A long response to buttonjockey308 from the "Price for gun rights paid..." thread.

[Mr.Krebbs]

I thought this was too much of a diversion from the thread it was derived from. Due to its controversial nature, I think it should be in the Pit as well.My posts. buttonjockey308’s post.

@buttonjockey308

First and foremost, piss off. I’ve been nothing but respectful (with the one offhand comment to Scumpup) this entire pit thread, and you have the gall to talk that kind of shit? Those officers died at the hands of a madman who threatened his mother and by extension the entire neighborhood. There are good cops who will lay it down for you if it comes to that, by the little accounts we’ve gotten so far, the officers that were murdered were those kind of cops, show some respect.

Once again, I don’t exactly approve of American police tactics. Verbal judo, the Reid technique, so and so on. If you lie or prevaricate to protect the immediate safety of yourself or others, fine; if you do so in the attempt to incarcerate an individual and/or ruin his life, I think that you, the liar, are a scumbag. Don’t tell me that patrol cops aren’t trained to manipulate suspects or that they don’t do it all that often. Don’t tell me that police have to because it’s part of the job or because criminals wouldn’t be caught otherwise; that’s irrelevant: one besmirches his own honor when he tells a suspect that plenty of evidence is already collected when it isn’t, when he makes up a law in order to make someone think that he’s violated a statute that doesn’t exist, or when he makes agreements that he has no legal power to execute.

From your posts, you seem like a decent guy. If you were in uniform, you would still be a pig to me, and I am sorry about that. I sincerely don’t like having to take an “us” vs. “them” attitude with anybody, but when officers are trained to hone in on anything that might be illegal or “out of order,” one should take into account that a lot of things are merely coincidences.

Unfortunately, in my case, the police treated me like a criminal within fifteen minutes of my “interview.” When my ex left me, I sold a number of guns. One was a handgun I had sold privately that ended up in the hands of someone who eventually was convicted of criminal assistance in a murder; they found my old weapon in his home and suspected that I sold him the murder weapon also. The fact that I had once owned the handgun found in the criminal’s home and that I had a weapon registered to me in the same caliber of the murder weapon is all the “evidence” they had. Not to mention the fact that they were barking up the wrong tree to begin with. (More on this later.)

A question: if the police are going to treat you as a criminal (suspect = criminal, in my experience) and do their best to manipulate you, especially without incriminating evidence, isn’t that prejudice? If so, isn’t perfectly reasonable to adopt a prejudiced stance towards the police?

Second, the registration of weapons would work if done properly, and there wasn’t the immediate comparison to Hitler’s Germany :rolleyes:. Would it prevent every crime, or even half of them? Nope. Though if it saves a life and costs nothing more than what’s being put in by the buyers, I consider that a win.

I haven’t compared anything to the Nazi regime. The fact is, handguns pass through many hands before they get to an end user who commits a violent crime. In my case, I sold the .44 found in suspects home to an eligible individual that I met at a friend’s studio. From there, I have no idea where it went before it ended up in the hands of the guy involved with the murder. I suspect that guns are transferred quickly and often in the underworld, anyway. Basically, the police will be harassing a lot of law-abiding citizens while they’re on the trail. The SPD major crimes detective asked me, “Why is everyone getting so hostile in this case?” I should have told him to evaluate his interrogation technique.

With regard to murder investigations, yes, 48 hours is typically when the trail goes cold, that’s obviously not an absolute. I’m not entirely sure what the scenario was that brought LE to your apartment, but depending on the size of the PD, the odds are good that those two weren’t the only ones working the case. What’s more, I’d bet you don’t know every angle of the investigation, you truly never know where an investigation will lead.

It’s the Spokane Police Department (WA state) that searched my apt. There were the major crimes sergeant and three SPD detectives, three patrol cops and one forensics technician who took photos. Two ATF guys came out for the search as well. The search itself took five hours, it took three hours to get the warrant and my “interview” was maybe forty-five minutes.

