In song form, for a quality tldw. Do watch the big one though, its chock full of good advice. Has added bonus with examples for insurance companies and civil suits too. Meta thought: Have an...
In song form, for a quality tldw. Do watch the big one though, its chock full of good advice.
Has added bonus with examples for insurance companies and civil suits too.
Meta thought: Have an autotomatic post which links to prior discussions on the duplicate post tag.
It seems a little sad to me that someone would feel the need to promote this sort of relationship with the people who (in theory) exist to protect the society they live in. All the times I've...
It seems a little sad to me that someone would feel the need to promote this sort of relationship with the people who (in theory) exist to protect the society they live in. All the times I've interacted with the police - especially in the instances when I've been the one in the wrong - they've been perfectly reasonable, helpful people. Talk to the police, they're just people doing their jobs and they don't want the paperwork of dealing with you unless they have no alternative. They're not trying to trick you. They're too busy for that. Lawyers like the guy in the video, on the other hand...
I would trust the police over a lawyer almost every time. I've never dealt with a lawyer who isn't as slippery as a fish. I know I can pay them to be slippery for me, but they're only ever really out for their own bank balances.
I am aware the way cops and justice works in the USA is rather different.
I used to be like you: I would walk up to officers and encouraged my kid to ask them for K9 stickers, and I still tell the kid if they really need help for the most part we have the privilege to...
I used to be like you: I would walk up to officers and encouraged my kid to ask them for K9 stickers, and I still tell the kid if they really need help for the most part we have the privilege to more than likely recieve help.
I have happily hired extremely helpful lawyers. Lawyers are like doctors and teachers and social workers in that truly have your best interest at heart, but lawyers are the only ones who ONLY work for you and not some middle outcome best for keeping peace/ conserve resources / good for everyone. I don't find them slimey at all, and they are experts at protecting my rights in all the ways in which things could go wrong. (My limited experiences are with civil eg reproductive rights family lawyer, real estate, employment and estate lawyers. Cant speak for criminal types but I will 100% get a lawyer before talking to police.)
Expecting them to be helpful is a privilege. The police do not work for us. They have no duty to protect -- A positive interaction is a privilege, not a given.
It's okay not to live in fear, but it's not okay to live in privileged ignorance. I would encourage everyone to watch this video
Edit: for nicer tone and civil vs criminal lawyers
Police are there to protect property, specifically that of the wealthy. For example, their priorities would prioritize a report of property damage at a mall above shots fired in a poor neighborhood.
Police are there to protect property, specifically that of the wealthy. For example, their priorities would prioritize a report of property damage at a mall above shots fired in a poor neighborhood.
My favorite take on having a lawyer working for just you comes from Tom Wolfe's The Bonfire of the Vanities: My spouse and I often like to joke about the "I'm not gonna be your friend. I'm gonna...
My favorite take on having a lawyer working for just you comes from Tom Wolfe's The Bonfire of the Vanities:
"What did I tell you the first time you walked into this office? I told you two things. I told you, 'Irene, I'm not gonna be your friend. I'm gonna be your lawyer. But I'm gonna do more for you than your friends.' And I said, 'Irene, you know why I do this? I do it for money.' And then I said, 'Irene, remember those two things.'"
My spouse and I often like to joke about the "I'm not gonna be your friend. I'm gonna be your lawyer. But I'm gonna do more for you than your friends," bit when it comes to hiring someone for a service. Sometimes there is something to be said for rational self-interest.
Sometimes it's very refreshing to have a relationship so well defined and honest, where you exchange money for actual genuine 100% in your maximized favor service. It's the opposite experience of...
Sometimes it's very refreshing to have a relationship so well defined and honest, where you exchange money for actual genuine 100% in your maximized favor service.
It's the opposite experience of hiring a real estate agent, for example. I can do without fake friendliness forever thank you.
I have never had a positive outcome from an encounter with the police. They have only ever managed to make a situation worse, and usually exponentially so. The best encounter I have had with...
I have never had a positive outcome from an encounter with the police. They have only ever managed to make a situation worse, and usually exponentially so. The best encounter I have had with police was at work, where they asked for video footage for a robbers who were never caught.
So, I have some questions for you. I wish to preface this by stating I am asking these in good faith, and I do not mean them as any kind of attack against you or your statement of personal...
All the times I've interacted with the police - especially in the instances when I've been the one in the wrong - they've been perfectly reasonable, helpful people.
So, I have some questions for you. I wish to preface this by stating I am asking these in good faith, and I do not mean them as any kind of attack against you or your statement of personal positive experience. I'm very happy for you that those encounters have been reasonable and not gone badly for you.
What country do you live in?
What is your: Race, Gender, Age or (or age range at time of police encounters).
What is (or was at the time of police encounters) your approximate income level, and did your appearance / clothing / vehicle / other reflect that.
I understand these can be personal and intrusive questions, and I also understand if you don't want to answer any of them - completely fine if you don't - but different answers to these questions can statistically lead to dramatically different outcomes with police encounters of otherwise the same initial nature.
People can have prejudices, police are people, and police are very often in the position to get both cynical and worn down into an adversarial mindset. Prejudicial judgement 'at a glance' based on the mentioned characteristics (Race/Gender/Age/Socioeconomic Status) can, and do, happen.
I have a similar view to the person you're replying to, though with some caveats, so I'm going to provide a data point. I would not say that I trust the police more than lawyers. And I see the one...
I have a similar view to the person you're replying to, though with some caveats, so I'm going to provide a data point. I would not say that I trust the police more than lawyers. And I see the one obvious huge problem - police has authority over you, so all it takes is one asshole to make your life hell by abusing that authority, these assholes just seem to be uncommon here. I would not talk to the police in a situation where jail time or other serious consequence is a possibility, like a bad traffic accident, because there being unpleasant and uncooperative is worth lessening the chance of a really bad outcome.
That said, all my encounters have gone really well, police in my country is generally relatively trusted and respected with the exception of traffic cops (with whom I have not had a bad experience either), they receive much more training than cops in the US and when they do overstep their authority, the General inspection of security forces is far from perfect, but it is at least a separate organization, so it's not "we investigated ourselves and concluded we did nothing wrong", the inspection seems to be equally disliked by the public and the police.
I am a white man in Czechia and the age range is 14 - 35. Perceived income level based on clothing is average, based on vehicle definitely low (I drive a 2008 Romanian car which was one of the cheapest vehicles on market at that time), though I likely sound at least somewhat educated and don't seem threatening.
