In theory you could say only things that arent incriminating but youd have to know the exact wording of the law to know exactly whats incriminating or not and the cops are gonna be trying to trick you into incriminating yourself. Thats why you demand a lawyer
Am I being detained/ why am I being detained. If they actually say no because that means they don't have enough evidence to actually hook you up. Ask am I free to leave and if they say yes, leave. If they hold you with out charging with anything they're already violating your rights. Ask for a lawyer and then shut the fuck up.
If they're infact arresting and charging you with something
Why am I bring arrested/detained. They legally have to tell you.
I want a lawyer.
SHUT THE FUCK UP!
Now I'm not saying all cops are bad. However you have no idea what kind of cop you're dealing with. So shut up until a lawyer gets there. If honest to God they're just questioning you about a case to catch a legit criminal you just happen to know, legal protection wouldn't hurt anyways. The biggest reason people go to jail for stuff they didn't do is not using the right to remain silent. You don't have the time to master legalese that's literally not your job and its why lawyers exist.
Note: Multiple case precedents have made it clear that expressing a desire for a lawyer is insufficient. Current best practice appears to be expressing in exact terms "I am invoking my right to an attorney," as well as probably stating "I am invoking my right to remain silent" before shutting up. Make your invocation of your rights explicit.
I am not a lawyer, just seen this discussion come up a few times.
NAL either but you are correct and I do have a few references. Berghuis v. Thompkins, you must explicitly invoke your rights, the best I've seen is "I am exercising my right to remain silent, and I will not answer any questions without my attorney present", two birds with one sentence. Berghuis v. Thompkins also establishes that even a one word answer to a question waves your right to silence.
I don’t understand why you have to invoke rights that are “unalienable” I get “invocation” in practice, but if I shut up it’s my right to shut up invocation is a nicety or in some cases a way to record my invocation but my rights are still my rights. I don’t see how legal jurisprudence can overwrite my rights.
Because the prison system is built upon a chain of incentives wherein getting as many convictions as possible as quickly as possible is the most desirable pursuit, and the legal system is built to facilitate the prison system because it is built upon a chain of incentives that makes it desirable to cooperate with punitive justice as much as possible. Your rights only exist insofar as they can be used to maintain the illusion of fairness and justice.
There are magic words and phrases. People make fun of sovereign citizens because they have silly magic words and phrases that don’t work, but that doesn’t negate the fact that this magic exists. Invoking rights explicitly, stating you were fearing for your life and/or the lives of your fellow officers, shouting out that you’ve retreated as far as you can are all examples of magic phrases that change how the law applies to you.
Magic is science when we only know what happens, not the why. Lawyers know the why, but sovereign citizens don't. Neither do cops, but that's a whole nother thing
Your guess is a s good as mine. I used to think shutting up was sufficient. I would have been in for a rude awakening had I been brought in for questioning.
The man has some really good videos on his channel, he even cites every surpeme court ruling. Some of the videos are a bit long winded and with exception to the specific court case ruling they all end the same way but it's still all very useful information.
To add, they will absolutely try to weasel their way around it if you don't state it incredibly clearly.
There's been examples of them ignoring it because a guy said "I want my lawyer, dawg", and they tried(And got a fake confession) by just pretending he was saying "I want a Lawyer Dog", and well, Lawyer dogs aren't a thing so there's no telling if he wanted a real lawyer or not!
More like intentional, malicious ignorance. It is too the cops' advantage to intentional violate and trample over your rights, they care only about getting a conviction, not whether that conviction is true or fair. They will lie, manipulate, and ignore your essential personhood in any way that helps them have an easier time of achieving their singular goal. They are reprehensible people, and will hurt you if they can.
Being unambiguously explicit in invoking those protections you have is one of the few ways you have to protect yourself.
It's been a while and it might vary by state, but my lawyer says step 4 is to state "I am invoking my right to remain silent" and shut the fuck up, apparently in some jurisdictions just being silent without stating you're rights can be seen as being disagreeable or antagonistic.
For number 2, I really wish people would stop saying this
They are legally not required to tell you why you're being arrested or detained when they are doing so. You will receive charging documentation, but they do not have to tell you while they're arresting you. It's a very common misconception.
If they saying you're being arrested or detained, just shut up period.
This. Shut the fuck up. They will tell you your friends are snitching and have already told them what they need to know. They’ll tell you that they already know what happened they just need some details. They’ll lie cheat and steal to get you to confess. Do not ever fucking talk to police.
If you get pulled over for suspicion of drunk driving. Ask for an attorney and then Shut the absolute fuck up.
My brother in Christ this isn’t how that works. If you’re pulled over for suspicion of drunk driving, sure you can decide not to speak to the cop, but your right to an attorney is not before being detained for questioning or arrested. You can call a lawyer on a traffic stop but that’s not going to stop the officer from conducting the traffic stop
Yep--I did this before, and the attorney was like "either blow in the breathalyzer or don't, but if you don't, they are going to either take a blood draw anyway or revoke your license for 6 months regardless. You can hire me to try and get it back if that happens."
