My interpretation of this question is, if you declare you are exercising your right to remain silent, do the police have to stop the interview? Or can they keep asking you questions until and unless you ask for a lawyer?
In regard to the phone call item several have mentioned, when I was detained (not arrested) for parking violations - hardened criminal that I am - I was denied any phone calls. This was in West New York, NJ. After about 4 hours of begging and pleading, the more sympathetic of the officers agreed to make a phone call on my behalf. However, since my attorney’s phone number was in my cell phone (which they confiscated, apparently out of fear that I’d bludgeon myself to death with it in the holding cell), I couldn’t give him a number to call - the phone was my Blackberry for work, and I’m not about to give out the passphrase. Ultimately, all I could do was give them my girlfriend’s phone number so they could tell her I was alive.
Damn, I don’t miss NJ at all.
I’ve never heard of anyone doing that, and know of no cases which address the point, but I suspect the officers could keep talking to you and trying go get you to gab unless and until you clearly state your wish to speak to counsel. You’re otherwise representing yourself, and as far as the officers know, just might change your mind and decide to talk to them after all.
They can (and will) keep grilling you - recently put in front of the Supreme Court in Berghuis_v._Thompkins
EDIT: That might not actually answer what you’re asking.
I should have mentioned this in my first post. I would tell them, “Be polite and respectful but don’t say anything until you talk to a lawyer”. In a perfect world an innocent person talking to the police would be no problem. In the real world cops, prosecutors, judges and even (gasp) defense attorneys can be incompetent, biased, corrupt or unethical. As a result innocent people go to jail. If I had a farm I’d bet it that innocent people have been executed. I was no super cop or anything but there’s no way I’d trust my loved ones future to some of the people I’ve worked with. They represent a very small minority of the varied professions but it only takes one. That includes all of the categories listed above.
BUT while I was working I’d do my best to get suspects to talk to me. As long as a tactic wasn’t illegal or unethical it was fair game. Including telling people that they might be sitting in jail for a while (where bad things happen) before they got to speak to an attorney. It was the truth. Let them make their own choices.
As far as not answering questions (in itself) constituting an invocation of rights - at least one (normally liberal) NJ court disagrees. A double-murder suspect initially waived his rights and then wouldn’t answer questions. Not a word. Eventually, he did begin to answer and ultimately confessed. He never asked for a lawyer or said he wanted to remain silent. The defense argued that the critical confession should be suppressed on the grounds that the failure to respond was an invocation of the right to remain silent. The court disagreed and said that the waiver must be affirmative. All a suspect has to say is “I want a lawyer” or “I have nothing to say to you guys” or something like that. “Do you think I need a lawyer?” or sitting there like a rock won’t do it. I don’t see what is so hard about that. It makes things much clearer.
I think the cognitive dissonance some people like me would experience would be if we were brought in for something we clearly didn’t do, something we felt we could easily explain to the police to help them find the true suspect. We would feel like we were implicating ourselves with guilt by asking for an attorney rather than cooperating. Since after all, if you are innocent, why cause a scene? Just tell them what you know and if they aren’t morons they should release you and be on with it. It’s interesting that as a general rule you should always ask for your attorney no matter what, even if you feel like it makes you look more guilty than you actually are.
This exactly. Almost every case out of the Supreme Court (or various appellate Circuits) after Miranda, have attempted to narrow it’s scope. You need to demand to speak to an attorney.
But, again, the reality is that most investigators are not going to spend hours hammering on someone sitting in silence for any old case. Unless they have good reason to suspect you just killed your coworker, molested that kid down the street, you are probably not going to be in a custodial interrogation situation.
Interestingly enough, most of my clients who “confess,” meet up with law enforcement of their own free will and sign Miranda waivers. People have an overwhelming desire to be honest with authority figures, to unburden, and explain their side of things.
FYI, in the U.S. your invocation of the right to remain silent can’t be used against you. (I know in some other places this isn’t so, and I suspect that much of the discussion of places that have an “on call” attorney comes from locales where there is a definite drawback to refusing to answer questions.) If you’re there, being interrogated, they already think you did it. No point in tangling with professional confession-getters with no real upside.
There’s the famous case of Susan Nelles (?) in Toronto. Back in the 1980’s, there was a suspicion that a number of babies in one of the Toronto hospitals had been murdered. When the police started inquiring, they eventually settled on Ms. Nelles. A few years and many legal bills later, the case was dropped and an Inquiry happened. It seems the only incriminating factor that got the police focussed on her was that unlike all the other nurses who cried and said “oh, that’s horrible!” when she was approached she said “I should talk to a lawyer if you are going to question me”. In the end, suspicion fell on a different nurse…
Or maybe there never was any murders, and the tests were flawed.
