Posted on 07/18/2024 8:48:17 AM PDT by DIRTYSECRET
Police officers can and will lie to you. They may claim that an accomplice has already ratted you out. They may claim to have hard evidence against you, such as video footage of you committing the crime. They may give you completely dishonest answers to your questions. Because they're free to lie, it's important to avoid overly trusting their words.
(Excerpt) Read more at americanthinker.com ...
Cops will explain that if they arrest you , you must be guilty. Since guilty people lie, cops should lie in order to get conviction! You do not have to go through police interrogation, Invoke fifth amendment, ask for lawyer and shut up. After olympic bombing, Richard Jewell who was a hero and saved many lives ,didn’t even understand that cops thought he was the suspect. He wanted to help them and the cops wanted to put him in prison for life.
Seems about right.
*As a retired LEO I have nothing to defend myself for. If I am interrogating you it means I arrested you for something you did.*
Very good. I’ve been looking for that.
As a side note, if you are pulled over for a suspicious DUI, you legally do not have to submit to the field sobriety test.
My favorite lawyers. Warning Language.
Shut the fudge up!
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uqo5RYOp4nQ
You ask for a lawyer and keep your mouth shut.
BUT... also realize that silence can also be used as evidence against you. Salinas v. Texas established that you must “expressly invoke the privilege against self-incrimination in response to [an] officer’s question”
If an individual does not assert his or her Fifth Amendment rights when refusing to answer an investigator’s question, the government is free to draw an adverse inference from that silence at trial.
For example say a suspect is freely answering questions and suddenly, when the police ask about a criminal action, that suspect suddenly shuts up. The police will assume that they stumbled upon something incriminating... and that silence WILL come up at trial.
So basically before you are mirandized tell the police you want legal council and then say something like “I am invoking my 5th Amendment right to silence and will not answer any questions without legal council present.”
Then shut up and stay quiet.
Your lies were fun and productive. But they should destroy a criminal case you would try to bring.
That reminds me of how the prosecution blew the OJ case when they decided they would frame a guilty man.
It’s worse than that. Now if you “lie” to a Fed, I mean ANY Fed, you are going away. That is why Martha Stewart went to prison. They categorize the slightest inaccuracy as a “lie”. You said it was a Tuesday, but it was a Wednesday. You tell the same story twice with the slightest change as normal humans do... and now you lied.
They had asked “Scooter” Libby an obscure but extremely specific item on his planner/Calander. He was caught in perjury trap.
Of course I THINK you did it otherwise I would be breaking the law by arresting you if thought you didn't. My assumption of your guilt is required once I establish probable cause that you did it.
Am I right? Have I established beyond a reasonable doubt that you're guilty? NO not even close. That's for lawyers, judges and juries to decide. In doing my part I ensured that your constitutional rights were protected as I hand your case to the courts.
If the court finds in your favor great, good for you and God bless. I don't know you and you don't know me, Its not personnel and I have no dog in the fight. Once I pass the case to the court system I'm out if it. Not my circus or my monkey's.
I was always truthful on the stand, if it helped the defense so be it. I don't work for the prosecutors anyway and the outcome of the case is not my problem. I did my job without passion, predigest, regret or apology.
“That reminds me of how the prosecution blew the OJ case when they decided they would frame a guilty man.”
The cops did nothing wrong there. And no, evidence was not planted. When Fuhrman was snapping in for a sweet disability retirement for PTSD years before, he used the N word liberally. Then the idiot prosecutors had him try on a leather glove that had been soaked and shrunk and that he definitely didn’t want to fit into.
But the cops did not frame or lie in that case. If anything cops had kid gloves on for him. Think you or me would get away with that low speed chase all around LA? With a gun to your head? Who knows where you are headed to do what.
Spike strips and a SWAT standoff would have happened.
“They had asked “Scooter” Libby an obscure but extremely specific item on his planner/Calander. He was caught in perjury trap.”
And they knew the entire time that Sandy Berger did it and that Plame and her husband were straight up liars.
The cops did nothing wrong there. And no, evidence was not planted. When Fuhrman was snapping in for a sweet disability retirement for PTSD years before, he used the N word liberally.
Fuhrman mishandled the blood and failed to maintain a proper chain of evidence. Whether it was intentional or simply sloppy, it hurt the case.
Yep.
Every single question should have the same answer. “I don’t answer questions”.
If they ask you if the sun is shining. “I don’t answer questions”
“I refuse to answer any questions without my attorney present.”
“What is your name?”
“Lawyer”
That is the answer to every question.
Easy Peasy.
I don’t know where you are from, but if you are arrested in Indiana you have to provide your Name, DOB, and current address. Other than that you don’t have to tell them anything else. Also if you are not guilty of or being detained for some sort of infraction, you don’t have to tell them anything.
Love that video.
Absolutely. However I was not trying to bring a criminal case to court. I acceded to the wishes of the victims who were not interested in going to court. They only wanted their money or property back.
"That reminds me of how the prosecution blew the OJ case when they decided they would frame a guilty man."
Oh? Did I frame anyone or attempt to? In cases that never went to court? Is that what you concluded?
In two of the scenarios no one confessed to me. In the lottery money theft I lied, and the girl who stole the money showed me where it was. No arrest. No prosecution. But she was far from innocent.
"And it also brings to mind the FBI and “Trump is a Russian asset” investigations. They go to people and say “we have the goods on Trump, incontrovertible evidence”, are you going to cooperate or are you maybe involved too?”
My investigations centered on a suspect. I didn't need to to go to people who weren't involved. If you can fit that example to my investigations then you can fit it to any other investigation.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.