Based on a recent local case .
Can the cops make a witness talk about a crime? I don’t think they can. Can the witness just say “I am not going to talk to police” and that’s it? I am also pretty sure nobody is required to report a crime to police. The only exceptions are for teachers and child abuse and things like that.
I know if the witness lies to the cops then the DA will go after them (in some cases) .
If you turn around and walk away, and not even answer their question, there is nothing the police can do (except under unusual circumstances). The police have a right to ask you to state your name, and can Terry Search you if they reasonably believe you are a threat to them. But you cannot be detained unless you are an actual suspect, or the need for detention outweighs the intrusiveness into your rights.
For example… A homicide occurs right in front of you. You see everything and know the suspect. The police ask you what happened and you refuse to talk to them. You can be subpoena(ed) to appear and testify before a grand jury as to what you know. You only have the right to remain silent if you are being questioned as a possible suspect. Also, at least in Texas, you are required to identify yourself to a police officer who is acting in official capacity.
and if you refuse to answer grand jury questions, you end up in jail, correct?
Quite possible, yes.
If you turn around and walk away, and not even answer their question, there is nothing the police can do (except under unusual circumstances).
You obviously don’t live here in Long Beach. If a street cop asks you a question and you just turn and walk away, you won’t like what happens next. You just made yourself a suspect, and you’re for sure going to jail. Hopefully you have someone to call who can pay an attorney to come and get you, or it will be several days before you get spit out and most likely charged with obstruction and resisting arrest.
Even implying that you somehow have control over the situation is asking to be arrested. “Invoking your rights” with a street cop is just f’ing stupid. That sort of stuff is for your attorney to do on your behalf in the proper setting.
I’ve been in a bar several times when fights have occurred, then cops arrived. When asked, I (and everyone else) replied they didn’t see anything. They write up their report indicating there were no witnesses.
On a technical note, “I didn’t see anything” is different than “I am not talking to you”. At least saying “I didn’t see anything” IS answering the cops question…although it would probably be lying (which you do not have the right to do).
I seriously doubt the grand jury would get involved in a simple barroom scuffle, unless there were serious bodily injury or death…in which it would no longer be just a simple barroom scuffle.
Wouldn’t there be a difference in these cases:
(a) witness won’t talk and is able to plausibly deny to have knowledge
vs.
(b) given the circumstances, it obvious that the witness has knowledge which he is withholding (for whatever reason)?
Yes there is a difference. In the former, if a person can plausibly deny he/she has knowledge, there would be nothing for the police to gain from holding them as a material witness. In other words, if Officer Friendly cannot demonstrate to a District Attorney and/or Grand Jury why they need to subpoena the witness, then the witness can go their merry way.
In the latter example is where a grand jury might get involved, if Officer Friendly can present enough facts as to why the witness HAD to have knowledge. Here’s an example:
A guy is sitting at a table in a barroom. Someone comes up behind him and stabs him in the neck and then flees. Now there is someone else nearby. This person was sitting at an adjacent table. This person could possibly say “I didnt see nuttin’! I was crying because my girlfriend just left me and I was looking down into my beer.” Is it plausible this guy really did not see anything? Possibly.
Now, same scenario but now lets say the witness was sitting across the table from the stabbed guy. Would it be reasonable to assume he probably DID see something? I would think so.