Never talk to the police. Ever.

This is where general Agony discussion takes place.

Moderator: Staff

remagi
End Game
Posts: 1472
Joined: Fri Nov 04, 2005 1:28 pm
Location: San Diego, CA

Never talk to the police. Ever.

Postby remagi » Tue Dec 23, 2008 11:27 am

Interesting discussion of the fifth amendment and the use of police information against defendants in the court system by James Duane, Professor at the Regent Law school in Virginia and former criminal defender.

Duane is a wildly hyper speaker, and this is pretty long (27 minutes). But it's chock full of concrete examples and some real eye-openers of criminal law.

Google video here

If you want the really short version without seeing the explanations (which I don't recommend, the examples given are stunning): Nothing you say to the police, even if you are completely innocent and telling nothing but the absolute truth, will ever be used to HELP you in court. Ever.
GREEN.

"Please don't lock up these words." - Lenny Bruce

User avatar
Doomsayer
End Game
Posts: 2734
Joined: Fri Nov 04, 2005 8:05 am
Location: SF, CA

Postby Doomsayer » Tue Dec 23, 2008 8:55 pm

i dont need a fancy professor to tell me!

User avatar
The Gooch
Sr. Peon
Posts: 326
Joined: Sun Apr 23, 2006 10:29 pm
Location: NOT Canada

Postby The Gooch » Wed Dec 24, 2008 2:38 pm

Great info, thanks for posting.
The eyes are the groin of the head - Dwight Schrute

EDINGER INCIDENT - Electronica with a splash of Limon

User avatar
Phace
Sr. Peon
Posts: 259
Joined: Mon Jul 16, 2007 6:34 am
Location: Baltimore, Maryland

Postby Phace » Thu Dec 25, 2008 11:32 pm

If you have any doubts, I'd urge you to heed Justice Robert Jackson's advice: "Any lawyer worth his salt will tell the suspect in no uncertain terms to make no statement to the police under any circumstances". Watts v. Indiana, 338 U.S. 49, 59 (1949). In other words, don't EVER talk to the police if you are a suspect in a criminal investigation.

Frankly there's no reason to challenge advice from one of the finest prosecutors in modern jurisprudence. Justice Jackson, to my knowledge, is the only Supreme Court Justice who has ever recused himself from the court to actually try a case. In fact, FDR himself asked him to serve as the chief US prosecutor at the Nuremburg trials. Why...because Justice Jackson is one of the greatest trial lawyers to have EVER lived, and the United States couldn't risk allowing the Nazis to escape accountability for their actions in WWII. Quite literally Justice Jackson was asked to defend all that was right and true in the world from all of the evil and horror the Nazis represented. To his credit, Justice Jackson's closing argument at Nuremburg is considered one of the finest of all time (right up there with John Adams' at the Boston Massacre and Clarance Darrow's in his own defense).

So if someone of his caliber tells you not to make any statement to the police... for your own good just zip it. :wink:
Phace

User avatar
Prybutok
Staff
Posts: 2835
Joined: Fri Nov 04, 2005 10:57 pm
Location: Sacramento, CA

Postby Prybutok » Fri Dec 26, 2008 11:42 am

We need a Justice Jackson right now in this country.
"It's like a koala bear crapped a rainbow in my brain." -Captain Murphy

User avatar
Guljit
End Game
Posts: 828
Joined: Mon Mar 10, 2008 11:09 pm
Location: Knoxville, TN

Postby Guljit » Sat Dec 27, 2008 12:05 pm

Good video, there is a follow up from a police officer at the same lecture who backs up pretty much everything this guy says.
<--- A delicious high protein snack!

Guljit: "I can't decide whether to go do Kara or see my x-girlfriend."
Niiko: "Either way, you are just plowing old content."

User avatar
Ink
End Game
Posts: 1314
Joined: Thu Nov 03, 2005 10:45 pm
Location: Redmond, OR
Contact:

Postby Ink » Sat Dec 27, 2008 5:55 pm

"I ran a couple heroics with Rd a long time ago before he was even in Agony, but I think that's it" - Gannis

remagi
End Game
Posts: 1472
Joined: Fri Nov 04, 2005 1:28 pm
Location: San Diego, CA

Postby remagi » Sat Dec 27, 2008 7:46 pm

What strikes me about it is how thin and limited our rights are even here in this country. And although it's taken a huge beating lately, we still have one of the most liberal legal systems in the world.

You start with a presumption of innocence and a handful of very simple laws that protect you, and from there you have an entire giant organization (the criminal prosecution and police) who work non stop to overcome those protections.

-remagi
GREEN.



"Please don't lock up these words." - Lenny Bruce

User avatar
Phace
Sr. Peon
Posts: 259
Joined: Mon Jul 16, 2007 6:34 am
Location: Baltimore, Maryland

Postby Phace » Sun Dec 28, 2008 12:44 am

If you found this video eye-opening, I suggest you read a bit more about the exceptions to the warrant requirements of the 4th and 14th amendments. Even prosecutors will admit that some of the things police are allowed to do reach a very questionable level. Unfortunately nobody wants to look soft on crime or criminals (namely legislators and the conservative dominated Supreme Court), so our civil liberties erode, more people get locked up, we spend exorbitant amounts of money to incarcerate them in a system with horrendous recidivism rates, and we do this all while underfunding the educational system that could have helped avoid the problems in the first place. I digress...

One of the other things most people don't know about is the erosion of the exclusionary rule. Without getting too serious here with citations, the exclusionary rule is the mechanism the US Supreme Court has chosen to use to ensure the police won't violate citizens' 4th, 5th, and 14th amendment rights. Its main functions as originally conceived were to 1) deter police from collecting evidence in violation of the Constitution (under the theory that because a police officer's main motivator is the eventual conviction of a suspect he or she will want to avoid having evidence excluded), and 2) to ensure judicial integrity by not allowing the use of unconstitutionally gathered evidence.

In subsequent cases, the Court has narrowed the exclusionary rule by now only applying it in situations that will deter the police. This means that if exclusion won't deter the police, you CAN be convicted of a crime in a US court of law even if the evidence used to convict you was collected in violation of your Constitutional rights. Make of that what you will...
Phace


Return to “Agony General”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 43 guests

 

 

cron