IANAL, but… I guess the point of “shut up and ask for a lawyer” is that at a certain point, depending on the other evidence, the cop is going to arrest you and let the courts sort it out. Once you are arrested they probably have enough to lay a charge, so you will be held until arraignment. How many of those arrestees did you actually let go? How likely was a story going to help?
If you seriously think the police are going to listen to “it wasn’t me” then you can try it, but if they have enough to arrrest you, odds are there’s not much you can say to persuade then to let you go. All you can do, usually, is dig yourself deeper. The more facts that you give them, the more likely they can build a case. There are enough spectacular failures in the justice system to point out that although most of the police are trying to do a good honest job, it only takes one (say, walking up to a group for no good reason and pepperspraying them) to give the whole lot a bad name. If you get the ahole or lazy guy, they will just use what they tell you.
Plus, much of the time if you are arrested, you are guilty of something and what you need to do is minimize the damage, not add to it by narrowing your options and giving them extra ammunition.
It’s the same as a traffic ticket. You can try to talk your way out, but very few stories will get you out of a ticket once the cop has decided to pull you over. What we think is “fair” is not usually a decent excuse. Not much other that politeness or exposed cleavage will help you.
I am under arrest anyway, so I doubt you would let me go based on anything I say.
And a clarification -
IANAL, but you still have every right mentioned under Miranda whether you are in custody or not. You never have to answer any questions. Whether you are under arrest, in custodial interrogation, or just being stopped by the police because your taillight is out.
The only information you are required to give is your name, address, and birthdate. If the cop asks you where you are going, you don’t have to answer. If he asks you why you are out on the street at 3am, you don’t have to tell him.
I’m sorry if I implied that a public defender was a lesser attorney than a private one. I am sure that you are just as capable as any other criminal defense attorney. I think the problem lies, and these could be misconceptions, here:
You are usually swamped with cases. I’ve talked with public defenders that have over a hundred open and active cases. You do your best with what time you have, but you certainly can’t get all Perry Mason and go to the ends of the earth for your client.
Most of you clients are the dregs of society. After a while you get tired of hearing the same story. Yes, you are innocent of your 15th DUI. Yes, that bitch was lying when she said you hit her, just like the last 7 bitches were lying. Yes, you only had two beers. Yes, you stabbed him 32 times in self-defense, etc.
So when the one innocent guy who is caught up in the system comes your way, you immediately don’t believe him.
You are underfunded. If I’m paying for a private attorney, I can hire my own experts and conduct whatever tests I pay for. Usually you get a flat amount per case and the court will decide if my request for a test or an expert is important. Its my life on the line. I want to be able to control the process.
There are many other reasons, but I don’t think that anyone thinks that you have fewer skills than a private attorney.
I understand that sometimes that happens because of funding issues and other times the police use that to keep people from exercising their rights. I won’t accuse you of the second, but you give that indication from the tone of your posts.
Even if you do sit in jail a week or two before you talk to a lawyer, that is better than sitting in jail for 25 to life because you said something stupid while under stress. Never, ever, ever, ever talk to cops without a lawyer present. No matter what they say. Ever.
So if you have a lawyer, I assume he does not have to drop everything because the cops want to have a chat with you - they just stop trying to interrogate you?
“Things will go easier on you if you cooperate”? Has this ever been true? yet every cop show seems to open the interrogation with it.
Even in traffic cases, the judge usually only looks at the ticket and the dollar amount checked off, they don’t care if you were polite or rude to the police (as long as you did not assault them). Similarly, whether you were cooperative with the police probably won’t make much of a difference between 15 or 25 years; wheras giving them enough answers to argue murder over manslaughter may give you life instead of 10 years.
Anecdote. In traffic court a few years back, the hearing officer opened the proceedings (it was a cattle call, maybe 50 cases one after another) and said that he was feeling generous that day and that all no contest pleas would get 50% off of the fine and no points on the driver’s license UNLESS:
What you did was unconscionable—WAY in excess of the limit
or
The person was rude to the citing officer.
I suppose that could be held to be all sorts of unconstitutional, but when you are talking about a couple hundred dollar ticket, who wants to take it to the Supreme Court?
Yep. I work in a police station. And its in the real world. In 14 years never once saw a lawyer show up to advise anyone. We never keep prisoners there for long enough for it to matter much. And never had a Kennedy in custody.
I think that from the variety of responses, we can see that it varies all over the country and the world. Obviously if you are suspected of littering, the cops aren’t going to sweat you out and keep you in a dank room under a single light bulb for 34 hours trying get you to confess while you keep puffing on Camel non-filtered cigarettes.
There are different degrees of crimes and different scenarios and different levels of police custody. The basic rule is not to talk until you speak with a lawyer. If you refuse to talk for a minor crime, most likely the cop will be happy that he doesn’t have to fill out a long report with your statement included. If it is a major crime and he wants you to confess, you are still better off to wait for a lawyer.
Public defender of four years here. Virginia, USA.