My .380 ACP, the caliber of the murder weapon, was stolen at 1am the same day that my house was searched. (I was drunk and some people that I thought were my friends came over, they took three handguns; yes, it is a big coincidence.) Evidently the detective and ATF agent had been by before, according to my downstairs neighbor when she let me use her bathroom while we (myself and two patrol cops) waited for the warrant. The LEOs that interrogated me used my report to the police about my stolen guns to gain access to my home. This upset me a little bit, but I believed they still might help me. When they tried to get me to take a polygraph and started telling me absurd lies I became uncooperative.

The detectives who handled the case of my stolen handguns contacted me the following day. The bullshit that preceded the theft of my weapons was a big fucking waste of time, from what I can gather.

I wonder how many people have had experiences like mine in Washinton state. So what kind of gun registration do you think would work?

[pkbites]

@Mr.Krebbs

Once again, I don’t exactly approve of American police tactics. Verbal judo, the Reid technique,

Could you please cite where verbal judo and the Reid Technique incorporate lying?

[Jack_Batty]

Could you please cite what the hell the Reid Technique is?

[samm]

I agree. I think the cops should take it easy on folks and just ask them politely, “hey, did you have anything to do with this crime? No? Very well, sorry for bothering you sir and have a great day.”

[pkbites]

@Jack_Batty

Could you please cite what the hell the Reid Technique is?

It’s a specialized technique of interviewing subjects (including suspects & witnesses). I’ve used it for years. In fact, I took a refresher course this past January.
I’m looking at the book right now as I post. Nowhere do I see it say to lie to people.

This does not mean that police officers don’t lie to people. Nor does it mean that it is illegal for cops to lie (it isn’t). But to state that a trained technique endorses lying demands a cite or a retraction!

http://www.reid.com/training_programs/r_interview.html

[pkbites]

And…

It’s been a while since I’ve last taken any verbal judo training. But what I took I remember quite well. I don’t recall any lying to it.

Explanation, please, Krebbs.

[Acsenray]

@Mr.Krebbs

A question: if the police are going to treat you as a criminal (suspect = criminal, in my experience) and do their best to manipulate you, especially without incriminating evidence, isn’t that prejudice?

No, it’s not. They’re investigating a crime. At most, they are making you feel uncomfortable for a short period of time. I don’t see a problem with that. By the way, I don’t see any place in your story where you asked to consult a lawyer before answering questions.

Basically, the police will be harassing a lot of law-abiding citizens while they’re on the trail.

Not only do I dispute your definition of “prejudice,” I dispute your definition of “harassment.”

[buttonjockey308]

I’m pressed for time, but I’ll be back.

[Typo_Negative]

@Mr.Krebbs

Unfortunately, in my case, the police treated me like a criminal within fifteen minutes of my “interview.” When my ex left me, I sold a number of guns. One was a handgun I had sold privately that ended up in the hands of someone who eventually was convicted of criminal assistance in a murder; they found my old weapon in his home and suspected that I sold him the murder weapon also. The fact that I had once owned the handgun found in the criminal’s home and that I had a weapon registered to me in the same caliber of the murder weapon is all the “evidence” they had. Not to mention the fact that they were barking up the wrong tree to begin with. (More on this later.)

<snip>
It’s the Spokane Police Department (WA state) that searched my apt. There were the major crimes sergeant and three SPD detectives, three patrol cops and one forensics technician who took photos. Two ATF guys came out for the search as well. The search itself took five hours, it took three hours to get the warrant and my “interview” was maybe forty-five minutes.

My .380 ACP, the caliber of the murder weapon, was stolen at 1am the same day that my house was searched. (I was drunk and some people that I thought were my friends came over, they took three handguns; yes, it is a big coincidence.) Evidently the detective and ATF agent had been by before, according to my downstairs neighbor when she let me use her bathroom while we (myself and two patrol cops) waited for the warrant. The LEOs that interrogated me used my report to the police about my stolen guns to gain access to my home. This upset me a little bit, but I believed they still might help me.

Maybe there’s something that you left out, but this seems like very reasonable actions by the police. Whether you did it or not, you cannot claim that you were not a legit suspect.

[Mr.Krebbs]

@pkbites

Could you please cite where verbal judo and the Reid Technique incorporate lying?

