• 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.

Do Not Speak to Law Enforcement Following A Shooting

buster81

Regular Member
Joined
Aug 25, 2008
Messages
1,461
Location
Richmond, Virginia, USA
imported post

Why does one even need to say there was a shooting? Just call 911 and say there has been an attack, give them the location, and hang up.Let them figure it out. When the the police show up an start asking questions, inform them that you have nothing to say. Let your attorney handle all the talking with the cops. NOTHING you say can ever help you!

http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-4097602514885833865
 

suntzu

Regular Member
Joined
Jun 22, 2008
Messages
1,230
Location
The south land
imported post

BrianEMT wrote:
I came across this the other day, a very good read:

" This topic had been brought up a while back and the consensus was pretty back and forth as to whether or not to speak with the Police after a shooting.

First off : I am an LEO. The following are my opinions only and are not intended to reflect the feelings of other LEO's or act as a guide for what to do after a shooting. This is nothing more than my take and as big boys and girls you need to make your own decision on the matter.

Secondly: I am a member of an organization in my state which basically can be described as Lawyer Insurance. I pay quarterly dues and in turn, they provide me with legal representation in the event I am being hassled by my agency, sued civily and/or facing criminal prosecution as a result of my actions while in an official capacity. Also, if in the event of a shooting, whether on or off duty, they will have a lawyer at my side within 1 hour, regardless of the time of day/night.

Here's my take, as an LEO, on speaking with the Police after a shooting: DON'T.

1. When a Police Officer (or anyone else for that matter) has been in a high stress situation, such as a shooting, it is recommended not to write our reports until a day or two has gone by. This is because immediately after the incident, our minds are racing with "OMG I almost died!" types of thoughts, etc.

After a few days, and calming, one is much more able to think clearly and put the chain of events into words.

2.Anything you say, whether before or after your Miranda Rights are read, can and will be used against you in court. Statements are not always put into context by the Police, they are just listed. So statements such as "The Mother Effer came at me with a knife so I killed him" will be put in the report and you will get to explain to a jury why you used those words. They are not going to be too concerned with the fact you just fought for your life and were amped up, but more concerned with why you used the language you did.

Also, just because you have not been advised of your Miranda Rights does not mean you should speak. Police only have to advised you of Miranda if you are placed into custody, taken from one place to another (talking at the station), or placed in a situation where a "reasonable" person would not feel free to leave. So statements you make to the police while sitting on your couch in your house when they ask "Can you tell me why there is a dead guy on your front porch?" will also be used. So choose your words wisely.

The way you describe the chain of events leading to your use of deadly force, while it may seem innocent and honorable enough to you, may not sit so well with the Officer interviewing you, or the jury hearing the case. This can be avoided by letting your Lawyer coach you on how to better give your side of the story. Perception is everything, and even though you are the good guy, you need to be "percieved" as the good guy.

3. The Police are not going to be your advocate. We will try to find out the truth based on the evidence, witnesses and your statements. If all that leads to enough probable cause to charge you, guess what, you have much larger troubles now. There are many a District Attourney out there looking to make a name for him/herself, and there have been enought cops and citizens who have stood trial for a "good" shooting to prove it. If any of you have read Massad Ayoob's columns in the gun magazines, you know he frequently speaks about covering one's hind quarters in court, both before and after a shooting.

In asking to speak with a lawyer before making a statement, you give yourself an opportunity to cool down, sort out in your own head what just happened, and run it past a person who is YOUR advocate and has YOUR best interests at heart. Not to mention a person who is trained in the law and can help make you look like the good citizen you are, and not a gun toting Rambo the public/DA's office may see you to be.

4. Choosing to speak with a lawyer does not automatically tell the Police your are guilty. When dealing with a "suspect" who refuses comment and asks for a lawyer, it tells me either they've been through this before or they more than likely are guilty. The key word is "suspect." When honest Joe Citizen who just waxed some crook tells me he/she wishes to speak with a lawyer it tells me someone has done their homework.

5. In the event I am in a shooting, I WILL NOT speak to ANYONE without my lawyer present. Not my chief, best friend, etc. It doesn't matter if the shoot is clearly a good shoot, I'm still going to run everything past my lawyer who is there for me and only me. Why? My agency will only be looking to see if my actions will cost them $ or cause them to be held liable in any way. Once they find they are in the clear, I'm on my own.

For those of you not in the LEO business, you're just on your own, period. In these days of liberal judges/juries and law suit hungry people, you need to protect yourself and your family the best you can.

