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

51–60 of 154 posts

Re: Never talk to the police

#51

Post by jfengel »

digitalPhonix wrote: post #20
Brendinooo wrote: post #12

>that means one of two things: 1) You are a suspect; 2) You are a possible suspect. While I suppose this is strictly true, the far more likely option for 2 is that you're a witness to the crime and you can therefore help that crime be solved. So, in a situation where I am approached by the police to answer questions about something I know I didn't do: 1. I talk, and it helps the police solve a case 2. I talk, and it…

The point of the article (and any similar advice) is that 4 is not possible

Convicting you of a crime is not possible. But there are many, many ways in which you can be screwed, from forcing you to spend a weekend in jail to having a prosecutor offer you a plea deal that you can't risk refusing.

The police have a lot more power in any encounter, and there is no way to avoid having them make your life worse. About the only truly concrete advice is that if you are guilty of something then you absolutely, positively must get a lawyer before saying anything at all. The magic words are “I will not answer any questions without my lawyer present,” and any variation from that exposes you to the risk of the police creatively misinterpreting you.

The magic words can help you beat the rap, but they cannot help you beat the ride. If they decide that you are going to jail, then you go with them, and nothing you say or do (or not say or do) will prevent that. And you will stay there until your lawyer shows up.

Re: Never talk to the police

#52

Post by lwansbrough »

ceejayoz wrote: post #31
lwansbrough wrote: post #16

It’s really important to know your rights. A lot of people think they know, but often times they don’t. And it gets those people in trouble. For example, you are required to provide identification when operating a vehicle at a traffic stop. No exceptions. Don’t get hung up on the reason for the stop, it doesn’t matter. Additionally, police can articulate in virtually any situation that they fear for officer safety, w…

> For example, you are required to provide identification when operating a vehicle at a traffic stop. No. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hiibel_v._Sixth_Judicial_Distr... > The Hiibel decision was narrow in that it applied only to states that have stop and identify statutes. Consequently, individuals in states without such statutes cannot be lawfully arrested solely for refusing to identify themselves during a Terry s…

That case is about Terry stops, not about failure to identify when operating a motor vehicle.

A Terry stop includes detainments of pedestrians, who do not have an obligation to identify in most states.

Re: Never talk to the police

#53

Post by FatherOfCurses »

aquarious_ wrote: post #6

[flagged]

In the United States at least, 99% of the time when you are approached by the police, you are suspected of a crime. They are given wide latitude in using their feelings rather than facts to evaluate whether you should be taken into custody, physically harmed, or even killed. They are protected from consequences of poor decisions by strong unions and the concept of qualified immunity. There is vast evidence out there about why on average they cannot be trusted to deal with you fairly.

Re: Never talk to the police

#54

Post by thayne »

digitalPhonix wrote: post #20
Brendinooo wrote: post #12

>that means one of two things: 1) You are a suspect; 2) You are a possible suspect. While I suppose this is strictly true, the far more likely option for 2 is that you're a witness to the crime and you can therefore help that crime be solved. So, in a situation where I am approached by the police to answer questions about something I know I didn't do: 1. I talk, and it helps the police solve a case 2. I talk, and it…

The point of the article (and any similar advice) is that 4 is not possible

It absolutely is. In theory, staying silent or getting a lawyer shouldn't hurt you in court. But it could lead to the police focusing their investigation on you and/or making your life difficult.

Re: Never talk to the police

#55

Post by apwheele »

ceejayoz wrote: post #31
lwansbrough wrote: post #16

It’s really important to know your rights. A lot of people think they know, but often times they don’t. And it gets those people in trouble. For example, you are required to provide identification when operating a vehicle at a traffic stop. No exceptions. Don’t get hung up on the reason for the stop, it doesn’t matter. Additionally, police can articulate in virtually any situation that they fear for officer safety, w…

> For example, you are required to provide identification when operating a vehicle at a traffic stop. No. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hiibel_v._Sixth_Judicial_Distr... > The Hiibel decision was narrow in that it applied only to states that have stop and identify statutes. Consequently, individuals in states without such statutes cannot be lawfully arrested solely for refusing to identify themselves during a Terry s…

Terry stops != traffic stop

You are required to provide a license to operate a vehicle.

