Advocacy groups are great- but the advocates typically aren’t lawyers and shouldn’t be giving legal advice. And free or low-cost legal services generally only help with specific issues - which do not include providing a criminal defense attorney to someone who has not been arrested.
The point is, in the balancing act of whether or not one would be best served by calling the police, even as the victim of a crime, alternative sources of assistance, where available , may lend weight to the “maybe don’t call the police right away—or at least not first” side of the discussion. And with good reason.
That’s really not one of the sides - the two sides are “never talk to the police without a lawyer” and “it’s sometimes ok to talk to the police without a lawyer.”
You are not allowed to obstruct a police investigation, but you are not legally required to assist it. Refusing to tell the police what you know is not against the law.
You might not be under detention. If they’re questioning you as a witness, the conversation may be completely voluntary, with the cops taking detailed notes as you casually reveal things that can cast suspicion on you, even if you’re not actually guilty.
While everyone is arguing over the pros and cons of talking to the police, the OP actually asked:
This was answered briefly upthread: it’s when they start asking you questions about you, and you can potentially get yourself in trouble if you start inadvertently revealing that kind of information. And if they start asking you about information to help them “rule you out as a suspect,” then you are definitely considered a suspect, and it’s in your best interest to stop talking immediately.
I’m not sure I understand your criticism here. You’re saying I’m not allowed to join others in endorsing a third position? Or that that whether or not you might contact the police is a nuanced proposition, and that you should take what steps you can to protect yourself–where available–and if such protection isn’t available, that may tend to make it not (as you seem to suggest) a binary proposition, but dependent in part on a number of factors external to both you and the police–such as the avilability of third parties to advise and intermediate?
Because I think it’s already established that you don’t know if you’re a witness or a suspect, and the conversation seems to have moved on to “should you talk to the police, yes or no?” I hope I’m not participating in a runaway threadjack in that regard (certainly I wouldn’t if I thought there was a more direct way to address the OP).
I also wish people would stop jumping in to say “Well, those resources aren’t always available” (or words to that effect–I’m summarizing a few of you) when I already explicitly allowed that in my post: such resources are not always available, but as a policy matter could be more available if there was a will (political and financial) to make them so, and that people should perhaps be exposed to the idea.
What I’m trying to say is that as far as I can tell, no one has said “you should always talk to the police without a lawyer” or that " you shouldn’t seek advice regarding whether to talk to the police without a lawyer" , and that in fact, your position appears to fall into "it’s sometimes ok to talk to the police without a lawyer. " rather than being a third position. Sure, it’s nuanced - but positions that include “sometimes” usually are.
She makes the decision as to what to do next. She is the rape survivor; she calls the shots. And those shots may or may not include law enforcement because law enforcement is notoriously bad about violence against women (and sexual assault against men). Many police go straight to re-attacking and otherwise exacerbating the trauma against the person who was raped rather than doing anything remotely productive.
The person you should be supporting may need medical attention first and would likely be well served with some kind of victim’s advocate (not necessarily a lawyer, but a lawyer is a good choice) at their side before getting law enforcement involved assuming that’s what she wants.
If I had the means (and, therefore, the access), I would have a highly-competent attorney – of the right specialty – at my side before I ever uttered a word to a LEO – probably even as a Parking Enforcement Officer approached my car.
So that defines the far end of a spectrum – the 100% answer.
The individual circumstances of the encounter with LE, or even a potential encounter, and of my means, would inform just how far off of 100% I might be interested in falling.
But, in an ‘ideal world,’ where snapping my fingers would bring Perry Mason to my side, instantaneously and at zero cost, why wouldn’t I want him there ?
So that’s my starting point. That’s the gold standard.
In some states, you may be required to provide your name if asked by an officer. Otherwise, you have a clearly established Constitutional right to decline to speak to the police. No statute can contradict that, and I don’t see how the statute that you cite could be used to prosecute someone for refusing to speak to the police.
You cannot lie to the police, you cannot resist if they take you into custody, but you cannot legally be arrested for refusing to answer questions. Of course, police officers can and do arrest people without a legal basis. You should always comply with a clearly expressed order of an officer, even if it is in violation of your rights (while also clearly asserting that you do not willingly consent to the order). The courtroom is the place to debate Constitutionality, not a traffic stop.
