Who said he was a suspect?
Cops are just showing pictures of people to the attendant and he identifies you.
You said you were not there to the police. Attendant says you were. Now the police think you are lying.
Better if you had said nothing.
According to the video the police were saying he was guilty of murder.
And here is where you’re wrong 99-100% of the time; this is a non-sequitur. Asking for a lawyer is expected behavior from any half-way intelligent person. Just read upthread where actual officers here shake their heads at how many dumb people think talking to cops and believing they can convince them of their innocence is smart.
I’m not really following your line:
How do YOU think it works? You seem to think that the cops do actually start asking random people if they’ll talk to them and then whoever lawyers up becomes the suspect. Absent of, you know, any actual evidence. I don’t follow. If they have evidence or you fall into certain categories (spouse of the deceased, known to have threatened the victim, 10 other people say it was you) then you are a suspect regardless of what you say to the cops when they contact you. They don’t just drop you from the list if you say “sure I’ll cooperate”, nor do you automatically become a suspect if you refuse.
Another good video I’ve shared before on this subject repeats many of the facts in the longer video shown above, but here (it should start at the right location) makes a good point in that police and lawyers themselves when they become suspects usually don’t talk and hire their own lawyers.
Other points in that video that address your opinion that not talking makes you a suspect are addressed at 4:27 and 9:27.
This is addressed at 8:02 of my video.
You really need to watch that video again.
The police said no such thing at the outset.
The attorney gives a test at the beginning of how people hear what they want to hear. You are doing that right now. Watch it again.
I’m with you on this but what happens when the inevitable, “Ooops, technical problems…there is no recording” happens?
In the video where the attorney says never talk to the cops the cop himself says he erases all of his recordings because they are not necessary (or he only pretends to be recording…point being he is totally unconcerned about recording).
HA! Well, good luck with that. I’d wager that 90% of the people falsely convicted of crimes never imagined that they were a suspect until they had already given statements that could be used against them.
And how exactly are you supposed to use your “intelligence” to figure out if the cops suspect you? You don’t know what evidence the cops have, what other witnesses may have said. They’re not going to open their interrogation by making accusations – they’re going to say they need your help, really appreciate you coming down to the station, could you recount what happened for us one more time? And maybe there’s some minor differences between the first time you spoke to them and how you relay events this time. “Well, now we don’t know what to think, Mr. Little_Nemo, you told Officer Jones at the scene that night that you were asleep by ten, but now you’re saying you fell asleep around 11?” And now you’re in a panic trying to explain your innocent misrecollection, while the cops are getting sterner and asking more confrontational questions.
Maybe at this point you finally clue in that you’re a suspect and stop talking, but you’ve already given them plenty that can be uses against you in court.
Are you aware I used to conduct these investigations?
So then tell us how it works and where in your training you were instructed that those who lawyer up are to be automatically considered suspects, and can be beaten if they don’t cooperate or otherwise piss you off. And while you’re at it could you explain why what you say contradicts what other LEOs on this board say, or all the lawyers speaking on video that you say you watched but just ignore?
If that is true then that is scary.
You have said people unwilling to talk to police are displaying their guilt.
People being unwilling to talk to law enforcement are exercising their constitutional rights. That is not displaying guilt.
What?
sorry that was direct toward Little_Nemo; I quoted the wrong person
Good idea. Watch the tape. As a suggestion, start at the 13:15 mark.
This is human nature. He gets in there. It’s a stressful situation. Imagine a perfectly innocent client. The police say he’s been guilty of a murder. He’s totally innocent. As innocent as any one of us. So he goes in there. He meets with the police.
If the best you have is one out of context quote from a 45 minute video…
What’s weird is how hard you are working against the obvious here.
What the fuck.
Where do you imagine I said suspects can be beaten?
Maybe posters are right about not talking to the police. After all it’s US vs. THEM.
And don’t forget your t-shirt.
Once again, I’m saying one thing and you’re hearing something else.
To be clear, I did not say that.
I started to reply to your previous quote about lack of recordings when I saw the reply I ended up responding to. What I was going to reply to you was that the detective used his recorder as a prop to trick his suspect into thinking that he was the only one recording the interview, and that he controlled what was recorded or not. But his point was that yes the entire thing was recorded by the cameras and microphones installed in the room. So there IS a recording, but the helpful parts to the suspect can’t be used to help the suspect because of how the rules of evidence work.
Yeah you did.
No, I did not.
Go back and read it again. See if you can figure out the difference between what I actually said and what you’re claiming I said.
Me? I done here.
Yeah, you did and it is not anyone else’s job to intuit what you meant.