The causes of my encounters include being caught drinking beer (that was the age of 14), being caught climbing the roofs of a large abandoned factory, routine traffic stops (like a drug/alcohol check when leaving a festival), trying to enter an illegal rave, communicating with police after our flat or later my car were broken into. I was also present when my weed smoking friend from Slovakia (who definitely looks like it) was checked in a random traffic stop and admitted to the cop to smoking 2 joints the night before after he got a (nonspecific) positive drug wipe test. The policeman was cool about it, called a car with a digital drug testing machine, rechecked and let him go when it was negative. During the illegal rave the police were cool as well, got phone numbers of the organizers to call if there were any noise complaints from a nearby village and let us be, they just didn't allow any more cars to enter. Some of the people there looked like stereotypical techno travelers (mildly dirty poor druggies) and the police surely knew there were drugs present and the bar may not have a license.
As for discrimination, I'm quite sure there is discrimination against the Roma, with other people I think it may be less about the color of your skin and more about just being a foreigner. Probably not as much nowadays, because now that everyone has a phone, videos of incidents tend to get published and make the rounds in media. We are a very strongly ethnically homogenous country, which on one hand means that every foreigner sticks out, but on the other hand significant racial divides similar to what exists in the US and to a smaller degree in other western countries do not exist here. Regarding prejudice, I'm not saying we're not racist, we certainly are, but it manifests differently in society, including police attitudes.
Poor neighborhoods with shootings do not exist here, so police protecting wealthy people instead of responding in those areas is a non-issue. There is surely some discrimination against the homeless or drug addicts (though also not always, I've heard a couple positive stories from a dude who literally shoots up in a bush in a public park - but I admit that surprised me).
We're just a relatively calm country where not much bad shit happens, which causes people to not always expect the worst, and that includes the police. I think that this in combination with police having enough training and not expecting violence makes a huge difference in their demeanor. I have friends of all looks (including people who look like they obviously use drugs) and ages, both sexes and a couple nationalities and generally their experience is similar. In general the attitude of policemen has been improving in the last two decades, which has been confirmed by a couple people on the force (different positions, one is a detective and the other the lowest type of street cop) that I know in person and trust. The 90s were a different matter.
The only infuriating experience we've had was when a couple people were fined for jaywalking.
I do realize all of this is a privilege. I just don't think it's a "white middle class man" privilege, it's a privilege of being born in a "boring" country where not much happens, and believe me, I appreciate how fucking great that is all the time.
Oh, absolutely. I'm looking at this from the perspective of someone who lives (and has lived all their life) in the USA. We have major issues with our police in terms of deeply ingrained societal...
We're just a relatively calm country where not much bad shit happens, which causes people to not always expect the worst, and that includes the police. I think that this in combination with police having enough training and not expecting violence makes a huge difference in their demeanor.
Oh, absolutely.
I'm looking at this from the perspective of someone who lives (and has lived all their life) in the USA. We have major issues with our police in terms of deeply ingrained societal problems and a self-reinforcing adversarial cycle. I know that there are other countries that do not have these entrenched issues with their police forces (or, perhaps some have them, but with different nuances and/or to much lesser extent of severity).
In terms of stuff to be judged by at a surface level, I'm almost at the very top of the racist/sexist/classist privilege pile. I'm a white male, 41 years old and by all appearances reasonably well-off middle class.
My personal experiences with police interactions have been mixed. Police, as I mentioned earlier, are people. Some are 'good', some are 'bad', most are both in different ways at different times because people are complicated balls of contradictions and motivations.
I've had a number of perfectly reasonable encounters with police, with officers being not just reasonable but polite, kind, and showing empathy. I've had more than a few that were bad to varying degrees. I've had one.. hmm, no, I forgot one there... I've had two interactions that were absolute terror and left me wondering if I was going to be abused, imprisoned on made up charges, or literally tortured. While I was abused (in my certainly biased view of these situations), the majority of it did not go beyond being made to stand naked for hours in the cold in one case, and being threatened with bodily harm in the other - threatened by an officer in full view and hearing of many other officers present, who showed such non-reaction to the event as to make me think it was perfectly normal for them.
Sigh. Sorry, bit of a personal tangent there. I'm glad other countries have better societal relationships with their police forces than we have here in the USA, and I'm sad for the unfortunate and entrenched issues I know of in the country I'm in.
Over here “police school” is a 4 year college level school with physical fitness requirements. After that there is a mandatory one year probation during which the future officer can be immediately...
Over here “police school” is a 4 year college level school with physical fitness requirements.
After that there is a mandatory one year probation during which the future officer can be immediately dismissed.
Our police is pretty well trusted and respected. People do try to bring ACAB shit here but they’re just copying US attitudes and failing.
I am genuinely happy you have a good societal relationship with your police. Also that they have quality educational standards for being a police officer. Those two things in combination are...
I am genuinely happy you have a good societal relationship with your police. Also that they have quality educational standards for being a police officer.
Those two things in combination are probably not coincidental.
I'll add another angle from a non-USA perspective, like @V17 has done. In the Netherlands, the police is a lot better from what I've heard (never had an interaction with a cop yet, as I'm young)....
I'll add another angle from a non-USA perspective, like @V17 has done.
In the Netherlands, the police is a lot better from what I've heard (never had an interaction with a cop yet, as I'm young). The difference is that dutch cops in general interact very matter-of-fact like and will most of the time try to de-escalate the situation instead of doing things like scream at a suspect like seems to be surprisingly common in the US. This results in the police generally being considered to be well trained and professional. There are still plenty of racist interactions with the police, but the average interaction like being pulled over for speeding is something that most people don't fear from what I've heard. I have heard that black people are more likely to be pulled over, but I don't think they feel they are in danger, just very frustrated. I think one of the main causes, is that the average person has a ~5% chance of having a weapon and, like I've previously mentioned, that police are well-trained to de-escalate situations. If the police do encounter someone with a weapon, the suspect is quickly handled, but still in a stern but controlled manner from what I've seen in clips. Now I'll add that I am a young, white native dutch male (who would have thunk it with my username), so I and most people I know are way more likely to have relatively positive experiences. I also don't live in a particularly busy place, so it's rare for me to even see a police car at all, let alone an interaction.
I used to think people with hostility towards the police were just inherently distrustful and primed against seeing them as people doing their jobs. If you have an antagonistic relationship with...
I used to think people with hostility towards the police were just inherently distrustful and primed against seeing them as people doing their jobs. If you have an antagonistic relationship with them, you'll see them as enemies, and all of my positive interactions with them seemed to run counter to that.
Then I had a run-in with my first "asshole cop" and I understood everyone else's perspective. People who can and will ruin your day or your future because they have the authority to, and they decided they don't like you for your face, voice, posture, whatever.