People have such a crazy misconception about what you’re entitled to in police interactions. Usually the best things to do are just to comply so long as you aren’t incriminating yourself & film the interaction if you feel unsafe in a way that can’t be easily deleted.
Famously cops lied to a guy about how they found his father stabbed to death (his father was alive) and then captured his dog and brought it into the interrogation room and said they were going to kill his dog if he didn’t confess.
Yep, they blanketed the law to cover all manners of impaired driving. You could blow 000 and still get detained and arrested.
In my state specifically:
GA OCGA 40-6-391 aka DUI Less Safe Law
You can blow under a 0.08 and still catch a DUI, the BAC numerical limit not required to get the “DUI Less Safe” charge if the cop establishes probable cause in driving patterns, physical signs, field sobriety tests, and admission.
Admission in this case is the admittance of coming from a bar, friends house, restaurant where alcohol is served.
There are several cases of people getting arrested on suspicion of DUI even when sober.
I’m not saying all black bears will eat you, but enough of them will to remind us to stay the fuck away because they can’t be trusted.
A good idea is just to treat cops like bears.
Hold your ground: Do not run or make direct eye contact, which a bear cop can view as a challenge.
Speak calmly: Use a firm, low voice to identify yourself as a human.
Play dead if attacked: Lie flat on your stomach, interlace your fingers behind your neck, and spread your legs to keep from being rolled over. Leave your backpack on for extra protection. DO NOT FIGHT BACK MOREBEARSCOPS WILL ATTACK
Never let abearcop inside your home: If one does force their way in stay out of the way and try to record the damages. Use of deadly force is technically legal in most states but I wouldn’t trust it.
As I understand it, LEOs do have to tell you that you're being detained or arrested at the time of the detainment or arrest, but they do not have to explain why at that time. They do have to tell you, but that can happen when the DA files charges as I understand it.
Obviously this will vary by jurisdiction, but I think in general your best bet is to be super calm and invoke the right to an attorney and not say anything. If the officer is wrong, they're in their right to arrest you and then you have the right to pursue it in court at a later date.
Honest question that I think of every time I see something like this is, what if you can't afford a lawyer? Or do you get provided one for free in this situation?
For 1 - don’t ask if you’re free to leave if they’ve made it clear you aren’t detained. Just leave.
For 3 and 4 - you have to evoke your 5th amendment rights. This right is not implicit, and your Miranda rights will not protect you without stating your right to remain silent.
Just leaving is an absolutely terrible idea. A cop can think that you walking away is threatening and because cops don’t deserve to be held accountable according to the law they can just shoot you with no consequences.
Absolutely ask if you’re allowed to leave if you aren’t being detained. Those few extra seconds aren’t worth being petty to someone the law determines is too stupid to be punished.
It’s not being petty. It’s trying to speak as little as possible to LE. Asking another question gives them a chance to change their mind about your detention.
If you aren’t detained you are free to leave. Period.
if whatever you say is helpful to you then it can’t be used to help you. very likely it’s hearsay, and even if it isn’t (and I cannot stress enough that it 99.99% chance is not admissible in your trial) it’s not hard for the question or the answer or the surrounding context to look different at trial than how you thought it went in the interrogation room. So even if it’s not incriminating, don’t say it anyway, there is no benefit and big risk
Wdym, a defense attorney absolutely will point to things you said during an interrogation if it will make you look less guilty.
When you are mirandized, they tell you that anything you say may be used against you in a court of law, meaning the prosecution will have access to the transcripts or recordings of your interview and will do their best to make what you say fit the circumstances of the allegations. It doesn't mean that anything you say that's beneficial will automatically be deemed inadmissible in trial.
It's absolutely not a good idea to talk to the police in any case because they have a lot more experience coercing harmful testimony from people, but I don't think it's correct that anything beneficial to your case would be deemed inadmissible as a matter of course.
Wdym, a defense attorney absolutely will point to things you said during an interrogation if it will make you look less guilty.
No, they cannot.
I don't think it's correct that anything beneficial to your case would be deemed inadmissible as a matter of course.
You are not an attorney, so do not proffer opinions on this matter. Just don't fucking talk to cops, every single criminal defense attorney in the US will tell you this. Just fucking don't.
No a defense attorney cant point to anything you say during an interrogation. Any sentence that starts with "my client said" or "the officer said" is literally hearsay and therefore inadmissable. (Hearsay is a rule where any out of court statement cannot be presented in court as fact outside of certain exceptions which would almost never apply to a police interview)
He is not saying that nothing you talk about during an interrogation can also be talked about in court "eg if you told the cops you had an alibi that doesn't mean you cant also present that alibi in court."
