Innocent man being interviewed for a B&E.

Discussion in 'The Okie Corral' started by Sechott, Sep 21, 2020.

  1. cbetts1

    cbetts1

    Messages:
    3,949
    Likes Received:
    6,446
    Joined:
    Jan 28, 2006
    Location:
    AUSTIN, TX
    ''Generally, the people who are only willing to talk with an attorney present are guilty of something''. Wow, just wow. If you truly are LEO, you are the reason that people should not talk to the police without legal representation. That representation should tell you not to talk to the police under any circumstance.

    So an officer involved in a shooting should not require legal council or union rep if it was a good shoot? It must have been a bad shoot if he wants legal/Union representation, using your philosophy.

    If you had nothing to do with the crime, you shouldn't even be at the station. Tell the officers that at the scene and go home. If they don't allow you to go home, tell them you want an attorney, no exceptions. They can and will lie to you with no repercussions. They may threaten to put you in jail for life, take your kids and house. No exceptions. I encourage anyone that believes the above comments by nikerret to watch The Innocence Files and False Confessions on Netflix.

    Never Talk To the Police- Regent Law Professor James Duane

    View: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=d-7o9xYp7eE&pp=QAA%3D
     
    GlockPride and Mathemagician1 like this.
  2. nikerret

    nikerret Mr. Awesome

    Messages:
    10,157
    Likes Received:
    5,168
    Joined:
    Mar 29, 2005
    Location:
    Kansas
    Based on my experience, there is usually a reason people don't want to talk to the police, when actually innocent of the crime they are being asked about. Those reasons usually are adultery or addiction. Adultery is a crime (essentially decriminalized) and the addiction may or may not be, but most of the people who initially refused to give their alibis were hiding where they were from their family, not necessarily LE. Ironically, LE doesn't care you have a girlfriend and once your alibi is proven, you're off the hook.

    Don't forget, we are talking a small portion of the population who actually will not talk to LE. The vast majority willingly provide at least some information. Of the few who refuse to talk, there's generally a reason. You two really think people who get snagged by LE and are innocent of the crime being investigated are best off waiting for their attorney, in jail, instead of just saying they were with this person, at this place? Genuinely? I highly doubt that. In fact, I would be willing to bet that having this conversation, in person, and without an audience, you would concede that such a position is stupid. Now, tell me I'm wrong and beat your chest.

    cbetts1, I know you'll never believe this, because you have made up your mind and everything is black or white, but I have nothing in my career to be ashamed of or hide. In fact, on multiple occasions, people I have arrested have come to my defense. You won't find an attorney who has ever worked a case of mine who hasn't found me professional and a LEO who operates within the rules, laws, and regulations. I had one attorney call me a liar, officially, the Judge shot him down and told him not to bring that crap in his courtroom, again.

    As far as if I got into a shooting on-duty (I'm not currently a cop, so that wouldn't happen), we don't have unions, here. My response would depend on the situation. If I had a bad shoot, I would give a much smaller statement, before the KBI arrived, to investigate. By then, I would have an attorney as, by then, I would know I DID commit a crime. If I shot an active shooter with many third-party witnesses, I would not need get an attorney. All of that ground, in the middle is too situational dependent. If I thought I needed an attorney, I would get one, but not until it appeared I needed one. If I didn't need an attorney, I wouldn't pay for one.

    No different for CCW'ers or off-duty LE. If you shoot the gas station robber after he shoots the clerk, you probably don't need an attorney. If you shoot the guy who slept with your wife, and you two were alone, in the woods, where he met you after you used your wife's phone to lure him there, but it was self-defense, you should get an attorney.




    Let's go back to the video. The suspect got brought in for a "B&E". In the beginning, the investigator seems convinced the guy did it. The suspect does talk to the investigator. How did this hurt him? From what I see, it helped him. Perhaps, you'd be willing to show how this video is damning, for the suspect. The benefits I see are the investigator says there is video. I believe the suspect was correct in calling this bluff-it didn't seem the video exists, based on the investigator's response. This is good information to have, if the suspect does get prosecuted and there wasn't a video. Was it destroyed? Was it a bluff? Great ammunition for a defense where "reasonable doubt" is all that's required.