Being antagonistic is not really helpful either, but simply put there is 0 upside to communicating with the police in the US as things currently stand. The way the laws work, you or the cop could...
Being antagonistic is not really helpful either, but simply put there is 0 upside to communicating with the police in the US as things currently stand.
The way the laws work, you or the cop could be civil and reach some kind of net benefit, but that's only if both agree to behave that way. If the cop happens to NOT be acting that way you can literally wind up talking yourself into being guilty for something you did not do. The risk/reward isn't there.
Unfortunately, being a cop in the US is a mess of a problem. The laws don't really enforce the behavior we want, we have SERIOUS cultural issues within the police force, the prosecutors are too often rewarded for doing the same scummy things the cops are doing, and it's a job where almost everyone naturally hates you and you can literally have people try to kill you. And that's before getting into the outright corruption and abuse.
There's a lot of possible solutions that could be started on, but they usually get ignored while team "Thin Blue Line" argues with team "ACAB", while running up budgets because that's what you do mixed with bad metric chasing. It's a really sorry state of affairs.
I'll give my goto example: My co-worker lives in a very white affluent neighborhood outside of Philadelphia. White guy, wife and 2 kids, had his house got broken into, bunch of damage. Had called...
I'll give my goto example:
My co-worker lives in a very white affluent neighborhood outside of Philadelphia. White guy, wife and 2 kids, had his house got broken into, bunch of damage.
Had called police to get a report for the insurance company (as 0 expectations of actually catching burgler), and as they're documenting, a cop wanders off into the bathroom and starts rooting around into the medicine cabinet looking for an easy snatch or drug offense.
That was when he changed his tune to "don't trust the police."
It doesn't matter if 90% or more cops are great if they defend that really shitty 10%. That's why the phrase is "a few bad apples spoil the bunch" and not "eat the bad apples if you want any at all."
Yeah i'm not shocked to hear it sadly. I will say that part of the culture issue I alluded to is that there's a lot more good cops than people think who absolutely hate the bad apples, but it's...
Yeah i'm not shocked to hear it sadly. I will say that part of the culture issue I alluded to is that there's a lot more good cops than people think who absolutely hate the bad apples, but it's very very difficult to deal with the bad apples and the system incentivizes keeping them around and having them act horrifically. So even if you want to do something about them, you're often risking your career for it, and it's a coin flip at best if you accomplish anything.
This is precisely what I mean when I say I think it's sad that a lawyer would be lecturing people to not speak to the police. The police should be on the same side as the people they protect -...
This is precisely what I mean when I say I think it's sad that a lawyer would be lecturing people to not speak to the police. The police should be on the same side as the people they protect - even the people who have done wrong. There should only be one side.
I know you've already noted you are not in the US, but I wanted to post something to give some context to you and others about the difference between being white and being something else and...
Quote from the first story, to give folks the flavor of it.
"Pull the car over. Pull the Goddamn car over right now motherfucker." That is what this cop is screaming at me, and I think, this is how I die. This man is going to kill me.
Lest folks think this is sensationalized or being played up for views, this is consistent with other accounts I have read and stories I have heard firsthand from Black friends.
Thanks for this. I did know that Existing While Black is essentially a crime in some parts of the US, but it's useful to have more understanding. I don't believe for a moment there aren't racist...
Thanks for this. I did know that Existing While Black is essentially a crime in some parts of the US, but it's useful to have more understanding.
I don't believe for a moment there aren't racist cops in the UK too, and I have mentioned elsewhere that I am aware that as a white dude myself I am having things as easy as they can be.
Leading with the 'not in USA' perspective would be good, given usa-centric post. But even outside of that, consider game theory. Lets say for any minor infraction, say a traffic violation, there's...
Leading with the 'not in USA' perspective would be good, given usa-centric post.
But even outside of that, consider game theory.
Lets say for any minor infraction, say a traffic violation, there's a 60/40 chance you get ticketted or let off with a warning if you're polite but refuse to answer any real questions.
Now you talk. If the cop is in a good mood, you don't trigger any biases, and they're not meeting quota; you increase odds of getting off by 20%. But if they're in a bad mood or have a quota, you've increased the chances of getting an additional violation by 10% and odds of getting ticket by 20%.
You never know what mood the cop will be in, nor the actual odds at play. In absence of more information, this is a terrible bet. Especially since in this case, the worst case for not talking is a minor traffic violation, and the worst case is you accidentally admit to something more.
I'm a white guy in the USA. 20 years ago, I had rolling papers and a baggie of tobacco on the passenger seat cause I was broke at the time and rolling my own smokes was cheaper. Cop pulled me over for doing 45 in a 35. One of the first things he says after 'license and registration' was 'smells like pot,' even though there hadn't been any pot in the car in well over a year.
If I had consented to the subsequent search request, cop almost certainly would have 'found' a dime bag in my passenger seat. Instead, he wrote me a $50 fine and I didn't need to risk arrest due to a corrupt cop.
I have some friends in the police force. I cannot imagine any of them making more work for themselves by planting evidence while searching your car. It's so much paperwork, and for what? They just...
I have some friends in the police force. I cannot imagine any of them making more work for themselves by planting evidence while searching your car. It's so much paperwork, and for what? They just want you to stop being a bother. Speeding ticket, easy, job done, everyone can get on with their day. Arresting you is a lot of effort and there's not a lot of chance the prosecution service will be interested in a little (or even fairly large) bag of weed so the cops will just end up letting you go anyway, only with pages more paperwork to do first.
I don't think police have quotas in the UK. Police in the UK mostly have paperwork.
I once got tailgated hard by a big 4x4 while driving my tiny Fiat at night. As the car eventually overtook me I rolled down the window and gave them a two finger salute because it's scary when big cars do that. Turned out it was a cop in an unmarked car. They pulled me over and suggested that I shouldn't have done that on "his road" (dude was deputy chief constable for the county I was in, so one of the top few hundred cops in the country). I replied, politely, that I wouldn't have done anything if he hadn't been driving so aggressively and he admitted that was a fair point and apologised. We both went on our way.
Sure, I am a white dude. I know I am playing on easy mode, even though I have often presented as pretty alternative, at least when I was younger (on sight alone, anyone would guess at least a 50/50 chance I had a bag of weed in my pocket at any given time and to be fair, they'd be about right). But the police are just people. They're not psychopaths - and they do check for that during their training. The police don't exist to mete out "justice", that's the job of the courts. The police exist to "keep the peace" and that's not always the same thing as giving out tickets or arresting people. There's a reason most of our cops don't carry - and overwhelmingly don't want to carry - firearms. Peace and guns don't go together.