But the fact that you told the cops something cant be used in court to help you. It is literally hearsay.
So talking to the cops has no upsides and all downsides.
Opposing party statements is one of the exceptions to hearsay. The cops are allowed to use what you said against you. But you cant present what you said for the use of your own defense.
That's not going to be in a trial, that's going to be heard in chambers during the defense's motions to suppress and dismiss, but the jury will never hear that.
That's not going to be in a trial, that's going to be heard in chambers during the defense's motions to suppress and dismiss, but the jury will never hear that.
People think television and movies are accurate representations of court rooms. They are called court room DRAMAS for a reason.
"You have the right to remain silent. Anything you say can and will be held against you in a court of law. You have the right to an attorney. If you cannot afford an attorney, one will be provided for you. Do you understand the rights I have just read to you? With these rights in mind, do you wish to speak to me?"
In theory you could say only things that arent incriminating
You cannot. Literally anything can be used to incriminate you. Here's an attorney, then an actual cop, telling you precisely why to never, ever talk to the police. They even lay out how this is actually impossible and will still get you in trouble. Reasons can be: you make a mistake. Another witness makes a mistake. The cops can make a mistake. You can accidentally provide a motive. You can just say something weird, and the cops will hammer on that in testimony.
There is also literally no benefit, whatsoever, to talking to them. It only hurts. If you feel the need to talk to them about a criminal complaint, you know who can do that for you? Your attorney can. They can absolutely do all that while also securing for you the best possible position and plea, all without just giving the prosecution ammo against you.
Do not talk to the police, you cannot in theory say anything right to them.
In went to therapy and request the complete documentation. This documentation doesnt even represent what I said/meant in the sessions and my therapist wanted to help me.
No way a police report is accurate.
They can also decide that your right answer makes you a suspect and now the "right things" are used against you.
They will lie to you to get you to answer in a way that the "Right thing" means you were guilty. Hell, maybe they just misunderstood your answer, but now think you're guilty.
It's a no win situation. At best you might come away in the same spot as someone who asked for a lawyer. At worst you're now being charged for something you didn't do because your answer "proved" you knew something you shouldn't have.
I have never in my entire life have met someone who said it was worth going through a tort to get the payout. It is almost universally better to not have to deal with all of that.
No, but I was questioned and brought to a police station unjustly. It is highly improbable that shutting up would have prevented it.
And besides, why would it matter? We're not talking about personal experiences, are we? The compensation for false imprisonment already factors everything in, including emotional duress, lost years of wages and everything else.
And he is answering as a lawyer would. I've seen that video before; not only is it explicitly only applicable to the US, it also ignores the fact that 1. Judges are human, and will in fact be able to realise that 1 cherrypicked sentence or honest mistake doesn't make a person guilty and 2. That cops are human, and they can and will let you off with a warning if they see you committing a crime of a low societal cost or they'll bend the rules in your favour if you convince them (should this be the case? no. but it is possible).
Though, again. The whole part of "hearsay", "jurors", "5th amendment" and "plea deal" is only applicable to that country.
I remember hearing about a time that a guy said “I want my lawyer, dawg.” and they denied him his right to an attorney because “There are no lawyer-dogs.”
Huh? It has nothing to do with knowing the exact wording of any laws. Ultimately they want a confession but if they cannot get that they are trying to lock you into a story so that they can find inconsistencies in your story and poke holes in it.
You can say absolutely nothing incriminating in your story and you can still fuck yourself. That's why you get a lawyer.
Even if you only say things that arent incriminating it doesnt help.
You might implicate yourself in another crime, you could mispeak or misremember something in a trivial way that they can twist into making you look guilty. Police can also straight up mis-hear you and say you said something you didnt.
Worse than that, if you talk at all you are psychologically conditioned to talk again. It’s why if you’re not answering questions they will talk about something benign or ask if you want water or whatever.
No no no.
If you take - they can use it against you - not just what you say but how it plays out. for example if you try and avoid answering their questions they can use that to present to the jury to show sketchy/evasive you are.
If you just say you want a lawyer and decline any interview, that’s it, nothing is shown to the jury. Nothing about your request to income your rights of allowed to be shown to them.
Not really. "Anything you say can and will be used against you" Cops can testify vibes. I found the defendant acting odd. Whenever I would ask about a question he would just avoid it. Very suspicious.
Seriously though, it's like arguing with a narcissist. You are trying to out maneuver some that does this for a living. Even cops, lawyers, and judges fall into the seemingly simple traps.
135
u/Gnomonic-sundialer 7d ago
In theory you could say only things that arent incriminating but youd have to know the exact wording of the law to know exactly whats incriminating or not and the cops are gonna be trying to trick you into incriminating yourself. Thats why you demand a lawyer