This is exactly my thought/question. I can get that if I did something wrong, my best bet is ALWAYS to remain completely silent. And I can sort of understand that even if I did nothing wrong but am being accused of something, my best bet is PROBABLY to remain silent. But what about when I did nothing wrong and am just being questioned by the police (I know it may not always be possible to determine the difference)?
For example (just pulling this out of my butt): I’ve had a tough day at work and arrange to go out to drinks with a couple of my friendlier co-workers. I show up at the bar but after waiting there for 30 minutes or so, no one else shows up. So I leave and make a stop or two on my way home to pick up dinner. A couple hours after I get home, there’s a knock on my door. It’s a couple cops that would like to bring me down to the station for questioning. It seems that this evening my boss has been murdered. Or there was a theft of some computers at my office. Or whatever.
I suppose it’s not clear if I’m being accused of the crime or what, but it’s definitely a formal “interrogation”. I should really just say NOTHING and invoke my right to an attorney? As a law-abiding person, my first instinct would be to just be truthful and explain to the cops what I did that evening (assuming/hoping that someone can corroborate my whereabouts). Maybe something I tell them will help with their investigation.
Yes. Yes. A thousand times yes. Do not say anything without an attorney present.
You don’t know why they are wanting to speak with you. You will not know if they are just trying to get answers, or if you are the prime suspect. They will act like your best buddies to get you to talk.
So then you tell them you stopped for gas and then went to the restaurant. No wait, there was a line at the first gas station, so I went to the restaurant FIRST and then got gas. And how much did you have to drink at the bar? Only two drinks, sir? Are you sure it’s not possible that the boss showed up and you killed him in a drunken rage?
No. Way too many possibilities here. This isn’t like talking your way out of a speeding ticket where the worst that can happen is a couple of hundred dollar fine. You may spend your life in jail. Let an attorney hear your story first and then let him decide whether you should talk to the cops.
Jtgain, the problem with your example is that there is no way that you could be an innocent witness in the above scenario. The only reason they are there is because they think you might be the perpetrator! If they are asking you to come downtown voluntarily, you don’t have to invoke any rights, just say “no thanks” and close the door.
Absolutely. But the poster did state that maybe what he says will help the cops in their investigation to catch the real killer. So, call your attorney, tell him the story and tell him that you want to help the cops. Then listen to his advice.
Chances are, unless you are Harrison Ford, there will be enough evidence (bartender remember you, gas receipts, restaurant receipts) to make you not a suspect. Let the attorney process all of this and tell you its safe to talk.
Whoops, not you jtgain, the guy you were replying to!
Has anyone seen Don’t Talk to Cops, Part 1 especially the attorneys on this thread?
The problem that never gets addressed with this approach is that lawyers aren’t cheap, especially if you call them out of the blue - most people don’t have a criminal defense attorney on call. So if you’re some guy who has never had a run in with the law, who knows he’s innocent, and who “knows” he can prove he’s innocent, you’re going to think “I can clear this up in 10 minutes, why should I spend $2k that I really can’t afford just to get an attorney involved?” I’m not saying you shouldn’t get an attorney just because you know you’re innocent, but it is a hard thing to decide you’re going to have to spend hundreds or thousands of dollars just because you happen to work for a guy who got murdered.
It’s like you are stepping into the ring with an Olympic class boxer whose job is to win and you are utterly untrained. You will lose. The police are trying to get evidence to convict the people they bring in whom they already suspect. The police will lie to you (which they can do), they will play games with you, they will be your friend, they will do anything within the law and ethics to get you to say something incriminating about yourself. And you will lose because they are good at it and you are not (Don’t Talk to Cops, Part 2).
I’ve always wondered about these questions, especially since most people only get involved with the police in traffic accident or violation situations: When stopped, are you required to give any information regarding your driving or the details of the accident? Are you required to fill out an accident report, which might incriminate you? If you refuse to give information, could you be charged with obstructing an investigation? Can the accident report you file with your insurance company be used against you in a criminal or civil case? If so, can you refuse to submit this information to your insurance company, and still be covered for the accident?
I understand that lawyers are not cheap, but what’s $2k compared to spending the rest of your life in prison for a crime you didn’t commit? When you are being questioned about a murder, that is serious business. If the cops think that you did it, you aren’t going to clear it up in 10 minutes, or at the very least you are taking a huge chance that you won’t.
You do not have to say anything that might incriminate you. You can refuse to fill out accident reports or talk to the police.*
Your report to the insurance company can be used against you, and if you refuse to talk to your insurance company, they can refuse to pay because you have a duty to cooperate with them. That’s in your policy language.
*With small exceptions. If there is a bleeding motorist over the hill, unseen by anyone, who is there because of your negligence, you would likely have a duty to report that and get him help.