Page 1 of 12 12311 ... LastLast
Results 1 to 25 of 279

Thread: Rights - Law professor speaks on exercising 5th amend rights

  1. #1
    Moderator / Administrator
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Location
    Fairfax County, Virginia, USA
    Posts
    8,711

    Post imported post

    http://www.regent.edu/admin/media/schlaw/LawPreview

    I actually could not hear him as my computer is acting up - maybe after I re-boot.

  2. #2
    Regular Member Flintlock's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Location
    Alaska, USA
    Posts
    1,224

    Post imported post

    Fascinating speach by the professor. Very informative but I think he needs to stay off the Red Bulls, lol.
    Peace through superior firepower

    Luke 11:21
    "When a strong man, fully armed, guards his own house, his possessions are undisturbed.

  3. #3
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Location
    Washington Island, across Death's Door, Wisconsin, USA
    Posts
    9,193

    Post imported post

    PLUS ONE

    When I'm sticking pins in my LEO doll I'm imagining someone just like Officer Bruch. Watch the video. Do not talk to the police. Get your own recording device.

  4. #4
    Moderator / Administrator
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Location
    Fairfax County, Virginia, USA
    Posts
    8,711

    Post imported post

    I did not mean this an an anti-police posting - police unions and their lawyers also tell the police to not waive their fifth amendment rights!

  5. #5
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Location
    Washington Island, across Death's Door, Wisconsin, USA
    Posts
    9,193

    Post imported post

    I don't think anyone is - yet - making this an anti-police thread. You must admit that the officer did not come across as a friend of armed citizen activists, even without an overt explicit statement pro or con.

  6. #6
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Location
    Burton, Michigan
    Posts
    3,361

    Post imported post

    Flintlock wrote:
    Fascinating speach by the professor. Very informative but I think he needs to stay off the Red Bulls, lol.
    Indeed it was, but I think he worked his way through law school as an auctioneer.



  7. #7
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    Firestone, Colorado
    Posts
    1,189

    Post imported post

    Doug Huffman wrote:
    You must admit that the officer did not come across as a friend of armed citizen activists, even without an overt explicit statement pro or con.
    He didn't come across as either friend or foe of armed citizens. He came across as a guy doing a job: to find criminals and build a case that makes them easy to convict. If he's told that armed citizens are criminals, then he'll go after them and probably be very successful at putting them away. If he's told that they're okay, then he won't bother manipulating them into confessing crimes they may or may not have committed.

    What I got from his talk was that a skilled "interviewer" can convict damned near anybody, innocent or guilty, but that's okay because a skilled interviewer can tell who is innocent and will let them go.

    Don't Talk To Police, indeed.

    Edit: Fixed typo.

  8. #8
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Location
    Catasauqua, Pennsylvania, USA
    Posts
    3,047

    Post imported post

    swillden wrote:
    What I got from his talk was that a skilled "interviewer" can convict damned near anybody, innocent or guilty, but that's okay because a skilled interviewer can tell who is innocent and will let them go.
    On an unrelated note, yesterday I saw on FX that the last season of The Shield is airing later this year...

  9. #9
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    USA
    Posts
    7,607

    Post imported post

    Very entertaining video.

    Honest information provided by both people.

  10. #10
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Location
    Virginia USA, ,
    Posts
    1,688

    Post imported post

    I can't watch shows like CSI/L&O because I end up getting flustered by the morons talking to police at the station

  11. #11
    Regular Member BUBB4H's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Location
    Centreville, VA, ,
    Posts
    165

    Post imported post

    hsmith wrote:
    I can't watch shows like CSI/L&O because I end up getting flustered by the morons talking to police at the station
    +1 - I always shake my head and laugh. "Who the hell does that?????"

  12. #12
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Location
    , ,
    Posts
    89

    Post imported post

    +1 on The Shield Great show though completely unreal and over the top in some areas.

    I make it a practice not even to talk to lawyers. Avoid all questions period!

  13. #13
    Regular Member Michigander's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    Mulligan's Valley
    Posts
    4,830

    Post imported post

    hsmith wrote:
    I can't watch shows like CSI/L&O because I end up getting flustered by the morons talking to police at the station

    I can't watch those shows because of how unrealistic they are. Cops simply are not that emotionally involved in their jobs. Those shows are soap operas, and I despise any form of soap opera.

    As for the confessions and talking, you'd have to be uninformed or an idiot to talk to the police if you think they have anything on you. Detectives are manipulative liars, and they are really good at pushing buttons.


