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

Never talk to the police

campolalaw.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

101–110 of 154 posts

Re: Never talk to the police

#101

Post by assimpleaspossi »

patwork wrote: post #96
assimpleaspossi wrote: post #83

The type of person who gets themselves in a situation where they can become a suspect is one that I can't see getting into. It makes me question what the person did to have this happen to them. I lead a normal life. I've never gotten into a situation where this could ever possibly concern me. I'm betting the vast majority of people who visit HN (and aren't commenting here) wouldn't have this issue, either. I do not f…

That's where this part applies to you: > NO, YOU CAN'T TALK THEM OUT OF IT > No, they don’t care about your story If you are suspected of a crime, your inclination is going to be to explain the situation because it must be a mistake. If you find yourself suspected of a crime, you should talk to a lawyer, not the police. People unknowingly break laws every day, yourself included. You have a right not to incriminate yo…

What you are fearing is fear itself. It's not going to happen and I have no reason to fear it will

Re: Never talk to the police

#102

Post by thayne »

spelk wrote: post #80
thayne wrote: post #39

But lawyers are expensive, and if it turns out you are just a witness, you are going to be spending a lot of money for nothing. And then consider if you are are the spouse or parent of a murder victim or missing person, and are innocent. You are almost certainly going to be a potential suspect, but you also want to help them find the actual criminal, and if hiring a lawyer makes you "look guilty", then the police mig…

>And then consider if you are are the spouse or parent of a murder victim or missing person, and are innocent. You are almost certainly going to be a potential suspect, but you also want to help them find the actual criminal, and if hiring a lawyer makes you "look guilty", then the police might focus their investigation on you rather than finding the real perpetrator. I agree. This is a real problem in law enforcemen…

In a missing person case, it isn't just justice, you also want your loved one back (assuming they are still alive).

Re: Never talk to the police

#103

Post by onraglanroad »

retsibsi wrote: post #75
Capricorn2481 wrote: post #29

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> If you match a description and are in the general vicinity of where the crime took place, it’s enough reasonable suspicion for a detainment If you match the description and are in the vicinity of the crime, you are not going to save yourself by talking to the police. You are already in "get a lawyer" territory.

I'm not in the US, so maybe things are very different here, but I still wonder if the absolutist advice is helpful in situations like this: One night, while walking, I was stopped by police because I roughly matched the description of someone who had burgled a house nearby. They didn't tell me this straight away; they just asked who I was, where I lived, and what I was doing. I didn't have ID on me, but I answered th…

It definitely depends on the country. I live in Scotland and I've been perfectly happy to chat with police officers but if I'm taken in for questioning (which in Scotland is an arrest) I would have no hesitation in asking for a solicitor and they would probably advise no comment on every question.

If I want to help them out I would then prepare a written statement, approved by my solicitor, and give them that.

It's just the sensible way to go.

There's no rush. Take your time and be smart.

Re: Never talk to the police

#104

Post by pseudalopex »

buellerbueller wrote: post #78
pseudalopex wrote: post #48

Earlier quoted context omitted.

When disagreeing, please reply to the argument instead of calling names. "That is idiotic; 1 + 1 is 2, not 3" can be shortened to "1 + 1 is 2, not 3."[1] [1] https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html

Brosky: I called them no names. I referred to their argument as bonkers...

The quoted guideline covered your false separation. The discouraged example called a statement idiotic.

Re: Never talk to the police

#105

Post by nosioptar »

assimpleaspossi wrote: post #83

The type of person who gets themselves in a situation where they can become a suspect is one that I can't see getting into. It makes me question what the person did to have this happen to them. I lead a normal life. I've never gotten into a situation where this could ever possibly concern me. I'm betting the vast majority of people who visit HN (and aren't commenting here) wouldn't have this issue, either. I do not f…

I was accused of a minor felony about 20 years ago. I was on video 80+ miles away from the crime from four hours before to four hours after.

My alleged coconspirator talked to cops because he knew he was innocent. They datained him overnight a couple times, showed up at his work and got him fired, and pissed off his landlord by showing up at his house a bunch of times.

