• We are now running on a new, and hopefully much-improved, server. In addition we are also on new forum software. Any move entails a lot of technical details and I suspect we will encounter a few issues as the new server goes live. Please be patient with us. It will be worth it! :) Please help by posting all issues here.
  • The forum will be down for about an hour this weekend for maintenance. I apologize for the inconvenience.
  • If you are having trouble seeing the forum then you may need to clear your browser's DNS cache. Click here for instructions on how to do that
  • Please review the Forum Rules frequently as we are constantly trying to improve the forum for our members and visitors.

Don't Talk to Police - ever for any reason...

Brimstone Baritone

Regular Member
Joined
Mar 26, 2010
Messages
786
Location
Leeds, Alabama, USA
Yeah, someone asked the Parks and Recreations board in Northport if it was legal to OC at an upcoming fall festive. Their answer was to go to the city council and try to get an ordinance passed to make it illegal. No good can come from asking permission to exercise a right.
 

Deacon Blues

Newbie
Joined
Aug 7, 2007
Messages
124
Location
Birmingham, AL
Seeking permission to exercise rights only engenders a false equation with privilege; this is evident by the reactions we've seen. Northport is a prime example. One individual asks two people if it's okay to OC to an event, and the immediate response is an effort to ban OC on city property - an act blatantly in violation of preemption.

We should never allow the thought to enter any official's mind that we need someone to sign off on our God-given rights!
 

EMNofSeattle

Regular Member
Joined
Aug 7, 2012
Messages
3,670
Location
S. Kitsap, Washington state
Problem is, it is overly simplistic, real life isn't quite as simple as Duane makes it seem.

If your defense is alibi or something that is good advice, if you get involved in a DGU in which you shoot someone those rules fly straight out the window.
 

Vitaeus

Regular Member
Joined
May 30, 2010
Messages
596
Location
Bremerton, Washington
Problem is, it is overly simplistic, real life isn't quite as simple as Duane makes it seem.

If your defense is alibi or something that is good advice, if you get involved in a DGU in which you shoot someone those rules fly straight out the window.

Defensive Gun Use, since I had to google it,

"I was in fear for my life, I shot to stop the threat. I would like to go see a physician and talk to my lawyer." this covers use in your home or out in town. This may change for Alabama I am not as conversant with your laws as Washington state.
 

EMNofSeattle

Regular Member
Joined
Aug 7, 2012
Messages
3,670
Location
S. Kitsap, Washington state
Defensive Gun Use, since I had to google it,

"I was in fear for my life, I shot to stop the threat. I would like to go see a physician and talk to my lawyer." this covers use in your home or out in town. This may change for Alabama I am not as conversant with your laws as Washington state.

Well I'm of the school of thought that if you know of exonerating evidence it's best to point that out right away.

in a previous thread I used an example of you shoot someone at a street corner after they charge you with a knife on an icy night.

knife slides into an alley and maybe one witness saw the shooting go down but was afraid to get involved.
police are dispatched to the scene, they have one guy holding a pistol and another laying on the ground in a pool of blood. guy with gun says nothing except "I want my lawyer" by the time you speak to your lawyer you're now a suspect in a manslaughter investigation and the knife is gone and witness had a stroke.

whereas if the knife and witness are pointed out, the police have some believable evidence you acted in self defense.

Mas Ayoob, and the armed citizens legal defense network advocate this formula in the aftermath of a defensive gun use.

1)This man attacked me, I want him prosecuted
2) I will sign the complaint
3) Evidence is........
4) potential witnesses......
5) Officer, you know how serious this is, you'll have my full cooperation in 24 hours after i've spoken with counsel.
 
Last edited:

FTG-05

Regular Member
Joined
Feb 28, 2011
Messages
441
Location
TN
Well I'm of the school of thought that if you know of exonerating evidence it's best to point that out right away.

in a previous thread I used an example of you shoot someone at a street corner after they charge you with a knife on an icy night.

knife slides into an alley and maybe one witness saw the shooting go down but was afraid to get involved.
police are dispatched to the scene, they have one guy holding a pistol and another laying on the ground in a pool of blood. guy with gun says nothing except "I want my lawyer" by the time you speak to your lawyer you're not a suspect in a manslaughter investigation and the knife is gone and witness had a stroke.

whereas if the knife and witness are pointed out, the police have some believable evidence you acted in self defense.

Mas Ayoob, and the armed citizens legal defense network advocate this formula in the aftermath of a defensive gun use.

1)This man attacked me, I want him prosecuted
2) I will sign the complaint
3) Evidence is........
4) potential witnesses......
5) Officer, you know how serious this is, you'll have my full cooperation in 24 hours after i've spoken with counsel.

