Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Don't Talk to the Police (2012)

youtube.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

101–110 of 172 posts

Re: Don't Talk to the Police (2012)

#101

Post by dmix »

mistermann wrote: post #88
joshmn wrote: post #65

As someone who has been through the criminal justice system a handful of times, here's what I always tell people: If you are approached by a policeman/woman, you don't need to say anything other than, "I'm going to ask you to refer all questions to my counsel as I'm not prepared to handle or able to answer any questions you may have." Don't have counsel? Get some. Can't afford any? Tell the policeman/woman that you'l…

It seems to me that this advice forgets it's own lesson: A policeman/woman can only get you in trouble. In many cases, a copy really does just want to have a 5 minute chat, and if you stonewall them ( Am I being detained? ), they might decide to exercise their power to get you in trouble, just to return the sentiment of unreasonableness.

Right, telling someone to "say the bare minimum" doesn't mean saying nothing at all and treating the officer poorly. Don't act superior because you happen to know your rights, that's basically as bad as being a two-bit criminal in their eyes. Police don't recruit people based on their sensitivity and grasp of common sense, they are people who enjoy the power dynamic the job gives them and for the most part 99% of the time people go out of their way to respect them (for better or worse) and whenever someone doesn't they over react, like a slighted bully in elementary school.

Police culture and training promotes this toxic type of no-common sense approach to handling situations, it trains them to be assertive and the 'alpha-male' in all situations, so any type of rebellion against this idea to them is treated as sacrosanct, at least by the average (aka dumb) officer.

And yes, for the most part if you are respectful and non-confrontational you won't have any problems.

Some people reject this entirely and think they have rights so they should assert them always. But ultimately these are social situations in which one party is given a significant imbalance of power, that goes well beyond the rational/common-sense "I didnt do anything wrong" context, and which goes well beyond the rights you do actually have - in a courtroom in front a judge.

The simple fact is police can make your life miserable without crossing any legal/employer boundaries. The bureaucracy, political culture, and power structures allow this to happen.

So if you care about this try to focus your energy on changing politics, police training, and the accepted police culture at the society/community level. In individual moments it's probably not worth the energy.

But that said, never ever say anything you don't want to reveal to a police officer, even (or especially) if you broke a law, and never trust a single thing they say about it being "the best thing for you to do at this moment". Be polite and listen to what they say in terms of behaviours, but if you are pressed repeatedly after not wanting to say something, then say you want a lawyer present because you don't feel comfortable in this situation. And yes sometimes that requires you being a "dick" to be assertive, but that's because the police have an incentive to make you feel that way. As long as you are a good citizen otherwise they have nothing on you and the truth will come out in court, if they can prove you did anything to get to that point.

Re: Don't Talk to the Police (2012)

#102

Post by skrebbel »

sundarurfriend wrote: post #80
skrebbel wrote: post #38

Is the hidden motive here to sell lawyer services? This is a lawyer on a long and powerful rant about how you shouldn't do X without a lawyer. I'm not saying that this makes the point less valid, but beware that people are always better equipped to make powerful arguments when that argument aligns with their source of income.

He also gives several very clear examples of why this is the better course of action. Skepticism is good, but this is like looking for hidden motive when your doctor tells you to not swallow random pills without consultation.

Good point, thanks.

Re: Don't Talk to the Police (2012)

#103

Post by IgorPartola »

pmoriarty wrote: post #85
nateabele wrote: post #73

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You're not a weirdo, but you would be a weirdo for not having, say, insurance (health/car/home/whatever). Unfortunately, the world is such that we're coming to the point where this just needs to be another item on the checklist. People find the resources to cover the things they need, and lawyers aren't all crazy unaffordable.

Speaking of insurance, is there something like legal insurance where you pay your monthly premiums or whatever and then when you finally need a lawyer, your insurance policy pays for one?

Some employers provide this for about $5-15/month. It usually doesn’t cover everything, but it will cover routine stuff like wills, powers of attorney, real estate transactions, etc.

Re: Don't Talk to the Police (2012)

#106

Post by throwaway0255 »

For most of the population this is very bad advice.

It’s important to remember he’s assuming you have or can afford legal counsel. If you’re like most people and you can’t, ignoring or refusing to answer the questions of a police officer can seem rude, can make you appear guilty, and can get you singled out for charges, that later you won’t be able to afford to defend yourself against.

I knew someone who took the advice of this video. He was driving in a car with multiple people, there were drugs in the car, cops pulled them over. “Whose drugs are these?” Everyone says “not mine officer.” This guy remained silent. “Are these yours?” Silence.

All of the possession charges were put on him, and everyone else was free to go. The drugs weren’t his.

I never followed up to see what happened to him, but he was completely broke, so I can’t imagine it was good.

Re: Don't Talk to the Police (2012)

#107

Post by madeofpalk »

c22 wrote: post #67
Uehreka wrote: post #63

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I always wonder this when people bring this up. Am I a weirdo for not having a lawyer on retainer at all times? That doesn’t sound like something that would be affordable for most people. And quite frankly, I don’t even know how I’d go about looking for or evaluating a lawyer.

