I was going to say, so now that you’re a suspect, you thinkn the police will “find” evidence to connect you to the crime? And then I see in a follow up post, that’s exactly what you mean.
So how is that different than, well, anything? Who knows what you might do that is going to make some lazy-ass cop zero in on you? Maybe he doesn’t like your haircut, or your death metal tee shirt. Or your “attitude”. Next thing yoiu know, even if you didn’t call a lawyer, you’re under arrest. Except this time, you probaly helped the police by…not having a lawyer in the beginning.
Discovery. The defense is almost certainly going to be allowed to view any taped interview during discovery. Then the court will have to determine what’s admissible at trial. They’re two separate processes.
This isn’t strictly true. An officer can enter your home and arrest you without a warrant in a number of circumstances, such as if they’re in “hot pursuit” of a suspect, of if they have reason to believe that delaying entry may result in someone being injured or killed or that evidence may be destroyed. And for an officer to arrest you outside, he or she still needs to show probable cause.
Yes but if exigent circumstances exist, he doesn’t need to ask you to come outside. He can just enter when you open the door and arrest you. If you don’t open the door, he can break in.
And yes, in theory, the officer must have probable cause to arrest you outside. But if the officer is wrong, doesn’t have probable cause, and arrests you anyway, you will still go to jail and be booked. You will eventually be released after much avoidable embarrassment, inconvenience, and no small amount of risk, since police custody and jails aren’t particularly safe places. The consequence for the police officer of the wrongful arrest is, for all practical purposes, nothing. But, if you are inside your house, the cop has to go get a warrant and establish probable cause to a judge, who might decide the cop is an idiot and the warrant isn’t justified. Or the cop might just be too lazy to even bother seeking a warrant.
That’s why I love the Pot Bros recommended answers
“I’m not here to discuss my day.”
“Am I being detained or am I free to go?”
And to those that believe the cop questioning you is being 100% straight-forward with you, watch some videos on youtube and see how often THEY refuse to answer questions like that. Instead they reply with
“Why don’t you want to answer my questions?”
“Why are you being so defensive?”
“Drop the attitude!”
“Why don’t you want to help me?”
etc.
Hmmmn. If you are refusing to answer my question then why should I answer yours?
If I were black, brown, or a darker-complexioned immigrant, I’d probably fear the police and would be pretty damn guarded, and justifiably so. Paradoxically, that apprehension is exactly what seems to trigger hypo-gonadist white cops into this “Obey my authoritay” reaction, with lots of screaming and guns pointed.
But as a white male, I’ve never really felt afraid of the police. To me it seems like common sense: I never feel compelled to hand over my Gmail calendar to a cop or tell him my life story, but if he or she asks me where I’m headed as his running my plates, fuck it, I tell him provided there’s no compelling reason not to.
mm, got to be careful with that. Making a person believe they were not free to leave in a manner where a reasonable person would agree they were made to feel not free to leave can create a trick bag later on in relation to statements they made from questioning without Miranda.
Not quite, the fact you didnt say anything cant the fact that you sat like a lump and didnt say anything, then started talking means that talk can be used against you.
Thanks. I think this may be a difference between Canadian and US law talk. As far as I know, we don’t speak of a “party admission” exception to hearsay, at least not in the rules of criminal evidence. We call it the “admission against interest” exception, which I outlined above. Risks of a furriner trying to talk law down south, I guess. Bound to get something wrong in the translation.
No- I agree that a direct question should be able to receive a direct answer. I’m just anti-asshole in general, and most of those YouTube videos of people recording themselves in confrontations with police are just raw examples of absolute, unapologetic assholery.
I’m not exactly “pro-police”; I think our whole policing system needs serious work. But MOST cops are just people that are doing their damn job, the same as any grocery store clerk or fast food worker. And I don’t think ANYBODY needs somebody going all fucking “Karen” on them just for doing their job.
Later, at his trial, prosecutors told jurors that his silence in the face of that question showed that he was guilty, that he knew that the shotgun used to kill the victims was his.
Wikipedia
Which ones though re: this thread? The ones which people don’t want to talk to police or open up their windows to give their ID (I smell beer on you, boy!) and instead hold it it to the window or don’t want to consent to the search of their car … all as the cop tries to intimidate them?
OR are you talking about the SovCits that are Article IV Travellers ™ or obey natural laws by not creating joinders with the police and scream that cops don’t know their own laws? Because yeah, those I agree with tasing.
I will paraphrase Michael Dukakis when asked about would he support the death penalty if Kitty were raped and killed:
There’s a difference between what I would want and what I think should be done.
I wasn’t referencing any specific videos from this thread, just the “some videos on youtube”. Especially the “don’t roll down the window while constantly shouting ‘are you detaining me’” variety that seemed to be popular for awhile.
