The Zero-puncuation lawyer: Never talk to cops

[atxgun]

[youtube]http://youtube.com/watch?v=i8z7NC5sgik[/youtube]

It's a bit lengthy at 30 minutes but would like to hear the feedback from LEOs, lawyers and plain citizens on this if you have the time.

It ends just as he was about to have an officer come up to say what ever he had to say about the talk but unfortunately the youtube video is truncated there.

Edit: Oh here's part 2 http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=08fZQWjDVKE" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;, watching that now.

[nitrogen]

Part II
[youtube]http://youtube.com/watch?v=08fZQWjDVKE[/youtube]

EDIT: apparently neither of us know how to use the "youtube" tag...

EDIT EDIT: KeithB rocks.

[Keith B]

Take out the www. and it should work.

[Originalist]

It is advise I would give to my loved ones. You wouldn't believe what I have been able to get people to admit to, and I am not a very experienced "investigator", I am a tried and true "beat cop". I to do not pursue people I believe are innocent, just like the cop in the video.

My personal fav is "your friend is already telling us everything, how do you think we knew you were at the strip club." Man, he started squeeling like a pig.

[stroo]

One of the things I learned in law school was that people don't like quiet. You ask a question and wait. Sooner or later they will say something. The other thing I have learned from dealing with compliance issues in my company is that almost everyone is "stupid" like the guy says. I have seen really smart people do some really dumb things, try to cover it up and then without much effort admit to the coverup.

Another thing this guy is absolutely right about is that if you have been arrested and are being "interviewed", you are a rank amateur dealing with a consumate professional and if you talk to him, you will lose. So generally you want to ask for a lawyer and then force yourself to shut up.

Finally while he claims and I think most LEOs would claim to only want to go after the guilty, the fact is that because people want other people to like them and that includes their LEO "interviewers", it isn't to hard for an LEO to get a false confession out of someone, particularly if they don't have a lawyer with them, i.e. it will go easier on you if you just tell me what I want to hear. The other fact is that far too many prosecutors these days are more concerned about their conviction rate then about doing justice. In my opinion, unlike any other lawyers, prosecutors ought to be concerned about justice, i.e. are they prosecuting the guilty. So, it is very possible for you to be convicted of a crime even if you are innocent if allow yourself to be "interviewed" without an attorney present. It has happened before.

[KC5AV]

I have a brother that could easily verify what stroo just said. He is currently 9 and a half years into a 12 year sentence. I honestly don't know if he's guilty or not, but he made the mistake of being interviewed without an attorney present. The officers (according to him) told him that they 'knew he was guilty', and that they would hound him for the rest of his life until they proved it. They also offered to 'help him out' if he'd just confess. Since my brother isn't the brightest of my siblings, he did.

[Liko81]

This video's been around for a while, but good watching nonetheless.

Always remember that you do not have to be arrested to remain silent. If you do not wish to speak to an officer, simply inform him of that fact, and if he has no probable cause to arrest you on the spot, he can't continue to detain you. Being a member of OpenCarry.org, this was latched onto by many as support for the "Am I being detained? On suspicion of what crime?" broken record advocated when detained by police who object to legal open carry.

The flip side is that brushing off an officer as a matter of course is not very good "people skills". Consider the following scenario: a house on your street has been broken into and the homeowner gravely injured. Police are canvassing the neighborhood for evidence, while you head down the street to the neighborhood mailboxes (in my parents' neighborhood all the mailboxes for the block are in one place). Just for the sake of argument, let's say you're OCing in a state that allows it. An officer sees you, doesn't care you're carrying, and would like to ask if you saw or heard anything last night that might point them in the right direction. However, you know that not every officer likes OC and therefore you are on your guard against fishing expeditions. If your first words, as so many pro-gun and pro-OC advocates say they should be, are "Am I being detained on suspicion of a crime?", you are now on the officer's mud list and may even have just made yourself a suspect. Why? Because before you even gave him the chance to be polite, you rudely brushed him off. On top of that, since you didn't want to talk to him, he now thinks you have something to hide; after all, innocent people don't mind talking to the police as by definition they've done nothing wrong. Right? Well, no, but still, if the roles were reversed, would you like to be treated that way while trying to do your job?

As always, the truth is somewhere in the middle. If hailed by an officer, you will know what the encounter is about after roughly 10 seconds, so let him speak until that point. If you don't know by then, the officer isn't as good as most about coming to the point; ask him politely but firmly what's going on, what he wants from you and why. Once you know what the encounter's about, you can then decide to cooperate or not.

[WildBill]

If hailed by an officer, you will know what the encounter is about after roughly 10 seconds, so let him speak until that point. If you don't know by then, the officer isn't as good as most about coming to the point; ask him politely but firmly what's going on, what he wants from you and why. Once you know what the encounter's about, you can then decide to cooperate or not.

I will have to disagree on this point. The officer has been trained to ask questions, not give you information. They will "come to the point" when they are good and ready. In my experience they will answer questions only when it is to their advantage. They are trained to keep control of the conversation [interogation] so that you are at a disadvantage. That is why I subscribe to the doctrine "never talk to cops."

[Liko81]

I will have to disagree on this point. The officer has been trained to ask questions, not give you information. They will "come to the point" when they are good and ready. In my experience they will answer questions only when it is to their advantage. They are trained to keep control of the conversation [interogation] so that you are at a disadvantage. That is why I subscribe to the doctrine "never talk to cops."

I guess we'll have to agree to disagree. An officer is trained to gather information, and will, if he thinks it will help him to do that, give information to encourage your cooperation. If they acted like drill sergeants ("I'm asking the questions here!") they wouldn't get anywhere, certainly not on a sidewalk encounter. Police officers are trained to read people. They know when someone can be encouraged by being honest and friendly, and when someone will crack when they're leaned on. If they get it wrong in either case, they'll be perceived as either weak or abusive, the interviewee will shut down, and the officer won't get the information he wants.

[WildBill]

I think everybody here is being a little too paranoid.
If you haven't done anything wrong, don't act like a mule to the guy.
If he's not being impolite to you and is just asking for information on a neighbors break-in, then cooperate for gosh sakes unless he starts really probing and asking where you were at 10:03pm last night, etc. IE, it's obvious they think you're a suspect.
Other than that, treat others as you would like to be treated.

Maybe my post wasn't clear. If I were a witness to a crime or could offer information to solve a crime or catch a BG, I would fully cooperate with the police and give them as much information as I could.

The issue is not whether or not I have "done something wrong." I am always going to be civil and polite to an LEO, but if I became the subject of an interogation or didn't like the focus or direction of the questioning I would cease to answer questions.

[Carrots]

Thank you for posting that

[casingpoint]

if you have been arrested and are being "interviewed", you are a rank amateur dealing with a consumate professional

Not all of us are still wet behind the ears.