Of course I'm not saying UK cops are perfect by any means and I'm not saying you won't get a cop on a bad day, or who is just a bit of a dick, who will throw the book at you and I'm certain it's not as easy for everyone - but I don't think policing here is anywhere near as badly broken as I get the impression it is in the states. Which is what's sad about "don't talk to the police" - you should be able to talk to the police, safely! Even if you've done something wrong.
My buddy and his roomate spent a weekend in jail, only let out on $20k bail, because they had 1/4 ounce of weed and made an illegal left 100ft too close to a school and foolishly let the cop...
My buddy and his roomate spent a weekend in jail, only let out on $20k bail, because they had 1/4 ounce of weed and made an illegal left 100ft too close to a school and foolishly let the cop search their car (it was their weed they thought was well hidden).
Railroading people through the for-profit prison system for minor infactions is big business in the USA.
Never underestimate a small-town police force which is both bored and looking to rack up a few arrests for their resume.
Your cop friends must work in an area that actually audits and punishes abuse of power, instead of placing on unpaid leave for a week at most.
This is why “All cops are bastards.” Even your uncle, even your cousin, even your mom, even your brother, even your best friend, even your spouse, even me. Because even if they wouldn’t Do The Thing themselves, they will almost never rat out another officer who Does The Thing, much less stop it from happening.
That is key information. I am not in America either but I have seen this and other videos by both lawyers and a former police detective explaining in detail the ways they have to trick you into...
I am aware the way cops and justice works in the USA is rather different.
edit: I am not in America.
That is key information. I am not in America either but I have seen this and other videos by both lawyers and a former police detective explaining in detail the ways they have to trick you into getting in a lot of trouble even if you're innocent. Police detectives in particular make use of several techniques and tools that are not substantiated by science. Nevertheless, the word of a police detective is taken as gospel in court.
Similarly to @chocobean I have no contempt for lawyers. I'm not sure why should I have? I know we are all in different countries but the one time we needed a lawyer we essentially got the equivalent to an year worth of salary back from our health insurance. I also know quite a few lawyers, they're normal people. No better or worse than any other professionals.
I don't even have contempt for criminal defense lawyers because, when most people focus on those who defend awful or powerful people, I view them as an important counterbalace to guarantee their clients constitutional rights. I think about the millions of Black men that should not be in prison, a problem that would be even worse if not for criminal defense lawyers and public defenders.
I wouldn't say I have contempt for each and every cop either, but it would be naive of me to ignore systemic power imbalances and structures of oppression that might put me in a difficult position. As an Afro Latino male, that is a reality I cannot afford to ignore even in my own country.
It is sad they feel that need, but the need is real and police conduct creates it, not the person highlighting the problem. In the 12 years this video is up I have no doubt it has saved many...
It is sad they feel that need, but the need is real and police conduct creates it, not the person highlighting the problem. In the 12 years this video is up I have no doubt it has saved many people from undeserved jail time.
I'm curious what you see as motivation for the police.
I would trust the police over a lawyer almost every time. I've never dealt with a lawyer who isn't as slippery as a fish. I know I can pay them to be slippery for me, but they're only ever really out for their own bank balances.
I'm curious what you see as motivation for the police.
Lord Scarman, in his report on the 1981 Brixton riot, defined the "Queen's Peace" as the maintenance of "the normal state of society" (i.e., a "state of public tranquility") and defined it as the first duty of a police officer, ahead of the second duty of enforcing the law.
The Lord Chief Justice of England and Wales said, "The concept Queen's Peace as it now is, unbreakably linked with the common law, is arguably the most cherished of all the ideas from our medieval past, still resonating in the modern world.". He noted that the police officers take an oath to "cause the peace to be kept and preserved and prevent all offences against people and property."
I'm only had neutral to good experiences with cops, but you absolutely need to watch what you say to them. Especially if there's even the slightest chance you could be suspected of a crime.
I'm only had neutral to good experiences with cops, but you absolutely need to watch what you say to them. Especially if there's even the slightest chance you could be suspected of a crime.
In the US, even the police themselves will warn you not to talk to them: "You have the right to remain silent. Anything you say can and will be used against you in a court of law." This advice...
In the US, even the police themselves will warn you not to talk to them:
"You have the right to remain silent. Anything you say can and will be used against you in a court of law."
This advice does not necessarily apply in other countries, which may have different laws about how police may question you and use your statements.
But American cops absolutely will. It is their job to do so. That is not anti-cop; it's simply how the laws are written in the US.
This doesn't mean that you should be uncooperative or that you should refuse any interaction with a cop. But if you are a potential suspect, you should stay silent without a lawyer present because any word that comes out of your mouth is evidence.
It's more complicated than that. Those are part of your Miranda Rights, which are repeated to you when you are under arrest, and the point is to make it explicitly clear that can invoke your 5th...
It's more complicated than that. Those are part of your Miranda Rights, which are repeated to you when you are under arrest, and the point is to make it explicitly clear that can invoke your 5th amendment right not to testify against yourself.
So what about things you say before you've been read your Miranda Rights? They can be admissable in court, but if the court determines that you were coerced into saying them, they can be thrown out.
As a result, police do not tend to collect self-incriminating testimony before Miranda Rights are read out, and if it is collected, prosecutors usually don't use it, as it provides an easy in for the defense to crack in your case.
which may have different laws about how police may question you and use your statements.
Well, it's honestly more that in most countries you do not have the right to stay silent, and are obligated to testify the truth, even if against yourself.
It's more than just if you were coerced -- if you were in what's called a "custodial interrogation" (which you definitely are if you were arrested but even if you weren't arrested, you may have...
So what about things you say before you've been read your Miranda Rights? They can be admissable in court, but if the court determines that you were coerced into saying them, they can be thrown out.
It's more than just if you were coerced -- if you were in what's called a "custodial interrogation" (which you definitely are if you were arrested but even if you weren't arrested, you may have been if you couldn't freely leave), your defense lawyer can get anything you say without having been read your rights thrown out. They don't have to coerce you or even ask a question. The nature of your being in custody means that they need to read you your rights to use what you say in court -- and they usually do, because they're more than happy to coerce things out of you after you've been read your rights. Which is why you shouldn't talk to them and just ask for a lawyer in that scenario.
In the UK we have: "You do not have to say anything. But it may harm your defence if you do not mention when questioned something which you later rely on in court. Anything you do say may be given...
In the UK we have:
"You do not have to say anything. But it may harm your defence if you do not mention when questioned something which you later rely on in court. Anything you do say may be given in evidence."
