I’m also concerned that I only know my own number and my mother’s, and I have to think hard about both of those. I could very well not be able to get in touch with anyone.
Yeah, the low-level thug types are criminals precisely because they can’t manage to figure out that their life would actually be longer and more pleasurable if they just sucked it up and got a job at McDonalds. Fortunately for the police, the average criminal’s not much of a thinker.
But the mid-level and upper level drug dealers and the organized crime folks, those guys are NOT stupid. And that’s one reason they’re harder to lock up - they do NOT run off at the mouth in the presence of the police.
(You have discovered my secret! I’m actually a hired killer masquerading as a pathologist. Too bad for you I can’t leave you alive to talk about it… :D)
Good point.
The Miranda rights are now outdated, and must include the video/ audio recording cameras in most police car for the past 15 years.
I would also like to know how these recordings, which are clearly being made w/o the suspects knowledge or permission, are allowed. Yet we’ve seen them bust people on TV reality cop shows based on these recordings.
Here is just one recent case where two women didn’t know the cop car camera was recording their conversations:
http://www.theeagle.com/news/crime/article_e6c2855c-3b0d-5e99-b78f-82cd2a9de7ed.html
They’re legal because they are recording an interaction which is occurring in a public place (the street), and you have no expectation of privacy when you are out in public. In general, anyone may photograph you or record your voice when you are in a public place. (Recording speech has traditionally been somewhat more restricted than recording visual images.)
How is speaking to the police in the presence of an attorney who’s there to look out for your best interest stonewalling the police? They’re getting their questions answered, and you’re getting the assurance that you’re not inadvertently talking your way into an undeserved prison cell. Seems like a win-win situation to me.
“Objection, my client already said he did not see the suspect.”
“Dimwit, tell me which way he went so he won’t get away!”
Umm, not nessessarily so. Before they read you your rights, it depends on what, how and when.
Because if no one will talk to the police until tomorrow afternoon when their lawyer can be there, than not many crimes will get solved. (And I’m skeptical of the folks here that are willing to pay $400 to have their lawyer drive to their home at 9PM to sit with them while the police ask questions. Really do you all have a criminal lawyer’s number in your phone? Willing to shell out the cash??)
The police in a vacuum don’t solve crimes and keep our towns and cities. Our citizens and communities do, acting together, supporting each other. It’s frustrating to see so many acting so (proudly) selfish and self-serving. If we all act this way, virtually no crime will be solved and we are all screwed.
Right, because the police always get to a crime scene immediately after the perp gets away and except for selfish bastards who want lawyers around when questioning is going on, they never ever have to do interviews days or weeks or months or years later. :dubious:
I know a lot of cops.
Maybe it’s just because of the job - when your job is to catch criminals, druggies, and other lying, cheating scum, maybe cops just end up with an ‘everyone is lying and probably guilty’ attitude - but far too many of the cops I know are first-rate jerks for me to ever give any cop the benefit of the doubt when it comes to just waiving away my rights.
I mean, I’ll do my civic duty and all - If I’m asked, ‘did you see a tall man in a red hoodie run past in the last five minutes?’ I’ll answer yeah or nay or whatever. And if I do know something about an incident the police are asking me about, I’ll happy answer any question to the best of my ability - with a lawyer present.
Same here (in the UK)
This guy talked to the cops. During a traffic stop the officer asked him if he was carrying any cash. He said yes, $20,000 to buy a car. The officer asked if he could search the vehicle, and the guy said yes. Officer confiscated the money, and it took the guy four months to get it back.
Asset forfeiture laws (intended to be used as a weapon in the drug war) have given the police a LOT of power to fuck up your life, and very little recourse for you if they choose to take what you have. In the above case, the victim (yeah, I’m calling him a victim) should have answered the first question with “I’m sorry officer, but I will not answer any questions today,” and he should have answered the search request with “I’m sorry officer, but no, I will not give you permission to search my vehicle.” Both responses should be given in a loud clear voice to maximize the likelihood that they will be picked up by any recorded device the officer may be using.
He’s lucky he eventually got his money back, but if he had played his cards right (by not talking to the cops), he never would have been without it.
Typically the situation isn’t that “the police” are corrupt, but rather the department includes individuals who are corrupt.
Because in their worldview, you might not be on theirs. I can’t say much about the local cops, but the ones at the top of the food chain are power-hungry dictator-wannabes. They’re the ones who wanted the power to search people at will, and threatened a politician for having the audacity to suggest that it is possible to both be a police officer and a racist.
Maybe it’s a UK/US divide. (Not that I’m suggesting the police in the UK are squeaky clean; god knows there have been enough fuck-ups over here recently.) Or maybe it’s coloured by my background - my best friend’s dad when I was growing up was the local police constable and he was friendly, trustworthy and could have been the village bobby in an Enid Blyton book. When my friends and I got stupid with air rifles, and other teenage misdemeanours, he could have thrown the book at us and caused no end of trouble but he dealt with it sensibly, scared us enough to see the error of our ways and no more was done.
Since those days, I think I have had contact with the police precisely three times in 20 years: once following a break-in at my house, and twice for traffic infringements. In none of these cases did it ever occur to me to not say anything, or insist on a lawyer, or refuse to cooperate, and I’m sure it would have made things a lot worse if I had done.
Of the two traffic violations, the first case I was handed a fixed penalty, which was fair enough. I was polite, acknowledged that I was in the wrong and the policeman was equally polite and almost apologetic in handing me the fine but said he was new on the job and his superior was monitoring him.
In the second case, the police initially had quite a hostile tone and were talking about court appearances etc etc, but again I acknowledged that they were quite correct to pull me over, acted contrite, at which their stance visibly softened and I was sent on my way with no further actiion.
I get the impression that US citizens tend to have much more frequent contact with the police than three times in 20 years, which may well colour their impressions and attitudes.
You’d probably be wrong. I suspect most people in the US have the same type and frequency of encounters, which leads them to a sense of complacency and perhaps poor decisions when dealing with something that is more serious.
Fair enough. There just seem to be quite a lot of threads on this board about dealings with the police, which is why I had that impression.
There’s countries where a refusal/failure to defend yourself is considered an admission of guilt - a principle which hails from Roman Law. There’s countries where the people manning Customs or Airport Security are cops. Like so many other things related to the law and its enforcement, whether talking to the police is wise or not depends a lot on the location and the circumstances.
I don’t think most people in the US have frequent contact with police. I think cops tend to profile certain people (right or wrong) in high crime areas and stop people much more frequently there.
In the suburbs or rural areas stops seem to be very rare, so much so that if a person is traveling and gets a speeding ticket, the feel like they were severely violated.
People driving souped-up cars with the seats laid back and rap music blaring, or known criminal history are probably going to get stopped more often. I had a childhood friend who unfortunately became a drug dealer in his early 20’s. Every time he drove through our small town he would get stopped by 3 or 4 police cars, and they searched his car.
Me, I’m a long-haired dude with no criminal history and only get stopped for speeding once every 10 years or so, and usually get a warning. First impressions probably count for a lot, treat them with politeness (not kiss ass, just common courtesy) and respect and you’ll probably get that back.
This is what I have taught my kids to do if they find themselves in a situation where the cops are involved:
Cop: I want to ask you some questions.
Kid: Am I under arrest?
Cop: No. I just want to talk to you.
Kid: Am I free to go?
Police man: I just have some questions.
Kid: Am I under arrest?
This is designed to keep the kids from saying anything stupid to the cops. I have told them that it is fine if they get arrested as long as they don’t tell the cops anything until I am there. My reasoning is that cops are trained in interrogations and kids aren’t, so I trained my kids in how to handle an interrogation. This method keeps the kid from doing the two worst things he could do: telling the cop the truth and lying to the cop.