You don't need a lawyer on retainer, but it's probably good to know the phone number of one. If they can't take your case they will let you know and likely refer you to a colleague.

I've never had to have any sort of interaction with the justice system and have never talked to a lawyer (even a friend or in a social setting). I thought I was a proper adult for having a regular accountant I talk to once a year.

How do I know the phone number to a good lawyer?

Re: Don't Talk to the Police (2012)

#108

Post by ivraatiems »

throwaway0255 wrote: post #106

For most of the population this is very bad advice. It’s important to remember he’s assuming you have or can afford legal counsel. If you’re like most people and you can’t, ignoring or refusing to answer the questions of a police officer can seem rude, can make you appear guilty, and can get you singled out for charges, that later you won’t be able to afford to defend yourself against. I knew someone who took the adv…

> For most of the population this is very bad advice.

No, you are not correct. In the United States - where this advice was given - it is excellent advice. It is the only advice any competent attorney or student of US law will ever give you.

> It’s important to remember he’s assuming you have or can afford legal counsel. If you’re like most people and you can’t, ignoring or refusing to answer the questions of a police officer can seem rude, can make you appear guilty, and can get you singled out for charges, that later you won’t be able to afford to defend yourself against.

You have the right to counsel, and you have the right to wait until you have obtained counsel to answer questions. It is the obligation of the state to provide you an attorney if you cannot afford one. In that case, you can and should still say "I cannot answer any questions until I've consulted with an attorney."

> can make you appear guilty, and can get you singled out for charges, that later you won’t be able to afford to defend yourself against.

In the United States, it has been broadly found to be unconstitutional to interpret someone's request for counsel as evidence of their guilt. Again, you have a constitutional right to counsel and you have a constitutional right to refuse to answer questions that might incriminate you. The attorney and police officer in the video, both of whom say this multiple times, are making the point that any questions answered without counsel can potentially incriminate you.

> All of the possession charges were put on him, and everyone else was free to go. The drugs weren’t his. I never followed up to see what happened to him, but he was completely broke, so I can’t imagine it was good.

It makes no sense for you to offer this advice, citing no authority, if you don't even know whether the example you have proves your argument. Please don't spread misinformation on the grounds that you once heard of a guy who might have had a bad experience with something.

What is correct is that, in the case of the example you cite, it's important to remember that saying nothing is not the same as invoking your rights. It is always best to explicitly invoke your right to counsel and your right to stay silent. [1][2][3] Saying nothing does not necessarily imply your rights are being invoked; a reasonable person would not always interpret it that way. If this person had said "I'm not answering any questions, and I want to speak with an attorney," and the police kept questioning him, they would be in violation of the law.

[1] http://www.nbcnews.com/id/37448356/ns/us_news-crime_and_cour... [2] http://criminal.findlaw.com/criminal-rights/invoking-the-rig... [3] https://www.brennancenter.org/analysis/you-still-have-right-...

Re: Don't Talk to the Police (2012)

#109

Post by dazc »

sundarurfriend wrote: post #76
pps43 wrote: post #55

This is probably too extreme. Andrew Branca recommends [1] to "say little" rather than to "say nothing". [1] https://www.reddit.com/r/CCW/comments/5sicm5/the_law_of_self...

The link doesn't explain anything about his argument except that it's in his book. What does "say little" entail and why does he recommend that? Also, from the context it seems to be about what to do after a self-defense shooting - is his advice specific to that context, or a general argument?

'What does "say little" entail...'

I'm guessing, saying nothing infers guilt whereas saying 'I can't remember...' (or similar) leaves room for manoeuvre at a later date?

Re: Don't Talk to the Police (2012)

#110

Post by ivraatiems »

gst wrote: post #53
sp821543 wrote: post #40

I believe the lawyer in the video, James Duane, now recommends the phrase, "I want a lawyer," as the correct response to any police question. As some have mentioned, mere silence is not enough to invoke one's constitutional rights and could in fact be used as a legal argument as to your guilt.

If I get arrested and say "I want a lawyer". What lawyer do I get? A random public defender? A private defender? If it's private defender, am I able to ask for another lawyer if the fees are too high? Will that lawyer refer me to another more specialized lawyer later on?

For the purposes of your invoking your right, it doesn't matter. You have a right to a lawyer of some kind, and the purpose of saying that is to make them stop asking questions. You could just as easily say "I want to speak with my lawyer," if you've already got one, or, "I want to speak with a public defender," or something similar.

> What lawyer do I get? A random public defender? A private defender?

Generally speaking, somebody who's arrested falls into one of these categories: A. They have a lawyer already, and will contact that person or instruct the police to contact that person B. They don't have a lawyer, but can afford to retain one, and can contact someone who will take care of that for them or do it themselves C. They don't have a lawyer, and can't afford one, in which case they will be given a public defender

Courts generally won't give you a private attorney if you request a lawyer and can't pay for one - that's what public defenders are for. (Sometimes, private practice attorneys work with the public defender's office and take cases that way, but in that case, you still are not necessarily the one paying them.) In any of those cases, a person is always free to fire their counsel, retain different counsel, or represent themselves.

The basic rule - don't talk to police without a lawyer - applies no matter which case you fall into.

Post reply on HN