While you have the legal right to not say anything, there can be downsides to silence.
I wrote a reddit post a few years ago that was basically just a recap of this guys book. #YSK The Dangers of Talking to Law Enforcement, Even When Innocent ##Why YSK: Innocent People Can Be Found...
I wrote a reddit post a few years ago that was basically just a recap of this guys book.
Confirmation Bias.
After someone comes to a conclusion, it is very difficult for them to admit that they were wrong. It is much easier and more comfortable for them to convince themselves that they did not make a mistake, and that their initial accusations were correct. Their memories will gladly cooperate in that effort. Even if they are not aware of how it is happening, they might recall nonexistent details to coincide with and corroborate the story they have already begun persuading themselves to believe.
In the case of Earl Ruffin, a police officer brought a copy of his types noted from his interview with him, which he had typed up during their interview three months earlier. But he changed those noted and added three more words that were handwritten that implicated Ruffin, and this was used at trial to convict him. He was exonerated some twenty years later only after DNA evidence exonerated him.
Imperfect Legal System. The methods law enforcement use to interrogate and gather information is surprisingly effective at getting innocent people to confess to crimes they did not commit. According to one study of 250 prisoners exonerated by DNA evidence, 16 percent of them made what’s called a false confession: admitting their commission of a crime that they did not commit.
You are imperfect.
Misspeaking or saying anything even slightly inaccurate can be devastating to your defense.
It helps convince the police they have the right suspect, making them less likely to pursue other leads.
The prosecutor can present that evidence to a jury, and the jury will be instructed that if they believe you knew your statement to the police was false, they are permitted to regard that knowing falsehood as evidence you are guilty.
You can be prosecuted for the criminal offense of lying to the government. You may be sent to prison for up to five years if you made a single statement to a federal agent that turns out to be false, if the prosecutor and jury could be persuaded that you knew it was inaccurate.
Overcriminalization
You can be convicted and imprisoned for committing a crime even if you had no criminal intent and had zero knowledge that your actions were forbidden by law. There are so many thousands of laws that keep being added to that even the Congressional Research Service[is no longer able to keep count of the is no longer able to keep count of the exact number of federal crimes. ^1
The deck is stacked against you. As Justice Breyer of the United States Supreme Court complained in 1998 -
“The complexity of modern federal criminal law, codified in several thousand sections of the United States Code and the virtually infinite variety of factual circumstances that might trigger an investigation into a possible violation of the law, make it difficult for anyone to know, in advance, just when a particular set of statements might later appear (to a prosecutor) to be relevant to some such investigation.” ^2
Just about everyone, whether they know it or not, is guilty of numerous felonies for which they could be prosecuted. One estimate is that the average American now commits approximately three felonies a day. ^3
In conclusion, as former United States Attorney General and Supreme Court Justice Robert Jackson put it:
[A]ny lawyer worth his salt will tell the suspect in no uncertain terms to make no statement to the police under any circumstances. ^4
In song form, for a quality tldw. Do watch the big one though, its chock full of good advice.
Has added bonus with examples for insurance companies and civil suits too.
Meta thought: Have an autotomatic post which links to prior discussions on the duplicate post tag.
The song form is just awesome. Made me miss Austin.
The song made me laugh, thank you for that.
It seems a little sad to me that someone would feel the need to promote this sort of relationship with the people who (in theory) exist to protect the society they live in. All the times I've interacted with the police - especially in the instances when I've been the one in the wrong - they've been perfectly reasonable, helpful people. Talk to the police, they're just people doing their jobs and they don't want the paperwork of dealing with you unless they have no alternative. They're not trying to trick you. They're too busy for that. Lawyers like the guy in the video, on the other hand...
I would trust the police over a lawyer almost every time. I've never dealt with a lawyer who isn't as slippery as a fish. I know I can pay them to be slippery for me, but they're only ever really out for their own bank balances.
I am aware the way cops and justice works in the USA is rather different.
edit: I am not in America.
I used to be like you: I would walk up to officers and encouraged my kid to ask them for K9 stickers, and I still tell the kid if they really need help for the most part we have the privilege to more than likely recieve help.
I have happily hired extremely helpful lawyers. Lawyers are like doctors and teachers and social workers in that truly have your best interest at heart, but lawyers are the only ones who ONLY work for you and not some middle outcome best for keeping peace/ conserve resources / good for everyone. I don't find them slimey at all, and they are experts at protecting my rights in all the ways in which things could go wrong. (My limited experiences are with civil eg reproductive rights family lawyer, real estate, employment and estate lawyers. Cant speak for criminal types but I will 100% get a lawyer before talking to police.)
Expecting them to be helpful is a privilege. The police do not work for us. They have no duty to protect -- A positive interaction is a privilege, not a given.
It's okay not to live in fear, but it's not okay to live in privileged ignorance. I would encourage everyone to watch this video
Edit: for nicer tone and civil vs criminal lawyers
Police are there to protect property, specifically that of the wealthy. For example, their priorities would prioritize a report of property damage at a mall above shots fired in a poor neighborhood.
My favorite take on having a lawyer working for just you comes from Tom Wolfe's The Bonfire of the Vanities:
My spouse and I often like to joke about the "I'm not gonna be your friend. I'm gonna be your lawyer. But I'm gonna do more for you than your friends," bit when it comes to hiring someone for a service. Sometimes there is something to be said for rational self-interest.
Sometimes it's very refreshing to have a relationship so well defined and honest, where you exchange money for actual genuine 100% in your maximized favor service.
It's the opposite experience of hiring a real estate agent, for example. I can do without fake friendliness forever thank you.
I have never had a positive outcome from an encounter with the police. They have only ever managed to make a situation worse, and usually exponentially so. The best encounter I have had with police was at work, where they asked for video footage for a robbers who were never caught.
So, I have some questions for you. I wish to preface this by stating I am asking these in good faith, and I do not mean them as any kind of attack against you or your statement of personal positive experience. I'm very happy for you that those encounters have been reasonable and not gone badly for you.
What country do you live in?
What is your: Race, Gender, Age or (or age range at time of police encounters).
What is (or was at the time of police encounters) your approximate income level, and did your appearance / clothing / vehicle / other reflect that.
I understand these can be personal and intrusive questions, and I also understand if you don't want to answer any of them - completely fine if you don't - but different answers to these questions can statistically lead to dramatically different outcomes with police encounters of otherwise the same initial nature.
People can have prejudices, police are people, and police are very often in the position to get both cynical and worn down into an adversarial mindset. Prejudicial judgement 'at a glance' based on the mentioned characteristics (Race/Gender/Age/Socioeconomic Status) can, and do, happen.