My recommendation to people who carry a gun for protection, or have a gun in the home for the same purpose. Find a lawyer who has some experience in criminal defense. Alot of these people offer free consultations. Find one you have confidence in and can trust. It may take a while and several referrals, but once you've got one, keep them. Speak with your lawyer about his or her recommendations for you in the event you are involved in a shooting and get some 24/7 contact information for them so you can contact them right away should the need arise.

I'm not writing this in an effort to paint us LEO's as the bad guys, or try to create a feeling of fear or distrust for Law Enforcement. I'm only writing this because I feel every person carrying gun for self-defense needs to be prepared, both for the incident itself and the aftermath. I don't want anyone to get jammed up for something when they didn't do wrong. I honestly feel your consulting a lawyer before making a statement to the Police will help keep you from getting jammed up needlessly.

Finally, I, as an LEO, have the lawyers on stand-by in the event I'm involved in a shooting, so that in itself should say alot."
This is pretty much the EXACT same thing my firearms instructor said today in class. It was pretty straightforward and simple--do not speak to the police until you have spoken to your atty. Keep your mouth shut, refuse consent to search, and say NOTHING without your atty present.

He also said line up a good criminal defense atty, and have his/her number programmed into your phone mobile phone.

He said make no statements period until you speak with your lawyer, and let them do the talking for you.
 

darthmord

Regular Member
Joined
Oct 10, 2008
Messages
998
Location
Norfolk, Virginia, USA
imported post

Here's the other thing that many people just don't get...

Miranda... everything you say can and will be used against you in a court of law.

Notice what it DOES NOT say? Doesn't say that anything you say can be used FOR you / your benefit.

The videoa few posts above goes into specific detail why talking with the Police can only hurt you. Talking with the Police doesn't exonerate you. Investigation and the courts can exonerate you. Blabbing away at the Police will at best keep you neutral in the case. It often goes much worse.

One of the examples given in that video was asking the students how many drove to class. Then asking how many took I-64. Then asking how many went over 55 mph. Then all those that answered were told they failed. They admitted to wrong doing purely accidentally. Giving a confession (intentional or accidental, truthful or not) to the Police does you no good. The Detective in the video even pointed that out.

But hey, IANAL. You each have to do what is best for you. Me, I'll tell the officers asking me questions that I need to consult my lawyer before making any statements. But if I'm reporting a crime (like the drunk & high driver that ploughed into my wife's legally parked car and totalled it), you betcha I'm talking with the Police.

But in a case where I might be the person getting charged with a crime, I'm talking with a lawyer first.


Edited for clarity.
 

Legba

Regular Member
Joined
Mar 23, 2007
Messages
1,881
Location
, ,
imported post

codename_47 wrote:
Good grief, why do you guys have to make this hard?

Here is all that you ever need to say to the police,ever, ever, ever in any and all circumstances:

Do you suspect me of a crime?

Am I free to go?

I do not consent to any searches.


I would like a lawyer.

End of discussion. If you say anything else, you are just flirting with danger. Shut your mouth. Some people can't resist. They just have to talk. Stop talking and shut your mouth.


Word for word, that is all you ever have to say or should say. You don't have to tell them your name in most places.
I concur. Sage advice, truly.

-ljp
 

jaredbelch

Founder's Club Member
Joined
Aug 8, 2007
Messages
545
Location
Cottonwood Heights, Utah, USA
imported post

Yeah the best line for the 911 call would be something like... "Please send police and ambulance to ... location" click

Chances are 911 will try and call back... don't answer. Immediately dial your lawyers number before police arrive and you are detained and arrested; contacting anyone after police arrive will be much more difficult since you won't have your phone or wallet.

Most likely you won't have a chance to call again until you are booked into jail. and from jail, you will have to either look up your attorney's number in the phone book, or call information to get it since your phone and wallet are now in evidence/personal effects lockup and aren't available until you post bail or until the case is resolved.
 

IanB

Regular Member
Joined
Jul 18, 2006
Messages
1,896
Location
Northern VA
imported post

suntzu wrote:
BrianEMT wrote:
I came across this the other day, a very good read:
This is pretty much the EXACT same thing my firearms instructor said today...
Suntzu, it is common forum courtesy to not quote the entire posting when you reply, especially when the post is long. We have all read it just like you before getting to your post. From now on only quote the appropriate stuff or if referring to the entire post only include a few sentences and make some note that you redacted the rest.


Thanks.
 

Marco

Regular Member
Joined
Jul 29, 2007
Messages
3,905
Location
Greene County
imported post

to whether or not to speak with the Police after a shooting.
I'm going to talk with the police after a shooting.

Officer that person stole my bullets.
I believe, he demanded 3 possibly 4 then fell over.

I removed my property from his body and will be on my way.