    Answer every question about open carry in Michigan you ever had with one convenient and free book- http://libertyisforeveryone.com/open-carry-resources/

    The complete and utter truth can be challenged from every direction and it will always hold up. Accordingly there are few greater displays of illegitimacy than to attempt to impede free thought and communication.

  14. #14
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    USA
    Posts
    7,607

    Post imported post

    Michigander wrote:
    I can't watch those shows because of how unrealistic they are. Cops simply are not that emotionally involved in their jobs. Those shows are soap operas, and I despise any form of soap opera.

    As for the confessions and talking, you'd have to be uninformed or an idiot to talk to the police if you think they have anything on you. Detectives are manipulative liars, and they are really good at pushing buttons.
    I can agree with everything you said.

    The police are allowed to lie and I have done it to get the bad guy to confess.

  15. #15
    Regular Member Flintlock's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Location
    Alaska, USA
    Posts
    1,224

    Post imported post

    LEO 229 wrote:
    Michigander wrote:
    I can't watch those shows because of how unrealistic they are. Cops simply are not that emotionally involved in their jobs. Those shows are soap operas, and I despise any form of soap opera.

    As for the confessions and talking, you'd have to be uninformed or an idiot to talk to the police if you think they have anything on you. Detectives are manipulative liars, and they are really good at pushing buttons.
    I can agree with everything you said.

    The police are allowed to lie and I have done it to get the bad guy to confess.
    As a public servant, do you not find that to be unethical? Does your department have a code of ethics?
    Peace through superior firepower

    Luke 11:21
    "When a strong man, fully armed, guards his own house, his possessions are undisturbed.

  16. #16
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Location
    Hampton, Virginia, USA
    Posts
    495

    Post imported post

    Flintlock wrote:
    LEO 229 wrote:
    Michigander wrote:
    I can't watch those shows because of how unrealistic they are. Cops simply are not that emotionally involved in their jobs. Those shows are soap operas, and I despise any form of soap opera.

    As for the confessions and talking, you'd have to be uninformed or an idiot to talk to the police if you think they have anything on you. Detectives are manipulative liars, and they are really good at pushing buttons.
    I can agree with everything you said.

    The police are allowed to lie and I have done it to get the bad guy to confess.
    As a public servant, do you not find that to be unethical? Does your department have a code of ethics?
    I would like to add my say on that.

    In the scope of a LEOs duties, I find it useful to "lie" to a criminal in order to get a solid case. If known rapist is being interrogated, nothing wrong with moving facts around to catch the BG in a lie or trap him.

    However, I do find physical interrogation to gain a confession unethical. Nothing wrong with playing mind games, IMO.

  17. #17
    Regular Member Flintlock's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Location
    Alaska, USA
    Posts
    1,224

    Post imported post

    danbus wrote:
    Flintlock wrote:
    LEO 229 wrote:
    Michigander wrote:
    I can't watch those shows because of how unrealistic they are. Cops simply are not that emotionally involved in their jobs. Those shows are soap operas, and I despise any form of soap opera.

    As for the confessions and talking, you'd have to be uninformed or an idiot to talk to the police if you think they have anything on you. Detectives are manipulative liars, and they are really good at pushing buttons.
    I can agree with everything you said.

    The police are allowed to lie and I have done it to get the bad guy to confess.
    As a public servant, do you not find that to be unethical? Does your department have a code of ethics?
    I would like to add my say on that.

    In the scope of a LEOs duties, I find it useful to "lie" to a criminal in order to get a solid case. If known rapist is being interrogated, nothing wrong with moving facts around to catch the BG in a lie or trap him.

    However, I do find physical interrogation to gain a confession unethical. Nothing wrong with playing mind games, IMO.
    I see.. And I am sure this is being done with a lawyer present? Innocent until proven guilty in a court of law.....Unless you have had a jedi mind-trick cast upon you by the local law enforcement officials...
    Peace through superior firepower

    Luke 11:21
    "When a strong man, fully armed, guards his own house, his possessions are undisturbed.

  18. #18
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Location
    Catasauqua, Pennsylvania, USA
    Posts
    3,047

    Post imported post

    Flintlock wrote:
    LEO 229 wrote:
    Michigander wrote:
    I can't watch those shows because of how unrealistic they are. Cops simply are not that emotionally involved in their jobs. Those shows are soap operas, and I despise any form of soap opera.

    As for the confessions and talking, you'd have to be uninformed or an idiot to talk to the police if you think they have anything on you. Detectives are manipulative liars, and they are really good at pushing buttons.
    I can agree with everything you said.