Re: Never talk to the police

#56

Post by ceejayoz »

lwansbrough wrote: post #52
ceejayoz wrote: post #31

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> For example, you are required to provide identification when operating a vehicle at a traffic stop. No. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hiibel_v._Sixth_Judicial_Distr... > The Hiibel decision was narrow in that it applied only to states that have stop and identify statutes. Consequently, individuals in states without such statutes cannot be lawfully arrested solely for refusing to identify themselves during a Terry s…

That case is about Terry stops, not about failure to identify when operating a motor vehicle. A Terry stop includes detainments of pedestrians, who do not have an obligation to identify in most states.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Terry_stop

> When police stop an automobile, this is known as a traffic stop.

They can't pull you over without reason in the first place.

Re: Never talk to the police

#57

Post by cucumber3732842 »

treis wrote: post #36
Arainach wrote: post #15

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What would an example of #4 look like? Don't lie to the cops, but refusing to answer without a lawyer present should hold no legal consequences.

You can absolutely talk your way out of situations. Jeffery Dalhmer infamously convinced cops that his drugged victim was his boyfriend and they let him go. Probably not going to be able to do that after you're booked and in jail. I don't think it's terrible advice to not talk to the cops but it tends to discount the reality of the world. Going through any sort of criminal trial is expensive and has devastating life…

Exactly. You have to remember you're not just interacting with a faceless legal system, you're interacting with a human cop. There's some nuance to it. I've talked god knows how many fishing stops down to 5min papers checks. I'd still rather have not had them, but better than if I'd have been all "officer, I have a right to remain silent" which likely would've resulted in a whole bunch of hoopla, bringing the dog around to find nothing, etc, etc, all for a petty fine.

If the cops were seeking me personally (i.e the system is seeking me out) out it'd be a different story though.

Re: Never talk to the police

#58

Post by Cider9986 »

normalaccess wrote: post #14
mothballed wrote: post #4

Lawyers will damn you no matter what you do. AT one point I was accused of kidnapping my own child as a result of racial discrimination where a caller called in that the child was a different race so I must have kidnapped them. I later contacted a civil rights attorney to see if there was any case for racial profiling, but instead they took the opportunity to eviscerate me for not talking my way out of detention. Tru…

yes, there is a fine line between "Don't Talk" and standing up for your rights. I feel like it's advisable to speak up when your rights are being violated. I can't quite put the words on what I mean but I think stating a fact like "This is my kid" is A-ok.

I'm also curious should you not answer a question about weapons in the car?

I would honestly say it couldn't help because it's not like they'd believe you if you said no and saying yes could make them suspicious. So while it seems like something that would be important to answer for safety, maybe it's safer to decline to answer.

Of course, if they're threatening you, you should comply because the place to fight is in the courtroom, not on the road.

Re: Never talk to the police

#59

Post by ceejayoz »

apwheele wrote: post #55
ceejayoz wrote: post #31

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> For example, you are required to provide identification when operating a vehicle at a traffic stop. No. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hiibel_v._Sixth_Judicial_Distr... > The Hiibel decision was narrow in that it applied only to states that have stop and identify statutes. Consequently, individuals in states without such statutes cannot be lawfully arrested solely for refusing to identify themselves during a Terry s…

Terry stops != traffic stop You are required to provide a license to operate a vehicle.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Terry_stop

"When police stop an automobile, this is known as a traffic stop."

> You are required to provide a license to operate a vehicle.

And the police are required to have probable cause to believe you are operating it without such a license to stop you for that. Thus making it… a Terry stop!

Re: Never talk to the police

#60

Post by lwansbrough »

ceejayoz wrote: post #56
lwansbrough wrote: post #52

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That case is about Terry stops, not about failure to identify when operating a motor vehicle. A Terry stop includes detainments of pedestrians, who do not have an obligation to identify in most states.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Terry_stop > When police stop an automobile, this is known as a traffic stop. They can't pull you over without reason in the first place.

Yeah you’re doing the thing I suggested people don’t do.

It doesn’t matter if they have RS for the detainment (a reason for the stop), once the traffic stop is underway you must identify.

If you feel as though the detainment was illegal, you can sue after the fact. There’s no point in trying to litigate the situation with the officer.

Post reply on HN