I have a similar view to the person you're replying to, though with some caveats, so I'm going to provide a data point. I would not say that I trust the police more than lawyers. And I see the one obvious huge problem - police has authority over you, so all it takes is one asshole to make your life hell by abusing that authority, these assholes just seem to be uncommon here. I would not talk to the police in a situation where jail time or other serious consequence is a possibility, like a bad traffic accident, because there being unpleasant and uncooperative is worth lessening the chance of a really bad outcome.
That said, all my encounters have gone really well, police in my country is generally relatively trusted and respected with the exception of traffic cops (with whom I have not had a bad experience either), they receive much more training than cops in the US and when they do overstep their authority, the General inspection of security forces is far from perfect, but it is at least a separate organization, so it's not "we investigated ourselves and concluded we did nothing wrong", the inspection seems to be equally disliked by the public and the police.
I am a white man in Czechia and the age range is 14 - 35. Perceived income level based on clothing is average, based on vehicle definitely low (I drive a 2008 Romanian car which was one of the cheapest vehicles on market at that time), though I likely sound at least somewhat educated and don't seem threatening.
The causes of my encounters include being caught drinking beer (that was the age of 14), being caught climbing the roofs of a large abandoned factory, routine traffic stops (like a drug/alcohol check when leaving a festival), trying to enter an illegal rave, communicating with police after our flat or later my car were broken into. I was also present when my weed smoking friend from Slovakia (who definitely looks like it) was checked in a random traffic stop and admitted to the cop to smoking 2 joints the night before after he got a (nonspecific) positive drug wipe test. The policeman was cool about it, called a car with a digital drug testing machine, rechecked and let him go when it was negative. During the illegal rave the police were cool as well, got phone numbers of the organizers to call if there were any noise complaints from a nearby village and let us be, they just didn't allow any more cars to enter. Some of the people there looked like stereotypical techno travelers (mildly dirty poor druggies) and the police surely knew there were drugs present and the bar may not have a license.
As for discrimination, I'm quite sure there is discrimination against the Roma, with other people I think it may be less about the color of your skin and more about just being a foreigner. Probably not as much nowadays, because now that everyone has a phone, videos of incidents tend to get published and make the rounds in media. We are a very strongly ethnically homogenous country, which on one hand means that every foreigner sticks out, but on the other hand significant racial divides similar to what exists in the US and to a smaller degree in other western countries do not exist here. Regarding prejudice, I'm not saying we're not racist, we certainly are, but it manifests differently in society, including police attitudes.
Poor neighborhoods with shootings do not exist here, so police protecting wealthy people instead of responding in those areas is a non-issue. There is surely some discrimination against the homeless or drug addicts (though also not always, I've heard a couple positive stories from a dude who literally shoots up in a bush in a public park - but I admit that surprised me).
We're just a relatively calm country where not much bad shit happens, which causes people to not always expect the worst, and that includes the police. I think that this in combination with police having enough training and not expecting violence makes a huge difference in their demeanor. I have friends of all looks (including people who look like they obviously use drugs) and ages, both sexes and a couple nationalities and generally their experience is similar. In general the attitude of policemen has been improving in the last two decades, which has been confirmed by a couple people on the force (different positions, one is a detective and the other the lowest type of street cop) that I know in person and trust. The 90s were a different matter.
The only infuriating experience we've had was when a couple people were fined for jaywalking.
I do realize all of this is a privilege. I just don't think it's a "white middle class man" privilege, it's a privilege of being born in a "boring" country where not much happens, and believe me, I appreciate how fucking great that is all the time.
Oh, absolutely.
I'm looking at this from the perspective of someone who lives (and has lived all their life) in the USA. We have major issues with our police in terms of deeply ingrained societal problems and a self-reinforcing adversarial cycle. I know that there are other countries that do not have these entrenched issues with their police forces (or, perhaps some have them, but with different nuances and/or to much lesser extent of severity).
In terms of stuff to be judged by at a surface level, I'm almost at the very top of the racist/sexist/classist privilege pile. I'm a white male, 41 years old and by all appearances reasonably well-off middle class.
My personal experiences with police interactions have been mixed. Police, as I mentioned earlier, are people. Some are 'good', some are 'bad', most are both in different ways at different times because people are complicated balls of contradictions and motivations.
I've had a number of perfectly reasonable encounters with police, with officers being not just reasonable but polite, kind, and showing empathy. I've had more than a few that were bad to varying degrees. I've had one.. hmm, no, I forgot one there... I've had two interactions that were absolute terror and left me wondering if I was going to be abused, imprisoned on made up charges, or literally tortured. While I was abused (in my certainly biased view of these situations), the majority of it did not go beyond being made to stand naked for hours in the cold in one case, and being threatened with bodily harm in the other - threatened by an officer in full view and hearing of many other officers present, who showed such non-reaction to the event as to make me think it was perfectly normal for them.
Sigh. Sorry, bit of a personal tangent there. I'm glad other countries have better societal relationships with their police forces than we have here in the USA, and I'm sad for the unfortunate and entrenched issues I know of in the country I'm in.
Over here “police school” is a 4 year college level school with physical fitness requirements.
After that there is a mandatory one year probation during which the future officer can be immediately dismissed.
Our police is pretty well trusted and respected. People do try to bring ACAB shit here but they’re just copying US attitudes and failing.
I am genuinely happy you have a good societal relationship with your police. Also that they have quality educational standards for being a police officer.
Those two things in combination are probably not coincidental.
I'll add another angle from a non-USA perspective, like @V17 has done.
In the Netherlands, the police is a lot better from what I've heard (never had an interaction with a cop yet, as I'm young). The difference is that dutch cops in general interact very matter-of-fact like and will most of the time try to de-escalate the situation instead of doing things like scream at a suspect like seems to be surprisingly common in the US. This results in the police generally being considered to be well trained and professional. There are still plenty of racist interactions with the police, but the average interaction like being pulled over for speeding is something that most people don't fear from what I've heard. I have heard that black people are more likely to be pulled over, but I don't think they feel they are in danger, just very frustrated. I think one of the main causes, is that the average person has a ~5% chance of having a weapon and, like I've previously mentioned, that police are well-trained to de-escalate situations. If the police do encounter someone with a weapon, the suspect is quickly handled, but still in a stern but controlled manner from what I've seen in clips. Now I'll add that I am a young, white native dutch male (who would have thunk it with my username), so I and most people I know are way more likely to have relatively positive experiences. I also don't live in a particularly busy place, so it's rare for me to even see a police car at all, let alone an interaction.