    The police are allowed to lie and I have done it to get the bad guy to confess.
    As a public servant, do you not find that to be unethical? Does your department have a code of ethics?
    I generally believe it is unethical to lie to extract a confession in today's criminal "justice" system where one is essentially guilty until proven innocent. Now, in a slightly more perfect world, where every person convicted of a crime went to a trial where a fair and impartial jury looked at the evidence and rendered a verdict, I wouldn't have a problem with the police lying. But where the goal now is to get a guilty plea for every person charged with a crime, and with rampant plea bargaining, lying just adds to the pressure for an innocent person to confess to a crime. "What? You didn't rape the girl? Then how do you explain the, um, uh, DNA evidence on her that links you to the crime? Don't know how it got there, eh? Well, if you keep saying you didn't do it, you're gonna fry for this... just confess and we'll tell the judge to be nice to you, and hell, you'll be outta jail in a few years."

    Now, I can see lying to get information relevant to a case. If someone tells where to find a bloody shirt, for example, due to the belief that other evidence exists, then fine. But confessions? No.

  19. #19
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    USA
    Posts
    7,607

    Post imported post

    Flintlock wrote:
    LEO 229 wrote:
    Michigander wrote:
    I can't watch those shows because of how unrealistic they are. Cops simply are not that emotionally involved in their jobs. Those shows are soap operas, and I despise any form of soap opera.

    As for the confessions and talking, you'd have to be uninformed or an idiot to talk to the police if you think they have anything on you. Detectives are manipulative liars, and they are really good at pushing buttons.
    I can agree with everything you said.

    The police are allowed to lie and I have done it to get the bad guy to confess.
    As a public servant, do you not find that to be unethical? Does your department have a code of ethics?
    NO!!

    and

    The courts allow the police to lie during interviews so this has nothing to do with department regulations on ethics. The police cannot lie on reports or in court.

    But it perfectly acceptable to lie during an interview with a bad guy who IS going to lie to you. It keeps things fair.

    Think about it this way... if the police had to tell the truth... a bad guy could demand to know what evidence they had on him. The police would be required to tell him the "truth" andwhen he determines what they have he would know they had nothing and walk out.

  20. #20
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Location
    Washington Island, across Death's Door, Wisconsin, USA
    Posts
    9,193

    Post imported post

    If there is no cop-bashing on-going then why the defense? It takes two to tango.

  21. #21
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    USA
    Posts
    7,607

    Post imported post

    Doug Huffman wrote:
    If there is no cop-bashing on-going then why the defense? It takes to to tango.
    It takes two to tango.

    What are you talking about?

  22. #22
    Founder's Club Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    Dallas, TX, ,
    Posts
    496

    Post imported post

    Doug Huffman wrote:
    PLUS ONE

    When I'm sticking pins in my LEO doll I'm imagining someone just like Officer Bruch. Watch the video. Do not talk to the police. Get your own recording device.
    Important points:

    - You do not "need" the contents of your pockets in police custody.If you are arrested, you are searched and your pockets emptied.Those effectsgo into a manila envelope until you and the cops get to the police station. Those effects are now evidence, andifthe police plan to charge you, youwill not see the recorder or hear any recording it made until discovery, and it will only cover your initial encounter with the police up until the recorder is found and turned off. From that moment on the only recording available is that provided by the police.

    - Off-site recording? Forget it. The POLICE gather evidence. If you recorded a phone conversation using your answering machine, congratulations, you have a lovely little microcassette, the contents of which will NEVER be heard in court unless the POLICE collect it from the player. Same with a digital recordingmade from your pocket,dumped to a secure server. Why? Because unless you can prove it wasn't tampered with from the moment that conversation occurredto the time the motion to suppress is heard, the prosecution's motion to suppress will be granted, every time. That recording must also be timestamped, and tape answering machines don't timestamp unless the time is mentioned on the recording. Otherwise the conversation could have happened anywhere at any time in the timeline of the investigation and questioning.

    - DO NOT TALK TO POLICE. You are required, when under arrest (lawful or not in some states including Texas) to provide identifying information. You are required, arrested or detained, to ensure that all identifying information given is truthful. Beyond that, keep your mouth shut. Quoting law reveals that you do know the law. If they can provide evidence to show that you did in fact break the law you quote,you are losing sympathy points with the judge and jury. Any statement you make may mesh with another statement, as the Prof shows, to complete the puzzle.