Never once have I sat down with a client and some detectives like on TV for an interrogation. Once I’m appointed (defendant must be arraigned within a certain amount of time, if s/he asks for a PD at that point and qualifies, I’m in… this happens the next morning, not in the middle of the night) the police know better than to call and ask to interview my client… they know what the answer will be! Frankly, there’s no way I’d know enough about the case upon first being appointed to know if it’s that extremely rare case where my client would have something to say to the police that could possibly help in any way. Now, sometimes they want evidence that will help them get a bigger fish, but there’s plenty of time to get the prosecutor involved and get it all in writing before anyone sits down to chat. In four years, they have never wanted one of my clients’ info enough to make it worth the risk.
Sorry I wasn’t really clear. Shodan is right. You always have the right to remain silent. You cannot lie. But you do not have to talk.
But what Miranda truly applies to is whether or not statements against interest can be used against a person in a criminal trial. Miranda only protects those statements that are made in a custodial interrogation (again where one cannot, or believes they cannot leave). In the course of law enforcement officer’s day, very few encounters would arise to the level of custodial interrogation.
So when you get pulled over and the cop says, “do you know why I pulled you over,” and you blurt out… “speeding, dead tags, no inspection, etc…,” that statement can be used against you. :smack:
Yes, the funny thing watching Judge Judy or similar shows is that the average defendant has no idea how the law works and thinks that a justification that wouldnt work with their parents when they were 5 will somehow magically work with the police. He owed me $400 and refused to pay it back so I pushed open his door and took his TV while he was out. Oddly enough that will not do anything except make the cops job easier when charging you with break and enter and theft - because you just confessed.
Another point brought up by the legal-paranoid is that lying to the police can get you an obstruction charge, while saying nothing won`t. (IIRC Martha Stewart got charged with that).
I practice in Northern Virginia, and am definitely referring to a smaller local jail that happens to be brand new. It holds approx. 250 inmates at a time. All calls are recorded, not monitored… meaning, if the prosecutor or defense attorney calls the jail and says, I need all of X’s calls, the jail can accomodate. It is up to the lawyer to weed through the calls at that point.
My WAG is any jail built in the last 10 years has the capacity to record all calls, even if it is not done in practice. In the past three years, I have witnessed two situations where the prosecutor made it clear she had heard conversations between attorneys and clients. Namely, “OMG, I can’t believe you told so and so I was a psycho-bitch.” My response being, “clearly you are since you are listening to all my clients calls.”
Ok… you are pretty right. I think most courtroom attorneys are overworked and have more cases than they can handle. It is the nature of the beast. You got to take 90% of what walks in your office. But it is an absolute bitch to get money out of the court for scientific testing, experts, etc… I had to fight tooth and nail to get $1,000 for a blood splatter analysis for a first degree murder case. And the damn thing didn’t even say what I wanted it to. :smack:
I think your points one and two kind of blend in to each other. You never know what cases are going to have interesting issues. My best trials to date were misdemeanor cases, and I did get all Perry Mason up in those bitches. One day I will have to share the pink penis story. But I have had rape trials that were basically slow pleas. I did write a 30 page motion to dismiss with a supporting memo of law in a 10-day max, contempt of court case. The Judges are currently taking it under advisement.
Just slightly off topic, but does fit in with “trying to talk your way out of a ticket”. A co-worker got pulled over for running a stop sign on the day the sound barrier was first broken on land. He told the officer that he was distracted by the news story about this event. As the cop was walking back to his car, my co-worker called out of the window “he could have gone faster, but he got pulled over”. To which the cop doubled up laughing. My co-worker got off with a warning.
I got arrested when I was 17 for drug possession. The way it worked was that the holding cells in the jail had phones and lists of bail bondsmen taped onto them, and you could make unlimited calls (same as another poster’s experience upthread). The main issue at this time is securing bail and getting out of jail - since I was a minor at the time I was released to my parents without a need to post bail (though that car ride home was not fun). They hired a lawyer and I went in with her to a questioning session with the police something like two weeks later. So it’s not like you and the cops are all sitting around waiting for a lawyer to show up then and there. There’s plenty of time to arrange for it between the arrest and the arraignment (even if for some reason you can’t post bail).
What difference does it make if you make some vague remark like “I think I should talk to a lawyer” ? If you say that, and then simply stop answering questions, is that not still good enough?
ETA: Let me ask it a different way: Suppose I simply say: “I know I have the right to refuse to answer your questions, and I now do so refuse. I don’t see a need for a lawyer at this time”. Or suppose you simply think that but don’t say it out loud. And then, in either case, you simply refuse to answer further questions. Then what happens?
Similar to what I asked in the post just above: Suppose I clearly state that I intend to NOT answer questions, but I don’t ask for a lawyer. Then what happens? Suppose I even go so far as to state something like “I don’t believe I need to speak to a lawyer at this time.” – and then state clearly that I will not answer further questions. Then what happens?
It’s fine if you say that and actually do it, but they will most likely keep bugging you, stressing you and trying to manipulate your emotions. That’s all part of their job. It’s simpler to just invoke so that they give up and leave you alone.
One day I will have to share the pink penis story. But I have had rape trials that were basically slow pleas. I did write a 30 page motion to dismiss with a supporting memo of law in a 10-day max, contempt of court case. The Judges are currently taking it under advisement. 