I included prevarication as one of the things incorporated in said techniques. Will you deny that police lead a suspect to believe that they understand and sympathize with him? Verbal judo (sometimes called “gerbil voodoo”) is a similar technique, but the term incorporates a variety of ways to get a suspect to trust an officer.

It is pretty obvious that whatever lies the police tell to a suspect will be specific to the incident. “We have a witness to…,” “We found this [piece of evidence, ususally one suspected to exist but not yet found]…,” “We have a positive DNA match (used if a suspect is already ‘in the system’)…,” “You have already admitted to breaking this [fake law], so we can help if you…,” “If you don’t let me search your car, I’ll get a warrant (drug dog)…” The last is only sometimes a lie, but I think you all get the picture.

Having taken courses in the Reid technique and verbal judo, if lying was brought up in either, did your instructors encourage you to lie as part of the techniques (or in addition to them, if you prefer) to gain an advantage? If lying was not brought up, do you think your instructors would have approved of its use if it were to help the investigation?

Furthermore, if you have ever lied in an investigation and succeeded in convicting the suspect (although I think that you are a PI?), does it ever bother your conscience? What did your professional ethics courses say about this behavior?

I agree. I think the cops should take it easy on folks and just ask them politely, “hey, did you have anything to do with this crime? No? Very well, sorry for bothering you sir and have a great day.”

I agree that it is a difficult moral dilemma, but I still believe that many police techniques are morally inexcusable whatever the ends. Thus, I don’t want any friends or relations working a job that encourages them to think lying and prevarication are okay.

Let me ask you this: what is sacred about the four walls of a courtroom and pledge of honesty? Do you think that a trained liar wouldn’t use his skills to manipulate the court as well? What about his spouse?

[Mr.Krebbs]

@spooje

Maybe there’s something that you left out, but this seems like very reasonable actions by the police. Whether you did it or not, you cannot claim that you were not a legit suspect.

As I said, it was a strange coincidence, probably one in a million. It’s mostly the dialogue that I had with the police that was completely unreasonable, but I won’t bore you with what I remember of that except by request. Also, if they hadn’t have tried to be sneaky and instead left a card on my door the first time they came out (it was definitely before my guns were stolen) I would have turned over my .380; it was clean at that time (who knows, now).

Furthermore, you don’t think it’s unreasonable to lead a suspect to believe you’re investigating a crime in which he was the victim when instead the investigation is about the supposed sale of a weapon to a gangbanger?

I have to finish my homework now. Hopefully I’ll be back by 10pm PST.

[pkbites]

@Mr.Krebbs

(although I think that you are a PI?)

I have been a police officer for almost 27 years. I took a full retirement from a department 2 years ago and started with another. I also am licensed as a private investigator in 5 states, but my work in that is more as a consultant.

Nothing in the Reid training endorses lying. In fact, there are several warnings in the workbook and in the lecture about using fabrications as it can lead to false confessions.

As for Verbal Judo, I have no idea how you can equate what they teach with lying.

As far as I know anyone can take these courses. Why don’t you go to your local tech school and sign up. Then when you actually know what you’re talking about you won’t make erroneous statements about things you don’t know what you’re talking about.

And where’s the gun? You’re story sounds like B.S. to me!

[Mr.Krebbs]

Sorry, I realize this is my third post in a row; I forgot about this one.

@acsenray

No, it’s not. They’re investigating a crime. At most, they are making you feel uncomfortable for a short period of time. I don’t see a problem with that. By the way, I don’t see any place in your story where you asked to consult a lawyer before answering questions.

If you recall, I initially thought they were interested in a theft in which I was the victim. They asked me a number of questions about that crime first. Then it got to questions about who I knew and so forth. I was cooperative because I thought I do well to be as helpful as I could (which was seen as being uncooperative, because I knew very little) considering I wanted my stolen pistols back; I didn’t think clamming up and asking for a lawyer would have been productive to that end.

Not only do I dispute your definition of “prejudice,” I dispute your definition of “harassment.”