    The other thing that was huge is the suspect provided potential witnesses in giving his story of getting off the public transportation and which route he took, before LE contact. Now, LE has to do some time-sensitive footwork and investigating to prove beyond a reasonable doubt, they have the correct person. Juries tend to find people "not guilty" when LE doesn't do their job and investigate the claims given by all parties. Even the three hours later, that the interview was to the time he got off public transportation, can make things difficult, but much easier than tracking people down a day, or two, later. You think this makes it harder for LE? Sure it does, but the problem is not LE's. LE will investigate what they can based on what they find and are given. It's the suspect's problem that LE cannot verify their story.


    Would you like to hear another story of someone who won the "talk to LE" lottery? This one is backwards, though. I'll give the short version.

    I stopped a vehicle, for speeding. The driver, one of the largest humans I have ever seen, had been drinking and had a Suspended DL. He was very forthcoming, admitting to drinking Crown Royal and littering when he threw his cup out, after he finished the drink. He also admitted he didn't have a DL and the child in the back seat was not in a proper car seat (of course, these are all things I knew or would find out, except, the littering). The whole time we interacted, something was off.

    When I got him to the jail, his girlfriend, who owned the car and was sober, followed us. When we got within a block, she turned off. I had another Deputy wait out front, for her, in case she needed help finding the building. In the jail, I ran a records check and found this man had been released from prison less than twelve hours ago. I asked him about that and he told me he used to make and sell methamphetamine and did time for that as well as weapons charges. He was very cooperative. Way too cooperative, but I couldn't come up with exactly why.

    The girlfriend arrived around thirty minutes after I got to the jail. The other Deputy said she was very friendly, asking how to bail him out. I had the other Deputy ask for consent to search the vehicle. She consented and he found nothing. He, too, said something was very off.

    The man I arrested had $1,407 cash, in his pocket. He asked if he could use that, to bail out. He could, though his bail was much less. I finished up and left. He bailed out and left with a check for the difference in the cash he brought in and the bail amount.

    The next night, at break, a Trooper asked me about the car stop, from the night prior, with the big guy. I told him about it and he said I needed to call Wichita PD. They had a burglary with an abnormally large male. After getting in touch with the Wichita PD, I learned they had a Pizza Hut robbed a few hours before my traffic stop and arrest. Guess how much money was stolen. Yep, $1,407.

    I am convinced the gun was still in the car, at the time of stop. I think she got rid of it in the thirty minutes she disappeared. It will never be proven. He took one hell of a gamble that I didn't know of the robbery and that I wouldn't learn of it before he could get arrested, processed, and bailed out.

    Based on that example, everyone who talks to the police is guilty of more than they are being charged with. Of course, this is absurd, as is the idea that someone with nothing to hide is best served by going to jail instead of just giving basic information that exonerates them. Of course, you do you. You get one life to live, make the best of it.
     

  3. Caver 60

    Caver 60

    Messages:
    10,396
    Likes Received:
    13,002
    Joined:
    Jun 12, 2007
    Location:
    Midwest
    It sticks in my memory that there used to be a sticky somewhere on GT several years ago about how to respond to police when involved in a DGU. I though it was in COP Talk.

    I've spent some time looking for it and did some searches, but can't find it. A lot of it involved around wether it was a good shoot or a bad shoot.

    Anyone know where it went?
     
  4. Hoochrunners

    Hoochrunners

    Messages:
    5,237
    Likes Received:
    12,052
    Joined:
    Aug 14, 2008
    Location:
    Wisconsin
    I would argue that the front door step scene of a crime is a lot different than an interrogation room.

    “I’m the home owner. I feared for my life. I’d like to talk to my attorney.”

    Repeat as needed.
     
    IamtheNRA and cbetts1 like this.
  5. Sam Spade

    Sam Spade Staff Member Lifetime Member

    Messages:
    18,480
    Likes Received:
    12,205
    Joined:
    May 4, 2003
    Dirty little secret about law professor's video: every example except one that he uses is of a factually guilty person. The exception is a guy with poor cognition who was highly susceptible to suggestion.

    Assuming that you're factually not guilty, it's to your advantage to guide the investigation in the right direction. (Okay, unless you're covering for someone.) Staying out of jail, not messing up your employment, nor having warrants served at your home are all good things. You don't need a lawyer when you have an alibi.

    If you did it, but have a justification, there's a little more to it, but again it's in your interest to have the investigation go in the right direction.

    And to quash a common untruth: cops are indeed required to give a preliminary statement after a shooting without the benefit of an attorney.
     
  6. Sam Spade

    Sam Spade Staff Member Lifetime Member

    Messages:
    18,480
    Likes Received:
    12,205
    Joined:
    May 4, 2003
    Again, there's a difference between an interview and an interrogation. When you're asked/invited/requested to come down and you accept, it's not an interrogation.
     
