A staple of cop shows is the bad guy, the police say “We know you did it,” replies “You can’t prove a thing” or some such. Does that happen IRL? It seems such a stupid thing to say, but what do I know?
I’ve had my patients tell me (I work in a max security prison) that they shouldn’t have gotten convicted because “they couldn’t prove I did it”.
QTM You really do need to write a book about your experiences.
My first client made a related claim. He was stopped by police and as they approached the vehicle he passed his crack and crack pipe to the woman in the passenger’s seat. The cops saw the whole thing. At trial, and when I met with him as his appellate lawyer, he started off with, “They didn’t find anything on me!” This was part of a criminal appellate practice class, so I was there with a member of the State Appellate Defenders Office (er, SADO). On the ride home, we started calling this the “You’re The One Holding The Box Defense.”
God, yes. This is one of the most common refrains heard.
In a case like this, isn’t the cops testimony as a witness to the event equivalent to a videotape or full on admission of guilt? Does the cop have to preove that he saw something beyond proving his ability to have seen it?
I’m not in the Legal/Justice field, but good god, I’ve heard enough low life scumbags use this defense, even pre-event in order to convince themselves and others that they could get away with it.
Scumbag: (presents extremely stupid plan to break the law)
Me or someone else: That’s stupid, you’ll go to jail for it.
Scumbag: They won’t be able to prove I did it!
M,OSE: Wanna bet?
Like the moron who talked to me when I was working Armored and was all hot about the idea of walking off with a bag of cash because no one could prove that it was you who took it. :rolleyes:
Ranks right up there with “You got me busted, therefore everything that has happened is YOUR FAULT” Guilt/Responsibility Denial.
For an answer to that question, I’ll simply note that I was representing the guy on appeal.
I often hear this and variations such as, they couldn’t prove I was not in the pub(or some other location) therefore all the other evidence is false - what including the fingerprints, the DNA, the eyewitnesses and the gun they found down your pants?
You often hear them say something along the lines that some small loose end didn’t tie up, then everything else must fall apart.
Another favourite, “They didn’t catch me, I was grassed up” …er yes they did catch you, they used a witness to identify you and its why you’re in jail.
Anyone who is a witness is a grass, doesn’t matter who, could even be the victim.
Or a favourite, from one who has been doing fairly short jail terms since 1966 (hence he didnt see England win the world cup) " They just got lucky"…what? again, for the 15th time?
Well I always thought that things happened the other way round.
A gifted,lone detective presents his theory that the suspect is in deed guilty and how he has surmised it was comitted but without any real evidence that would stand up in any court of Law but it doesn’t matter because the perp immediatly admits his guilt along with curses aimed at the copper but the lack of evidence is unimportant because the perp tries to escape while killing someone or other in the near vicinity and is instead shot dead himself.
Thus saving the taxpayer the cost of a trial and burying any implications that there would have been absaloutly no chance of it even going to trial let alone getting a guilty verdict.
I cant help thinking of all the poor lawyers and their starving children being deprived of their livlihoods by this operation of the law enfocement system.
But oh no the programmes always finish before showing this unnecessary suffering,dont want to end the episode on a downer do we?