So what is profiling if not prejudice, then? Is prejudice okay if it is a reasonable suspicion? Should you assume that a black man who wears baggy clothes and lives in a bad part of town is a scumbag as you pass him on the street?

I think that people who lie to me in the attempt to incarcerate me and then sack my apartment are harassing me, but whatever. Note that if I had merely sold my .380, rather than losing it to a thief, the police would have probably responded the same way.

[Mr.Krebbs]

@pkbites

And where’s the gun? You’re story sounds like B.S. to me!

Exactly what I’m talking about; quick to judge. You are certainly a qualified person to evaluate a situation that you read about on the internet. Don’t you think a position of uncertainty is more reasonable?

First, all of my firearms and ammunition were seized by the ATF because they found marijuana paraphernalia (no drugs) in my home. I know who sold my guns and the three of them were arrested. When it came time to do the pre-court BS with the assistant prosecutor and the defense attorney, I told the prosecuting attorney that I would put myself in contempt rather than testify if the firearms the ATF stole from me were not returned; I also refused to talk to the defense attorney. The cases against the individuals that stole my pistols were dropped which I am not exactly okay with, but IMHO, I’d rather that those thieves go free than assist and thereby condone our legal system. Of course, I would have been willing to deal with that slimy sort for $7000 worth of firearms and ammo back, so maybe I’m a slimeball, too.

FTR, I was never arrested or charged.

Regarding Reid and verbal judo, I know that you’re cautioned in training about telling lies to individuals of questionable intelligence or because it might cause the suspect to turn against you. Why would they caution you about that? No, wait, I know: because cops lie in investigations a lot!

But I asked you about lies that might help the investigation. Are those lies condoned? Have you ever lied to a suspect in the manner I described in my last response to you? How about answering those questions.

[pkbites]

@Mr.Krebbs

Have you ever lied to a suspect in the manner I described in my last response to you? How about answering those questions.

Quite possibly. But in no way was I trained to do so by Reid or Verbal Judo. If you look at my first post that is what I jumped on you about. You’re slandering a private entity for the works of individuals not affiliated.

And your story still sounds like bullshit.

[Absolute]

Bear shits in woods.

Sun sets in the west.

Pot smoker selling and losing guns to questionable characters which are later used in crimes has issues with the police.

The pope is still Catholic.

[Typo_Negative]

@Mr.Krebbs

As I said, it was a strange coincidence, probably one in a million.

<snip>
Furthermore, you don’t think it’s unreasonable to lead a suspect to believe you’re investigating a crime in which he was the victim when instead the investigation is about the supposed sale of a weapon to a gangbanger?

I don’t think it is unreasonable at all. (of course, it’s also reasonable to tell the cops to take a flying leap and direct all future questions to your lawyer).

You said yourself that it’s a strange, one in a million coincidence.
Lets look at the facts:
a) you sold a gun to person later connected with a murder
b) you are known to have another weapon of the exact make and caliber of the murder weapon in that case
c) you are an associate of a gangbanger
d) you cannot produce this weapon

It would be unreasonable not to suspect that you supplied the weapon. It would further be unreasonable for them to expect you would be truthful about it.

That’s the tough part of police work. Evidence is not that easy to come by. A lot of folks don’t tell the police the truth, especially folks that have committed crimes. Folks that have committed crimes tend to be a bit on the devious side. So the cops, in order to get the evidence they need, have to be a* little *devious too.

Thankfully, there are rules as to how far the cops can go in their deviousness. It doesn’t look like they violated those rules here.

[asterion]

@Jack_Batty

Could you please cite what the hell the Reid Technique is?

The Reid Technique is giving in to the Republicans in the name of “bipartianship” even if the composition of the Senate is 100-0 Democrats to Republicans.

[pkbites]

Originally Posted by Jack Batty View Post
Could you please cite what the hell the Reid Technique is?

@asterion

The Reid Technique is giving in to the Republicans in the name of “bipartianship” even if the composition of the Senate is 100-0 Democrats to Republicans.

