# So, you DO think/know about it: Legal and social question

**URL:** <https://boards.straightdope.com/t/so-you-do-think-know-about-it-legal-and-social-question/356649>\
**Category:** Factual Questions\
**Created:** [May 13, 2006, 4:23pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/so-you-do-think-know-about-it-legal-and-social-question/356649 "2006-05-13T16:23:33Z")\
**Posts on this page:** 2\
**Page:** 1

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![BluePitbull](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/e9bcb4/32.png) [@BluePitbull](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/BluePitbull)\
**Post date:** [May 13, 2006, 4:23pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/so-you-do-think-know-about-it-legal-and-social-question/356649/1 "2006-05-13T16:23:33Z")

</div>

I am wondering what it is called when the person revealed that they are guilty of something, based on a response to a seemingly innocent question. Usually it is seen in one of those “Solve-it-yourself” detective sories like Encyclopedia brown.

An example  
BOONDOCKS EPISODE: Lets Nab Oprah  
Huey: Pretty strange, huh? Armed gunmen. Assault a bookstore. To kidnap Mya Angelou.  
Riley: Hey. I heard she had enemies.  
Huey: Even stranger, Oprah was right across the street when it happened.  
Riley: I don’t know anything about a plot to kidnap nobody.  
Huey: SO…Ed and Rummi DO have a plan to kidnap Oprah

Can this really be used as probable cause for suspision?  
Or when ever some anti-gay rights person bring up bestiallity when a disscussion is about gay marriage. Does it really indicate the person thought about bestially?

---

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![Rigamarole](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/77aa72/32.png) [@Rigamarole](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Rigamarole)\
**Post date:** [May 13, 2006, 4:29pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/so-you-do-think-know-about-it-legal-and-social-question/356649/2 "2006-05-13T16:29:52Z")

</div>

I’m not sure exactly what you’re going for here. In the example you gave, it seems like a case of a hunch based on such a strong denial.

Police/detective types use hunches all the time to help them solve in the case, but in the end you still need solid evidence to actually convict someone. What do you mean by “probable cause for suspision [sic]”? Nobody needs probable cause to merely be _suspicious_ of someone, but they do need legally defined probable cause in order to say, obtain a search warrant. IANAL so I won’t elaborate on that further.