I shut the hell up and refused to answer any questions without an attorney. I never heard back from the cops after that.

Re: Never talk to the police

#106

Post by buellerbueller »

pseudalopex wrote: post #104
buellerbueller wrote: post #78

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Brosky: I called them no names. I referred to their argument as bonkers...

The quoted guideline covered your false separation. The discouraged example called a statement idiotic.

Yet it did not allege that calling the statement idiotic is the same as calling its poster idiotic.

Re: Never talk to the police

#107

Post by buellerbueller »

jfengel wrote: post #68
buellerbueller wrote: post #33

Earlier quoted context omitted.

if they are going to fabricate evidence, why do you think they wouldn't also do that if you do talk to them and you already match whoever they are looking for? Your position is just bonkers.

If they don't have it out for you to start with, answering their questions can get you out of it. If they pull you over and you just answer their questions, the odds are that they will just send you on your way, eventually. But if you start invoking your rights and they think you have something to hide, they can easily find an excuse. "I smelled alcohol" is a popular one. If you refuse the test, they can invoke the s…

You make up a ton of hypotheticals to support your point, versus a lawyer and a retired detective (video in the link) who tell you explicitly to never talk to cops.

Re: Never talk to the police

#108

Post by buellerbueller »

bryanlarsen wrote: post #61
buellerbueller wrote: post #33

Earlier quoted context omitted.

if they are going to fabricate evidence, why do you think they wouldn't also do that if you do talk to them and you already match whoever they are looking for? Your position is just bonkers.

Because cops are human, and most people answer questions when cops ask them questions. Refusing to answer questions cannot be held against you in court, but it certainly often is in the minds of humans. And when a cop has "evidence" against you that they cannot use in court, that's when it seems likely they'll manufacture some evidence that is usable.

Cops being human is also exactly why the lawyer and detective in the video is exactly why never talk to cops.

Real lawyer opinion > armchair lawyer opinion.

Re: Never talk to the police

#109

Post by m348e912 »

happytoexplain wrote: post #41
m348e912 wrote: post #30

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is so true, and it's surprising how many people don't know what they are obligated to do when asked by an officer. It's even fuzzy for me at times. It should be well known that you are required to show ID if pulled over [Whren v. United States (1996)], your passenger is required to show his or her ID [Brendlin v. California (2007) & Arizona v. Johnson (2009)] , and you must exist the vehicle if asked to do so [P…

I'm going to charitably guess that you do not mean "surprising" in the common way, as in "wow, I can't explain why people don't know this laundry list of requests you are or are not required to comply with"; but rather as in "it's surprising that we find ourselves in this hellish society where citizens need to memorize a bunch of shit or else live in fear of every police interaction where they might sacrifice a right…

> instead of an incomplete list of one-off rules (that are apparently not even easy to interpret, as demonstrated by the other replies to your comment).

Looking at the comments, I will agree that there are different interpretations of the case law I cited. But the only thing that matters is can this case law be used against you to convict you for not complying with an officer, my understanding is it can, but I am not a lawyer.

I'd love to see civil rights lawyers tackle traffic stop etiquette head on and come up with clear guidance for drivers and passengers in common situations. "Keeping your mouth shut" is a good start.

Re: Never talk to the police

#110

Post by SoftTalker »

buellerbueller wrote: post #107
jfengel wrote: post #68

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If they don't have it out for you to start with, answering their questions can get you out of it. If they pull you over and you just answer their questions, the odds are that they will just send you on your way, eventually. But if you start invoking your rights and they think you have something to hide, they can easily find an excuse. "I smelled alcohol" is a popular one. If you refuse the test, they can invoke the s…

You make up a ton of hypotheticals to support your point, versus a lawyer and a retired detective (video in the link) who tell you explicitly to never talk to cops .

Neither of whom are disinterested. The lawyer wants you to hire him to talk to the cops for you, and the retired cop is earning money by giving his "don't talk to the cops" speeches.
Post reply on HN