LOL:p

[Mr.Krebbs]

@spooje

You said yourself that it’s a strange, one in a million coincidence.
Lets look at the facts:
a) you sold a gun to person later connected with a murder

No, the person that I sold that .44 to was never involved or implicated in the murder. When I described him to the police (he has a unique tattoo on his neck) he was not in the system, and they basically regarded the information about this individual as lies or at least as information not worth further investigation.

b) you are known to have another weapon of the exact make and caliber of the murder weapon in that case

Not exactly true. Months after the search, when I was contacted by a prosecutor about what I might know about this individual that I never knew and the attorney admitted that they “thought” it was a .380. Sounds like they never took the fatal bullet through a thorough ballistics examination before making an assumption on its caliber. I imagine that this is typical even though it is well known that bullets may break up on impact [ETA: and exit the body], thus lowering their grain weight (grain weight is the only way I can imagine of determining the caliber of a fired bullet without testing). It could have been a 9x19, 9x18 or a .38 spc, but neither myself, the court or the cops know for sure.

c) you are an associate of a gangbanger

Um, I sold a gun to someone who may or may not have been associated with gangbangers but had no felonies and could prove that he was over 21 (although in the US, one only has to be 18 to own a handgun - he just can’t purchase one at a store until 21). So, this “fact” of yours, like facts numbered one and two (although less so in the case of the latter), is false. Sounds like you have a bright future in law enforcement: apply to your local academy today!

d) you cannot produce this weapon

It would be unreasonable not to suspect that you supplied the weapon. It would further be unreasonable for them to expect you would be truthful about it.

Fair enough on d). It’s not 100% unreasonable for them to suspect me yet it was definitely less than a 50% chance that I sold the murder weapon, but whatever. FTR: I never lied to the investigators. I did refuse to give them any more information after a certain point.

That’s the tough part of police work. Evidence is not that easy to come by. A lot of folks don’t tell the police the truth, especially folks that have committed crimes. Folks that have committed crimes tend to be a bit on the devious side. So the cops, in order to get the evidence they need, have to be a* little *devious too.

If a pig goes into a investigation expecting that he won’t be told the truth, I’ll bet that he’ll be suspicious of even the truth when he hears it. If the cops in my situation would have listened, they would have saved themselves both time and energy (and the state would have saved a significant amount of wages).

I’m not saying they did anything illegal; what they did was immoral. If police have to be devious to do their occupation, doesn’t that make them devious (therefore dishonorable and untrustworthy) people in general? I mean, last I checked, Americans aren’t assigned permanent occupations after high school graduation.

One more thing: I find it far less objectionable to lie to protect oneself than it is to lie in an attempt to incarcerate another human being.

Thankfully, there are rules as to how far the cops can go in their deviousness. It doesn’t look like they violated those rules here.

Violating the rules is significantly different from behaving in an immoral and prejudiced manner.

@pkbites

Quite possibly. But in no way was I trained to do so by Reid or Verbal Judo. If you look at my first post that is what I jumped on you about. You’re slandering a private entity for the works of individuals not affiliated.

I love your piggy response to my question. Afraid to tell the truth about what you did for a living on a virtually anonymous message board? You are the epitome of honesty and courage, pkbites.

No intelligent business person is going to come forth and state on their webpage and state they train people to lie and manipulate; that doesn’t mean that they don’t do it. If they discouraged lying in order to benefit a case during your Reid technique training, I wonder why you don’t come out and say that instead of accusing me of slander? Even if you were told, “Step [xyz] is a good point to tell the suspect [standard pig lie #0003698]…” that’s just as morally wrong as listing “Lying” a particular phase in the course.

But since you haven’t indicated that they didn’t encourage lying when it might help a case, I am going to assume that they told you to lie through your teeth; tit for tat, dude.

Even if I were to theoretically assuming that the Reid technique and verbal judo never encourage officers to lie, who exactly trained you the best way to lie to a suspect, pkbites? Just so you can follow me, it’s an awful lot worse if your PD or FTO encouraged lying as a good way to get the “bad guys.”

And your story still sounds like bullshit.

I’m glad for you. [dripping sarcasm] You certainly are perceptive for a pig. [/sarcasm]