Not disagreeing with your overall post, but my ideal world starts from the other end of the telescope, where every single American don’t need to be defensive in the face of the police because they (and the DA) simply never pull any crap.
Once we’re inventing fantasy worlds let’s fix the root problem, not invent a better band-aid.
While some states may not have a statute specifically outlawing providing false information to the police, in any state I’m aware of you could end up being prosecuted for obstruction of justice or similar crime depending on the nature and circumstances of the lie. It’s obviously rare since police get lied to all the time.
It’s just never a good idea to lie to the police, especially when you have the Constitutionally-protected option of keeping your mouth shut.
I let it slip this time, inexplicably, but am a firm believer that – in conversations like this – we should always include something to the effect of, “Given the insanity of the basic premise, and how far from reasonable we actually are, …”
We also won’t see a world where all of us have Perry Mason riding around in the back seat of our car.
So both ideas seem equally fantastical to me.
A tiny fraction of rich folks having handlers in their motorcade to fix these problems while the rest do without is the real world. But in the real world the vast majority of police encounters are also professional, honest, and violence-free.
While you are probably right on absolute numbers it is bad enough now that if you are a minority you have to be legitimately scared any time police pull you over. And for good reason (video below is from a month ago). This is today’s reality for many people.
I was traffic-stopped a month ago. It never even occurred to me to be concerned for my safety, despite having been primed by participating in threads such as this in the day(s) immediately prior.
But I also recall being a teen who was stopped late at night by cops who thought I and my pal were the armed robbers they were looking for. That was a very nervous experience for all concerned. It later emerged that their suspicions were reasonable based on the info they had from their POV. Still, I coulda been dead had things played out differently.
I also recall being a USAF officer with black and Hispanic enlisted people under me. Who almost universally reported being hassled by the city police. Just as you’ve shown above.
I totally recognize that my situation is privileged. And that many honest Americans are honestly living in legitimate fear of illegal immoral abuse at the hands of our police in every encounter. Which fears sometimes tragically turn out to be justified.
My point was simply the number of the former exceed the number of the latter by a decent margin. That’s the reality for the USA as a whole. At the same time it totally is not the lived reality for a lot of people. Far too many. Hence my post #75.
I’ve been critical of the police. I’m a white dude from a white suburb, and generally not had big problems with the police. The story I recount above never got especially dangerous in terms of physical harm- but they were 100% in the wrong in the way they handled it.
And I do believe the majority of police a good people trying to do a good job. The issue is that there isn’t much in the way of accountability, they’ve created a narrative that every other person on the street is just looking for a chance to kill them (the statistics do not bear this out; Police isn’t in the top 10 most dangerous jobs, and most of the OTJ injuries are traffic-related). Finally, this us vs. them mentality means there doesn’t seem to be a willingness on the part of the good ones to get rid of the bad ones. That last item must change. In my business, bad actors make everyone’s life difficult. We have a culture that those who don’t take the regulations requirements seriously get pushed out and find themselves struggling to find employment in the business. The culture is “Keep after your reputation or you’ll be sorry.” I’d like to see the police have the same.
ETA: I went looking to back up that most injuries are related to traffic accidents, but I am having trouble finding a cite for that. I am sure I’ve read that in the past, but now I’m finding some cites listing violence from people and animals, and others that group violence from people and animals in with traffic accidents, which seems a bit daft to me. So I’ll acknowledge I’m not sure about that claim. But nonetheless, police still isn’t in the to 10, or even top 20.
The “never talk to police” is stated so forcefully because it is push back against the “police are your friends” mantra, which was often repeated in the last century, and to get through people’s general desire to be helpful and cooperative.
To me, I interpret this as “never talk to the police,” with the follow-up of “is this a situation where I should make an exception to that rule.” Lots of rules have exceptions, but following the rule should be the default state.
Am I a victim or witness to a crime? perhaps I should make an exception after weighing many of the issues already discussed here. Am I a suspect in a crime? Definitely do not make an exception.
Which gets back to the OP’s question, how do you tell the difference?