    - The police are allowed to lie. They can tell you they have you committing the crime on tape, and show you the cassette. In reality the cassette is blank and they are bluffing in the hopes you'll fold. Call the bluff. A request to have them show you the evidence is not an incriminating statement, as long as the words out of your mouth are "please allow me to viewthe evidence you have collected". If they refuse, your mouth is shut beyond that request.

    - DO NOT TALK TO POLICE. Remember one of Officer Bruch's tactics? He gives the Miranda warning, then proceeds to tell the suspect what he knows, and HE IS ALLOWED TO LIE. He THEN asks if the suspect wishes to talk. Do not give him the opportunity. Immediately after the Miranda warning, when he starts to say "now let me tell you what I know", your line is "I do not wish to talk to youor to be interviewed without first speaking with my lawyer". He must stop talking right there, otherwise he is in violation of the very warning he just gave you, ON TAPE.

    - DO NOT TALK WHILE IN YOUR CELL. While in the holding pen/drunk tank/your holding cell, you have the opportunity to speak with other occupants of the cell. DO NOT EXERCISE IT. The police put informants in cell blocks, and can make deals with real suspects to testify against you. You must assume that anything you say may be used against you, whether you are in the presence of a uniformed officer or not.

    - Recordings can be used against you. *dons flame suit* Remember that pocket voice recorder? It is now in police custody, and its contents can be entered as evidence against you if the police hear something they like. THAT RECORDING CAN BE ANYWHERE ON THE DEVICE; if the police can argue the relevance of ANY snippet of conversation stored on the device it's theirs.

    - DO NOT TALK TO POLICE.

  23. #23
    Campaign Veteran deepdiver's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    Southeast, Missouri, USA
    Posts
    5,974

    Post imported post

    It is sad that the world has come to this. It is very sad that any citizen would be afraid to have an honest conversation with a police officer unless they intentionally or knowingly violated the law.

    I mentioned this elsewhere on the forum a while back. This is what happens when a basically citizen function becomes overly professionalized. Law enforcement officers at one time were Peace Officers. Their job was to keep the peace, not to necessarily enforce whatever laws the politicians pulled out of their collective rears. We had constables and sheriffs and public safety officers, etc. Now they are all law enforcement officers and the law has become a higher calling than the peace. The peace allows the citizens to function in their lives and conduct commerce and recreation without threat, danger or undo interference, in other words, peacefully. The law as now used allows the government to perpetuate and retain control over the citizens and enforce it's will where it desires in the manner it chooses.

    We took a wrong turn somewhere.
    Bob Owens @ Bearing Arms (paraphrased): "These people aren't against violence; they're very much in favor of violence. They're against armed resistance."

  24. #24
    Regular Member Flintlock's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Location
    Alaska, USA
    Posts
    1,224

    Post imported post

    LEO 229 wrote:
    The courts allow the police to lie during interviews so this has nothing to do with department regulations on ethics. The police cannot lie on reports or in court.


    Very interesting information. As you probably know, it is difficult to gauge the correct emotions of a poster through a forum but it appeared that you were boastful and proudabout your ability to lie to gain confessions. I think the general public thinks highly of police officers and considers them to be of high integrity and ethical standards, so I think this would be somewhat surprising to some.. I guess it just confirms the original post that people should plead the fifth as much as they can.

    I think you can probablysee how this may come across negatively to many people hereand inthe public.

    Thanks for taking the time to respond LEO 229.
    Peace through superior firepower

    Luke 11:21
    "When a strong man, fully armed, guards his own house, his possessions are undisturbed.

  25. #25
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Location
    Catasauqua, Pennsylvania, USA
    Posts
    3,047

    Post imported post

    LEO 229 wrote:
    But it perfectly acceptable to lie during an interview with a bad guy who IS going to lie to you. It keeps things fair.

    Think about it this way... if the police had to tell the truth... a bad guy could demand to know what evidence they had on him. The police would be required to tell him the "truth" andwhen he determines what they have he would know they had nothing and walk out.
    So, now, where did you get this magic crystal ball that tells you who is a "bad guy" and who isn't?

    I wonder if it's made by the same company making the crystal balls that tell casual gun owners when they're going to need a gun.

    And what's so bad about letting the "bad guy" walk out if police have nothing on him? Doesn't it go something like... innocent until proven guilty?

    If we were interested in keeping things "fair" between police and suspects, we could start by allowing citizens 24 hours after being notified of a search warrant's being issued, before the police are allowed to begin their search.

    Being able to abuse power to psychologically manipulate citizens into confessing or giving up "incriminating" information is unethical, regardless of legality.

Page 1 of 12 12311 ... LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •