Is lying to the FBI illegal?

[Tired_and_Cranky]

@Whack-a-Mole

It absolutely blows my mind that the FBI refuses to record interviews and only relies on notes that they write-up without ever getting agreement from the person interviewed that it is accurate. And then that the courts are a-ok with this because we presume FBI agents are scrupulous and above reproach in their duties.

With recording devices in everyone’s pockets these days (your cell phone) it is trivial to record an interview and have a perfect record of what was said. To refuse using that can only be an admission that they want to be able to fudge the record as they see fit.

1. Your information is outdated. The FBI records has recorded interviews with suspects after arrest since 2014. FBI and other federal agents must now tape interviews with suspects

I’m not 100% sure whether this policy remains under Jeff Sessions but I haven’t heard of any changes. The policy doesn’t cover interviews with people who haven’t been arrested and there are exceptions even after arrest so FBI notes can still be important.

2. The FBI agents would argue record interviews might cause witnesses and suspects to be less forthcoming. After all, the absence of video or audio recordings also allows the suspects to claim the FBI notes misrepresent what they said. Suspects can choose to speak only if they are not recorded, but let’s face it, that will only happen if the FBI agent tells them it’s an option or if the suspect is particularly strong willed and realizes that not having any obligation to speak also means he or she can consent to speak only if not recorded. I don’t know what happens if the FBI surreptitiously records a conversation that was not supposed to be recorded. My guess is that the evidence would still be admissible.

[md2000]

@friedo

Lying to police is not obstruction of justice, it’s lying to the police. Lying to federal investigators, including the FBI, is a crime under 18 USC 1001. In many (perhaps most?) states, there is no equivalent crime for lying to a police officer. Though they have other tools to deal with you.

The police are permitted to lie their asses off. It is not obstruction of justice.

IANAL - As I understand it, lying to police is obstruction of justice if it is done to mislead or misdirect an investigation. There’s also the argument in defense that it may not be obstruction because the police were going to inevitably find out that fact anyway. So the onus would be on the police to prove you were deliberately trying to mislead their investigation, and that it substantially impeded the investigation.

It seems to me the federal statute simply makes it easier to prosecute someone for essentially the same crime.

[DSYoungEsq]

Here is a reasonably clear discussion of the three concepts in question: perjury, lying to the feds, and obstruction of justice (federal).

Based upon what I see in the statutes, lying under oath is just like a cherry on top of the sundae. It’s more a political theater thing.

[friedo]

The point is that there is no crime called “lying to the police” in most states that is equivalent to the “lying to federal investigators” charge in the federal system.

A lot of crimes involve an element of some kind of deception, such as screwing with evidence, tampering with official records, and good old-fashioned fraud. Obstruction generally can’t be charged against a suspect in the investigation that is allegedly obstructed, but it can be charged against witnesses.