  7. Hoochrunners

    Hoochrunners

    Messages:
    5,237
    Likes Received:
    12,052
    Joined:
    Aug 14, 2008
    Location:
    Wisconsin
    Here’s one to get people riled up. Would George Zimmerman been better off not talking and lawyering up? “I feared for my life. I’d like to call my attorney.”.
     
  8. cbetts1

    cbetts1

    Messages:
    3,949
    Likes Received:
    6,446
    Joined:
    Jan 28, 2006
    Location:
    AUSTIN, TX
    Unfortunately all LEO and DA's aren't the stand up people like on Glock Talk:2gun: . Statistically thousands of innocent people have been put in jail or are in jail for various reasons. For the most part it is best to remain silent.
     
    GlockPride likes this.
  9. TBO

    TBO Why so serious? CLM

    Messages:
    64,482
    Likes Received:
    74,222
    Joined:
    Dec 21, 2002
    Location:
    1504 7th Street South, Minneapolis, MN 55454
    "Damn the man! " , eh?

    Sent from my Jack boot using Copatalk
     
  10. tacit mesa

    tacit mesa

    Messages:
    544
    Likes Received:
    471
    Joined:
    Jun 13, 2020

    They don't. The investigation still proceeds, just without your input. That works out so that the only person things are tougher are is you.
     
    Sam Spade and nikerret like this.
  11. racerford

    racerford

    Messages:
    8,732
    Likes Received:
    6,322
    Joined:
    Apr 22, 2003
    Location:
    DFW area
    If you are going to talk to the police, if you are involved in a self defense scenario, you should be very thoughtful and not ramble on. Know and understand the deadly force laws in your state. Remember the key elements. A clear defense of yourself or you loved one should be easy, in my state. When it comes to the many other justifications in Texas, it might be wise to say it was a very traumatic experience and you need time for your nerves to settle. Consider calling a lawyer, if there are any questions in your mind. Or it might be wiser not to use deadly force in those scenarios, if safe for you or others.

    I am not a lawyer, and I don’t play one on TV and I did not stay at a Holiday Inn last night.
     
    Caver 60, Mathemagician1 and nikerret like this.
  12. GlockPride

    GlockPride M&P

    Messages:
    5,685
    Likes Received:
    3,136
    Joined:
    Aug 21, 2006
    Location:
    Just OK
    Miranda: ANYTHING you say can and WILL be used against you.
     
    cbetts1 likes this.
  13. Sherlock913

    Sherlock913 If the coronavirus doesn't take you out, can I?

    Messages:
    641
    Likes Received:
    1,644
    Joined:
    Sep 10, 2020
    Location:
    Kansas
    you lost me, I do not understand the reference, besides the 'eh.
     
  14. Hoochrunners

    Hoochrunners

    Messages:
    5,237
    Likes Received:
    12,052
    Joined:
    Aug 14, 2008
    Location:
    Wisconsin
    They can’t misquote silence.
     
    syntaxerrorsix likes this.
  15. syntaxerrorsix

    syntaxerrorsix Anti-Federalist CLM

    Messages:
    16,766
    Likes Received:
    12,640
    Joined:
    Oct 3, 2000
    Location:
    Lakeland, FL.

    Or take it out of context and use it to get a warrant.
     
    Hoochrunners likes this.
  16. Mathemagician1

    Mathemagician1

    Messages:
    375
    Likes Received:
    895
    Joined:
    Nov 24, 2016
    Location:
    NEPA
    I want to be very clear about something because I feel I may have given the wrong impression here: I am a big supporter of LEO of all stripes, and I do support the notion that you should absolutely discuss what is going on with the police. I just think people should be careful about what they say and I take exception to the attitude that "Generally, the people who are only willing to talk with an attorney present are guilty of something, if not the crime they are being asked about."

    I get that this may be your experience, but it is not the most constructive way to approach a citizen exercising his rights. Yes, they may have something to hide (or fear) as pointed out earlier in this thread, but why assume straight off the bat that it is a crime?

    For example, if I were the guy who was cheating on his wife, lied to his wife about his whereabouts, had been using drugs, or was attending a political event in support of a candidate overtly hated by a large segment of the population, you can bet I would get myself protected before I talk. But, once protected, I would definitely want to cooperate to the greatest extent possible.

    Here's an interesting question... In your experience, what is the best way to signal to a cop that you want to cooperate but have something to say that isn't for public consumption, if you know what I mean?
     
  17. GlockPride

    GlockPride M&P

    Messages:
    5,685
    Likes Received:
    3,136
    Joined:
    Aug 21, 2006
    Location:
    Just OK
    Ok officers and attorneys on here a quick question, if you’ll allow: How many interviews (what rough %) go over to interrogations or lead to charges with the person directly being interviewed?
     
  18. Sam Spade

    Sam Spade Staff Member Lifetime Member

    Messages:
    18,480
    Likes Received:
    12,205
    Joined:
    May 4, 2003
    Fewer than half, easy. Remember, all of the contacts with victims and witnesses are interviews, not interrogations.

    And I'd really rather be considered a victim in an attempted robbery than a suspect in a shooting. Which does kinda require me to *act* like a victim.
     
    nikerret, Caver 60 and TBO like this.
  19. TBO

    TBO Why so serious? CLM

    Messages:
    64,482
    Likes Received:
    74,222
    Joined:
    Dec 21, 2002
    Location:
    1504 7th Street South, Minneapolis, MN 55454
    That answer is meaningless without the context of what the persons involvement was with the situation and the officers knowledge of facts/evidence at the time of the interview.

    Respectfully

    Sent from my Jack boot using Copatalk
     
    nikerret likes this.
  20. nikerret

    nikerret Mr. Awesome

    Messages:
    10,157
    Likes Received:
    5,168
    Joined:
    Mar 29, 2005
    Location:
    Kansas
    Close, but more is needed. The applicable statute, in my jurisdiction, is "reasonably believe". You can't just say you were in fear for your life. You have to show a reason, if you want the statutory protection against being arrested or charged. However, there will also be evidence. If the LE get there and find you standing over a masked man who is bleeding out, and your front door is kicked in. When asked, you say you are the homeowner, were in bed when you heard the door get kicked in and got your firearm. Upon seeing the masked man, you felt fear he was there to do you harm so you shot him until he stopped coming towards you. After that you called 911. It can only help you to answer the first few follow-up questions. Do you know the masked man? Have you noticed anything suspicious in the hours, days, weeks, before you were attacked? Is there any reason someone may want to hurt you? This last one can be tricky, if you are doing shady things, even if they are not expressly illegal, but if you are a normal member of the citizenry, you will either not have a clue or you may think it has to do with X, Y, or Z. If you get through these, it should have met the "reasonableness" standard, if it could be met. From there, if you want to talk to an attorney, do it politely. "This has been a hard night, I don't want to talk anymore." Of course, they will ask you to, that's the investigating part of investigation, but they won't hold it against you and can't arrest you (KS law, probably doesn't apply where you live).


    The first sentence is fact. There absolutely are some bad cops out there. They are few and far in between, but that doesn't mean you won't meet one. In my life, I have met one that I put in the "bad cop" category. I was young and dumb, unfortunately. Nothing came of it, but I missed an opportunity to get some nice settlement money based on his behavior and illegal actions.

    If someone genuinely thinks it's best to get an attorney before saying anything, that is their right. Based on my experience, I have never seen that be the case, for an innocent person. I have seen innocent people sit in jail because they refused to come to their own defense and I have seen innocent people sit in jail until their story was able to be confirmed.

    The worst case of someone innocent sitting in jail, in one of my cases, was over 24 hours. The man was brought in as evidence pointed to him being the culprit. In the interview, he denied his involvement. More evidence was found and it, too, pointed to him. He was placed in jail, on the appropriate charges. The next day, I was able to corroborate some of what he said, in the interview. The new evidence proved there was no way he was the person. I felt terrible and immediately called the jail to have him released. As he left, I met him and apologized. I asked if he wanted to see why he was in jail and offered to show him the parts of the evidence that supported him committing the crime. He was interested and I showed him the reasons he was arrested and held. He agreed he fit the crime and was glad I was able to find the piece needed to prove it wasn't him. I would like to hear his telling of the event, years later, but I don't think he regretted giving me his story, in the interview. In his case, he looked just like and shared a first and last name of the real bad guy. They had never met and were in no way related.


    The whole phenomenon of innocent people giving false confessions is an interesting study and there is much more to it than I have fully read into. People do it for a variety of reasons. Often, it's a combination of impaired or abnormal intelligence paired with LE pushing the limits of what's legal and ethical. These cases, when they come to light, are very interesting and tragic.