I used to think people with hostility towards the police were just inherently distrustful and primed against seeing them as people doing their jobs. If you have an antagonistic relationship with them, you'll see them as enemies, and all of my positive interactions with them seemed to run counter to that.
Then I had a run-in with my first "asshole cop" and I understood everyone else's perspective. People who can and will ruin your day or your future because they have the authority to, and they decided they don't like you for your face, voice, posture, whatever.
Being antagonistic is not really helpful either, but simply put there is 0 upside to communicating with the police in the US as things currently stand.
The way the laws work, you or the cop could be civil and reach some kind of net benefit, but that's only if both agree to behave that way. If the cop happens to NOT be acting that way you can literally wind up talking yourself into being guilty for something you did not do. The risk/reward isn't there.
Unfortunately, being a cop in the US is a mess of a problem. The laws don't really enforce the behavior we want, we have SERIOUS cultural issues within the police force, the prosecutors are too often rewarded for doing the same scummy things the cops are doing, and it's a job where almost everyone naturally hates you and you can literally have people try to kill you. And that's before getting into the outright corruption and abuse.
There's a lot of possible solutions that could be started on, but they usually get ignored while team "Thin Blue Line" argues with team "ACAB", while running up budgets because that's what you do mixed with bad metric chasing. It's a really sorry state of affairs.
I'll give my goto example:
My co-worker lives in a very white affluent neighborhood outside of Philadelphia. White guy, wife and 2 kids, had his house got broken into, bunch of damage.
Had called police to get a report for the insurance company (as 0 expectations of actually catching burgler), and as they're documenting, a cop wanders off into the bathroom and starts rooting around into the medicine cabinet looking for an easy snatch or drug offense.
That was when he changed his tune to "don't trust the police."
It doesn't matter if 90% or more cops are great if they defend that really shitty 10%. That's why the phrase is "a few bad apples spoil the bunch" and not "eat the bad apples if you want any at all."
Yeah i'm not shocked to hear it sadly. I will say that part of the culture issue I alluded to is that there's a lot more good cops than people think who absolutely hate the bad apples, but it's very very difficult to deal with the bad apples and the system incentivizes keeping them around and having them act horrifically. So even if you want to do something about them, you're often risking your career for it, and it's a coin flip at best if you accomplish anything.
This is precisely what I mean when I say I think it's sad that a lawyer would be lecturing people to not speak to the police. The police should be on the same side as the people they protect - even the people who have done wrong. There should only be one side.
I know you've already noted you are not in the US, but I wanted to post something to give some context to you and others about the difference between being white and being something else and interacting with the police in the US. This excellent video series from Amber Ruffin is a pretty gentle introduction.
Quote from the first story, to give folks the flavor of it.
Lest folks think this is sensationalized or being played up for views, this is consistent with other accounts I have read and stories I have heard firsthand from Black friends.
Thanks for this. I did know that Existing While Black is essentially a crime in some parts of the US, but it's useful to have more understanding.
I don't believe for a moment there aren't racist cops in the UK too, and I have mentioned elsewhere that I am aware that as a white dude myself I am having things as easy as they can be.
Leading with the 'not in USA' perspective would be good, given usa-centric post.
But even outside of that, consider game theory.
Lets say for any minor infraction, say a traffic violation, there's a 60/40 chance you get ticketted or let off with a warning if you're polite but refuse to answer any real questions.
Now you talk. If the cop is in a good mood, you don't trigger any biases, and they're not meeting quota; you increase odds of getting off by 20%. But if they're in a bad mood or have a quota, you've increased the chances of getting an additional violation by 10% and odds of getting ticket by 20%.
You never know what mood the cop will be in, nor the actual odds at play. In absence of more information, this is a terrible bet. Especially since in this case, the worst case for not talking is a minor traffic violation, and the worst case is you accidentally admit to something more.
I'm a white guy in the USA. 20 years ago, I had rolling papers and a baggie of tobacco on the passenger seat cause I was broke at the time and rolling my own smokes was cheaper. Cop pulled me over for doing 45 in a 35. One of the first things he says after 'license and registration' was 'smells like pot,' even though there hadn't been any pot in the car in well over a year.
If I had consented to the subsequent search request, cop almost certainly would have 'found' a dime bag in my passenger seat. Instead, he wrote me a $50 fine and I didn't need to risk arrest due to a corrupt cop.
I have some friends in the police force. I cannot imagine any of them making more work for themselves by planting evidence while searching your car. It's so much paperwork, and for what? They just want you to stop being a bother. Speeding ticket, easy, job done, everyone can get on with their day. Arresting you is a lot of effort and there's not a lot of chance the prosecution service will be interested in a little (or even fairly large) bag of weed so the cops will just end up letting you go anyway, only with pages more paperwork to do first.
I don't think police have quotas in the UK. Police in the UK mostly have paperwork.
I once got tailgated hard by a big 4x4 while driving my tiny Fiat at night. As the car eventually overtook me I rolled down the window and gave them a two finger salute because it's scary when big cars do that. Turned out it was a cop in an unmarked car. They pulled me over and suggested that I shouldn't have done that on "his road" (dude was deputy chief constable for the county I was in, so one of the top few hundred cops in the country). I replied, politely, that I wouldn't have done anything if he hadn't been driving so aggressively and he admitted that was a fair point and apologised. We both went on our way.
Sure, I am a white dude. I know I am playing on easy mode, even though I have often presented as pretty alternative, at least when I was younger (on sight alone, anyone would guess at least a 50/50 chance I had a bag of weed in my pocket at any given time and to be fair, they'd be about right). But the police are just people. They're not psychopaths - and they do check for that during their training. The police don't exist to mete out "justice", that's the job of the courts. The police exist to "keep the peace" and that's not always the same thing as giving out tickets or arresting people. There's a reason most of our cops don't carry - and overwhelmingly don't want to carry - firearms. Peace and guns don't go together.
Of course I'm not saying UK cops are perfect by any means and I'm not saying you won't get a cop on a bad day, or who is just a bit of a dick, who will throw the book at you and I'm certain it's not as easy for everyone - but I don't think policing here is anywhere near as badly broken as I get the impression it is in the states. Which is what's sad about "don't talk to the police" - you should be able to talk to the police, safely! Even if you've done something wrong.
My buddy and his roomate spent a weekend in jail, only let out on $20k bail, because they had 1/4 ounce of weed and made an illegal left 100ft too close to a school and foolishly let the cop search their car (it was their weed they thought was well hidden).
Railroading people through the for-profit prison system for minor infactions is big business in the USA.