"Not" or "now"?
 

WalkingWolf

Regular Member
Joined
Jul 31, 2011
Messages
11,930
Location
North Carolina
Well I'm of the school of thought that if you know of exonerating evidence it's best to point that out right away.

in a previous thread I used an example of you shoot someone at a street corner after they charge you with a knife on an icy night.

knife slides into an alley and maybe one witness saw the shooting go down but was afraid to get involved.
police are dispatched to the scene, they have one guy holding a pistol and another laying on the ground in a pool of blood. guy with gun says nothing except "I want my lawyer" by the time you speak to your lawyer you're now a suspect in a manslaughter investigation and the knife is gone and witness had a stroke.

whereas if the knife and witness are pointed out, the police have some believable evidence you acted in self defense.

Mas Ayoob, and the armed citizens legal defense network advocate this formula in the aftermath of a defensive gun use.

1)This man attacked me, I want him prosecuted
2) I will sign the complaint
3) Evidence is........
4) potential witnesses......
5) Officer, you know how serious this is, you'll have my full cooperation in 24 hours after i've spoken with counsel.

Let's suppose you point them in the direction of where you think the knife is, and all they find is a ball point pen? You claim someone attacked you? So what? That can be used against you, especially if they find a pen where you claimed there was a knife. Even if there is a knife you could have planted it, and then pointed the officers in the right direction to find it. The potential witnesses you point out could be friends of the deceased, just what do you think they are going to say? It is the police job to search a crime scene, if they don't it will reflect on them in the court room. Had Z invoked his right to counsel, and was then arrested, he would not be in the mess he is today.
 

EMNofSeattle

Regular Member
Joined
Aug 7, 2012
Messages
3,670
Location
S. Kitsap, Washington state
Let's suppose you point them in the direction of where you think the knife is, and all they find is a ball point pen? You claim someone attacked you? So what? That can be used against you, especially if they find a pen where you claimed there was a knife. Even if there is a knife you could have planted it, and then pointed the officers in the right direction to find it. The potential witnesses you point out could be friends of the deceased, just what do you think they are going to say? It is the police job to search a crime scene, if they don't it will reflect on them in the court room. Had Z invoked his right to counsel, and was then arrested, he would not be in the mess he is today.

Yes he would, the police and DA both declined to arrest, charge and prosecute. Z's prosecution is based on a political witch hunt following national media coverage.
 

WalkingWolf

Regular Member
Joined
Jul 31, 2011
Messages
11,930
Location
North Carolina
Yes he would, the police and DA both declined to arrest, charge and prosecute. Z's prosecution is based on a political witch hunt following national media coverage.

If he had been arrested and taken before a judge with a good lawyer, before the theatrics, I have little doubt the case would have been dismissed. It would have been far better that the case went to court in the early stages before it got blown out of proportion. They did Z no favors by declining to arrest him in the initial investigation.
 
Last edited:

EMNofSeattle

Regular Member
Joined
Aug 7, 2012
Messages
3,670
Location
S. Kitsap, Washington state
If he had been arrested and taken before a judge with a good lawyer, before the theatrics, I have little doubt the case would have been dismissed. It would have been far better that the case went to court in the early stages before it got blown out of proportion. They did Z no favors by declining to arrest him in the initial investigation.

There are no guarantees once it goes to court. Remember, Z talked about everything with no lawyer present, the police were skeptical of his claims and yet they could find no reason to suspect him of a crime. no evidence existed that would have convicted him. even if charges had been dismissed by a court it wouldn't matter, the state AG can always pop in and file charges. I doubt they would have been dismissed with prejudice.
 

WalkingWolf

Regular Member
Joined
Jul 31, 2011
Messages
11,930
Location
North Carolina
There are no guarantees once it goes to court. Remember, Z talked about everything with no lawyer present, the police were skeptical of his claims and yet they could find no reason to suspect him of a crime. no evidence existed that would have convicted him. even if charges had been dismissed by a court it wouldn't matter, the state AG can always pop in and file charges. I doubt they would have been dismissed with prejudice.

And look where Zimmerman is NOW!
 

EMNofSeattle

Regular Member
Joined
Aug 7, 2012
Messages
3,670
Location
S. Kitsap, Washington state
And look where Zimmerman is NOW!

You're right! He is getting screwed!

But it would've happened regardless. yes he has diarhea of the mouth and talked to the cops too much.

But giving them the silence treatment wouldn't hurt or help him now, because this prosecution is politically motivated, it has to due with Florida bowing to public pressure, The Pope and Dalai Lama can come down and proclaim Z innocent and the state would still press to put him away. this is a trial for the press, not justice.
 
Top