Stay safe out there.:D
 

FMCDH

Regular Member
Joined
Nov 9, 2008
Messages
2,037
Location
St. Louis, MO
imported post

Yep, if I had any doubt before, I sure don't now. Its hard to argue with cold hard logic.
 

codename_47

Regular Member
Joined
Jun 16, 2008
Messages
376
Location
, ,
imported post

If you refuse a search and they do it anyway, you can sue their pants off, not to mention suppress any evidence they may find.
 

Citizen

Founder's Club Member
Joined
Nov 15, 2006
Messages
18,269
Location
Fairfax Co., VA
imported post

Carondalet wrote:
If this scenario occured, do you pick your brass up while waiting for the cops, ambulance and lawyer, or would you be tampering with "evidence"?

I'm guessing that it would be tampering with evidence. I'm not a lawyer, but I suspect evidence tampering applies to all evidence, not just the evidence of your attacker's crime.

More than one expert says not to adjust the scene, forensics being able to tell if tampering occurred.

Also, I imagine adjusting the scene would look rather guilty to a jury.
 

Citizen

Founder's Club Member
Joined
Nov 15, 2006
Messages
18,269
Location
Fairfax Co., VA
imported post

codename_47 wrote:
If you refuse a search and they do it anyway, you can sue their pants off, not to mention suppress any evidence they may find.

Cite, please.

Actually, I'll make it easy on you. Refusing a search does not mean one can't legally occur. There are reams and reams and reams of court opinions,sometimes slicing to the finest nuance, whether a warrantless search was legal or not.

Look up keywords like "probable cause" and "search incident to arrest" and "protective search" (for officer safety under Terry and related court opinions).

Refusing a search protects your 4th Amendment rights in case it turns out later that the officer in fact did not have sufficient legal justification to search.
 

codename_47

Regular Member
Joined
Jun 16, 2008
Messages
376
Location
, ,
imported post


Look up keywords like "probable cause" and "search incident to arrest" and "protective search"

Yeah, I've studied the Terry case and I know about inventory searches and search incident to arrest. Generally, though if they have to ask for permission, they lack PC.

I know if I refuse a search and one happens anyway, I'll be in court as the Plaintiff.
 

shad0wfax

Regular Member
Joined
Oct 11, 2008
Messages
1,069
Location
Spokane, Washington, USA
imported post

Carondalet wrote:
If this scenario occured, do you pick your brass up while waiting for the cops, ambulance and lawyer, or would you be tampering with "evidence"?
I'm not an attorney, but common sense and logic still apply and I think my answer is correct.

If you do that, you are only hurting yourself.Picking up spentbrasscould make it appear that you were attemptinging to flee the scene or planning to flee the scene. Furthermore, if there is any question of whether or not a crime occurred,tampering with the crime scene only makes things worse. (Not to mention it's most likely a criminal offense to do so.)

If the evidence may have indicated lawful self-defense, attempting to alter that evidencewill only hurt you by obscuring the aspects of the scene that indicate self-defense. If the prosecution felt that the evidence indicated a potential crime, tampering with that evidence will only solidify their case against you and may even indicate that you had intent to murder. Now all they need is a motive and they've got a murder case.

My non-legal $0.02
 

Citizen

Founder's Club Member
Joined
Nov 15, 2006
Messages
18,269
Location
Fairfax Co., VA
imported post

codename_47 wrote:
Look up keywords like "probable cause" and "search incident to arrest" and "protective search"

Yeah, I've studied the Terry case and I know about inventory searches and search incident to arrest. Generally, though if they have to ask for permission, they lack PC.

I know if I refuse a search and one happens anyway, I'll be in court as the Plaintiff.
Are you talking about suing in all cases of post-refusal search?

Or just when a search is requested, then refused, then the search occurs anyways?

I think what might be causing the confusion is related to the refusal. I'm operating on the premise that all searches would be refused, whether requested or not. Meaning if the officer started to search without asking permission, I'd still refuse. Now, don't nobody reading this misunderstand. This is very, very important. By "refuse" we mean "refuse consent." As in "refuse" is short for "refuse consent." As in"refuse" isshort for, "Officer, I do not consent to any searches or seizures."
 

codename_47

Regular Member
Joined
Jun 16, 2008
Messages
376
Location
, ,
imported post

Are you talking about suing in all cases of post-refusal search?

Or just when a search is requested, then refused, then the search occurs anyways?

It is late, so the differences here might escape me.

I'll just say that if I think my rights are getting violated, someone is going to be on the receiving end of a lawsuit, and I can't imagine very many instances with the police which involve a search, arrest, or seizure of any kind and me that won't end up with them on the receiving end of a 1983 suit.

In both of the above instances, I'd probably be in court and not as the defendant.
 
Top