Never underestimate a small-town police force which is both bored and looking to rack up a few arrests for their resume.
Your cop friends must work in an area that actually audits and punishes abuse of power, instead of placing on unpaid leave for a week at most.
Yes, its sad. But part of the reason ACAB is because the very job itself is
They’re also in Britain, which had a different path to police development versus the United States or Continental Europe.
They are, but ACAB has its origins in the UK, which should be obvious because 'bastard' isn't nearly as popular in the USA.
That is key information. I am not in America either but I have seen this and other videos by both lawyers and a former police detective explaining in detail the ways they have to trick you into getting in a lot of trouble even if you're innocent. Police detectives in particular make use of several techniques and tools that are not substantiated by science. Nevertheless, the word of a police detective is taken as gospel in court.
Similarly to @chocobean I have no contempt for lawyers. I'm not sure why should I have? I know we are all in different countries but the one time we needed a lawyer we essentially got the equivalent to an year worth of salary back from our health insurance. I also know quite a few lawyers, they're normal people. No better or worse than any other professionals.
I don't even have contempt for criminal defense lawyers because, when most people focus on those who defend awful or powerful people, I view them as an important counterbalace to guarantee their clients constitutional rights. I think about the millions of Black men that should not be in prison, a problem that would be even worse if not for criminal defense lawyers and public defenders.
I wouldn't say I have contempt for each and every cop either, but it would be naive of me to ignore systemic power imbalances and structures of oppression that might put me in a difficult position. As an Afro Latino male, that is a reality I cannot afford to ignore even in my own country.
It is sad they feel that need, but the need is real and police conduct creates it, not the person highlighting the problem. In the 12 years this video is up I have no doubt it has saved many people from undeserved jail time.
I'm curious what you see as motivation for the police.
The police primarily exist to keep the peace.
I meant an individual police officer, as a person. Like how you were describing lawyers.
I'm only had neutral to good experiences with cops, but you absolutely need to watch what you say to them. Especially if there's even the slightest chance you could be suspected of a crime.
In the US, even the police themselves will warn you not to talk to them:
"You have the right to remain silent. Anything you say can and will be used against you in a court of law."
This advice does not necessarily apply in other countries, which may have different laws about how police may question you and use your statements.
But American cops absolutely will. It is their job to do so. That is not anti-cop; it's simply how the laws are written in the US.
This doesn't mean that you should be uncooperative or that you should refuse any interaction with a cop. But if you are a potential suspect, you should stay silent without a lawyer present because any word that comes out of your mouth is evidence.
It's more complicated than that. Those are part of your Miranda Rights, which are repeated to you when you are under arrest, and the point is to make it explicitly clear that can invoke your 5th amendment right not to testify against yourself.
So what about things you say before you've been read your Miranda Rights? They can be admissable in court, but if the court determines that you were coerced into saying them, they can be thrown out.
As a result, police do not tend to collect self-incriminating testimony before Miranda Rights are read out, and if it is collected, prosecutors usually don't use it, as it provides an easy in for the defense to crack in your case.
Well, it's honestly more that in most countries you do not have the right to stay silent, and are obligated to testify the truth, even if against yourself.
It's more than just if you were coerced -- if you were in what's called a "custodial interrogation" (which you definitely are if you were arrested but even if you weren't arrested, you may have been if you couldn't freely leave), your defense lawyer can get anything you say without having been read your rights thrown out. They don't have to coerce you or even ask a question. The nature of your being in custody means that they need to read you your rights to use what you say in court -- and they usually do, because they're more than happy to coerce things out of you after you've been read your rights. Which is why you shouldn't talk to them and just ask for a lawyer in that scenario.
In the UK we have:
"You do not have to say anything. But it may harm your defence if you do not mention when questioned something which you later rely on in court. Anything you do say may be given in evidence."
While you have the legal right to not say anything, there can be downsides to silence.
I wrote a reddit post a few years ago that was basically just a recap of this guys book.
#YSK The Dangers of Talking to Law Enforcement, Even When Innocent
##Why YSK: Innocent People Can Be Found Guilty, And Overcriminalization (US)
###Innocent People Can Be Found Guilty
Police can mistakenly implicate innocent people because police aren't perfect.
After someone comes to a conclusion, it is very difficult for them to admit that they were wrong. It is much easier and more comfortable for them to convince themselves that they did not make a mistake, and that their initial accusations were correct. Their memories will gladly cooperate in that effort. Even if they are not aware of how it is happening, they might recall nonexistent details to coincide with and corroborate the story they have already begun persuading themselves to believe.
In the case of Earl Ruffin, a police officer brought a copy of his types noted from his interview with him, which he had typed up during their interview three months earlier. But he changed those noted and added three more words that were handwritten that implicated Ruffin, and this was used at trial to convict him. He was exonerated some twenty years later only after DNA evidence exonerated him.
You are imperfect.
Misspeaking or saying anything even slightly inaccurate can be devastating to your defense.
It helps convince the police they have the right suspect, making them less likely to pursue other leads.
The prosecutor can present that evidence to a jury, and the jury will be instructed that if they believe you knew your statement to the police was false, they are permitted to regard that knowing falsehood as evidence you are guilty.
You can be prosecuted for the criminal offense of lying to the government. You may be sent to prison for up to five years if you made a single statement to a federal agent that turns out to be false, if the prosecutor and jury could be persuaded that you knew it was inaccurate.
Overcriminalization
You can be convicted and imprisoned for committing a crime even if you had no criminal intent and had zero knowledge that your actions were forbidden by law. There are so many thousands of laws that keep being added to that even the Congressional Research Service[is no longer able to keep count of the is no longer able to keep count of the exact number of federal crimes. ^1
The deck is stacked against you. As Justice Breyer of the United States Supreme Court complained in 1998 -
Just about everyone, whether they know it or not, is guilty of numerous felonies for which they could be prosecuted. One estimate is that the average American now commits approximately three felonies a day. ^3
In conclusion, as former United States Attorney General and Supreme Court Justice Robert Jackson put it:
^(1 Paul Rosenzweig, "The Over-Criminalization of Social and Economic Conduct," Champion, August 2003, 28.)
^(2 Rubin v. United States, 252 U.S. 990 (1998)^) ^Breyer, ^J. ^dissenting ^from ^denial ^of ^certiorari
^(3 Harvery Silverglate, Three Felonies a Day: How the Feds Target the Innocent (New York: Encounter Books, 2009)^.)
^(4 Former United States Attorney General and Supreme Court Justice Robert Jackson, Watts v. Indiana, 338 U.S. 49, 59 (1949)^) ^((concurring opinion)^)