I remember a local station years back that showed reruns of COPS almost nonstop, there are so many instances of “questionable” police actions to even count them. I’m pretty sure remaining silent is not obstruction of justice for instance, but then the threat was incriminate yourself or I will charge you for obstruction, the cop never said it would lead to conviction
Anyway so many times I wished I could get a legal opinion while watching the show, because even when TV cameras are running police work is messy in the real world.
And am I crazy or did the later seasons of COPS start seeming…staged? It just started flowing better, like it was storyboarded. More weirdness and the cops always had some clever quips handy.
I did not know that, if you’ve ever seen the earliest episodes they seemed very raw and real. At some point the show started seeming too perfect, I think the time it hit me was a call involving someone in full clown makeup, or maybe they had more material to pick from for certain cities.
That would be great if it were a court of law. It isn’t right?
Seriously, any lawyer would probably tell you not to tell the police much beyond your basic identification information and that you want a lawyer present for all forthcoming questioning. And to be polite about it.
Not that the average COPS person would think of such things.
Don’t get confused. There are a few shows out there that look exactly like cops but are completely staged. I’m looking at you TruTV. Cops is not staged. They did an interesting anniversary special on it a while ago. They do a ton of filming in each city. Almost all of it winds up on the cutting room floor. A lot of it is boring like police work can be.
Comments on what happened later in each case would be interesting. A lawyer’s comments not as much. That would still be one guys opinion and not necessarily the truth. For instance the remaining silent you mentioned. It absolutely could be obstruction. Try getting pulled over and see if you can get out of it by remaining silent and not giving your name. Each circumstance is different and you don’t nescessarily see everything that happens on the screen. And also although rulings by SCOTUS do mold how things are done across the country, it is not the only thing. You would need experts from each jurisdiction to do the play by play in order for it to be accurate.
Also take into account that its been on since 1989. Things have changed quite a bit since then and court rulings are constantly changing things. Even something like Miranda has shifted from time to time due to different court cases.
I’ve watched many, many episodes of this show and I can’t recall ever hearing a police officer warn a suspect that if he didn’t incriminate himself he’d be charged with obstruction.
A common scenario is a suspect getting Mirandized, then the cop asking him if he wants to talk about the crime. Which is the point at which the lawyer commentators would be screaming “NO! NO!”
I actually saw them perform this (they were on the bill as a warmup for the Reverend Horton Heat).
I can’t be sure about all of the shows but I recall that both sides get an appearance fee. If there are any judgements then it comes out of that fee. No one is out any money.
I’m not an expert, but doesn’t this basically mean that everyone agreed to resolve things there, outside a “real” court? The decisions are final and the show pays the restitution to the winning side, I think.
This gives the judges leeway to act the way they do, which is dramatically different from actual court behavior.
A lawyer would have a heart attack watching these shows, if expected to give any actual legal advice.
We talked about this, but darned if there isn’t a single person on the SDMB that has ever been a litigant on The People’s Court.
Looking around teh Intarwebs, I’ve found the consensus to be that even those who have attended the show don’t know, and those who run it are deliberately (perhaps for legal reasons?) evasive on how it all works, exactly. Perhaps revealing the details would destroy the show’s mystique and people would no longer sign up to be litigants.
It reminded me of the situation with the Jeopardy! TV show: even those here at the SDMB who have been on the show aren’t completely sure how some of it works, because the contestants are at different times sequestered and have very little contact with the host to prevent a 50’s game show-style scandal.
The cop did not say incriminate yourself of course, it was more like “you either tell me what happened here/who had the drugs or I charge you with obstructing a police officer” something along those lines. I have seen dozens of “look just tell me where the drugs are and we can all go home here” “look don’t BLEEP me around ok? You want me to be cool with you than you need to be straight with me, or do you want to make me angry? Give me something to work with here/put in my report and we will be cool” etc etc.
Oh and BTW it is very difficult to look up info about this show, I thought there would be an episode guide with general outlines of the incidents but only for the newer episodes. The episodes don’t even appear to have titles!
I don’t know… like Cops and People’s Court its a window into the world of the loser’s of society. Then I come to the SDMB (other forums) to find out why it isn’t their fault.
People’s Court provides the bonus of some legal insights … Judge Judy not so much.
