lobster" charges. Make no mistake: all of these penny-anti-ridiculous-to-the-point-of-laughter crimes that you say don't get charged against "good" people, either HAVE BEEN or WILL BE. See my tag line. That's where it comes from originally - the kind of crap charges (often hidden in reams of rule-making) that the defense attorney was talking about. You can no longer walk down the street or drive your car without breaking a law (did you hear the LEO describe how he "gets" people he suspects of a real crime?). 99% of the time you're not charged. BUT, you could be if you've p!$$ed off the right people or they WANT something from you (like to testify against your best friend or neighbor or to violate privileged conversations.) Example - You're a doctor and a LEO wants info about one of your patient's medical conditions (could prove he is guilty of something). You tell him "no way". He sees that there is a needle sticking out of your sharps container. He says "tell me what I want to know or I arrest you for an E felony" (or whatever violation of the sharps rule is). Please don't tell me such things don't happen. Maybe not often - but they do happen.

End of rant 'cause YMMV.

[Lazarus]

I was once questioned by police. They did not care if I did it or not. They said anything they could to get me to confess to something I did not do to close their case.

I will not talk to police again. They are not on your side. They have a job they want to get over with and go home. I heard lies trying to get me to confess my guilt for something I did not do. I would not say anything without a lawyer present if I were you.

This has been over 30 years ago and I will never forget it. Plus be careful who you date!

[utrecht]

You meet a friend at Starbucks for coffee and a muffin. You are there for 45 mins and then you both leave and go your separate ways. As you're walking down the street you hear sirens and you get stopped by the cops who say you match the description of a guy who just robbed Wells Fargo 3 mins ago. Are you saying that even though your friend, the barrista and a lady who you exchanged phone numbers with will all verify that you've been at Starbucks for the past 30-45 minutes, you are still going to keep your mouth shut and refuse to talk to the police? You're going to stand there and demand an attorney or just say nothing at all?

Good luck with that.

[Malcolm2]

Koolau, I think you watch too much television, Hollywood does not reflect reality. There are about 18,000 law enforcement organizations in the United States. Most officers, and Federal Agents are not lurking around trying to convict an innocent person. Most people in the U.S. trust them, and for good reason - they have earned it. Your example of an officer trying to threaten a Dr in order to get medical records just would never happen, as the officer would be committing a crime not to mention that there are legal ways to get the records. If it has happened, post a link to the story please.
Nodak's story of the Eagle feather is also a joke, post a link.

Bottom line is defense attorneys have a more difficult job getting a guilty person off if the guilty person honestly admits his guilt to the cops. Has nothing to do with keeping an innocent person out of jail. I knew a prominent former defense attorney fairly well and once asked him how many of his clients were actually innocent. His reply..."one, I think".

It is true the system is designed to let off several guilty people before convicting an innocent person. It works that way for a reason, and I think generally works well, with some exceptions (OJ?). If you are the family of the victim when the guilty walk it seems crazy. There is no need for additional people to try to get more obviously guilty people off.

I doubt the cop from Virginia Beach (size 840 officers) has ever worked with police in another country, has made 'thousands of felony arrests' or speaks for the other 17,000+ law enforcement agencies. Rarely would a good cop grow up and want to be a defense attorney.

Honest people (most of you) should just keep being honest. Don't commit a felony. If you do, by all means get a lawyer (a good but honest one) and hope you are one of the criminals that get off.

[utrecht]

I doubt several things that the cop said:
1) No way he has done 1000s of interviews. At least not in an official capacity or in an interview room type setting.
2) No way hes made 1000s of felony arrests and 2500 misdemeanor arrests. I work in a city of 4000 officers. We can actually look up our entire arrest history and NOBODY on my huge department has that many arrests. He has this whole speech rehearsed and is very smooth but stumbles over his words when he talks about how many arrests hes made. That's a sure sign of someone lying.
3) He said his conviction rate is 98%. I've never heard a single detective who has ever known what his conviction rate is. We don't keep stats like that. Most cases never go to court. They either get plead out or dropped and unless he looked up every single case of his, he would never know what happened.

This cop is a bigger blowhard than the lawyer is and I don't trust either of them as far as I could throw them. Think about someone in your profession that you knew was full of sh*t and you will see how I feel.

[Buckeye]

Quote:

Originally Posted by utrecht I doubt several things that the cop said: 1) No way he has done 1000s of interviews. At least not in an official capacity or in an interview room type setting. 2) No way hes made 1000s of felony arrests and 2500 misdemeanor arrests. I work in a city of 4000 officers. We can actually look up our entire arrest history and NOBODY on my huge department has that many arrests. He has this whole speech rehearsed and is very smooth but stumbles over his words when he talks about how many arrests hes made. That's a sure sign of someone lying. 3) He said his conviction rate is 98%. I've never heard a single detective who has ever known what his conviction rate is. We don't keep stats like that. Most cases never go to court. They either get plead out or dropped and unless he looked up every single case of his, he would never know what happened. This cop is a bigger blowhard than the lawyer is and I don't trust either of them as far as I could throw them. Think about someone in your profession that you knew was full of sh*t and you will see how I feel.

I got the impression the lawyer and the cop were talking to the cop's law school class. The cop made a joke at the beginning that it was harder to get out of law school (graduating?) than it was to get in. I thought I heard him use 'we' which made me think they were speaking to members of his class.

[eytonxav]

If you haven't done anything wrong, I think we'd be in a pretty sad state of affairs in this country if you can't talk to the police without fear of being unfairly charged. I'd be more fearful of unscrupulous attorneys and over zealous prosecutors than in a few bad LEOs trying to stick me with something I didn't do.