Don't talk to the police...

[In_God_We_Trust]

as much as I agree that Mass Sucks, Im going with baystate on this one. If someone is lying dead in my house, gun in hand broken window, etc. I do not believe my local pd would have me walking out of there in cuffs. Would they want you to come in for questioning? Sure. But when you tell them your waiting for a lawyer, etc. I dont see them cuffing you and taking you away.

if this guy got off in New Bedford a few years ago...

http://www.southcoasttoday.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20070322/NEWS/703220342

Take a look at this spin:

http://www.southcoasttoday.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20070327/NEWS/703270352




And then this quote from the following article:
http://www.southcoasttoday.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20070327/NEWS/703270343

The family of the slain burglar, Frank Pereira Jr., was just as emotional. His father, sisters and longtime companion wept at the verdict. As they exited the courtroom, sister Missy Cimbron yelled "You (expletive deleted) murderer" in Mr. Chieppa's direction. Once outside, they pleaded with a victim witness advocate for further legal recourse.

"No matter the circumstances, nobody deserves to die over property," said Marcey Lugo, Mr. Pereira's companion. The couple has a daughter, who is 6 years old.

When you f*ck with the wrong bull, you get the horns. He robbed the wrong person that night: Yes, there are people in the Kommonwealth that have firearms, and will use them to protect their lives.

Point is: Don't say a word and ask for a lawyer! So, you go to jail for the night....better than life.

 

[mark056]

Oh yeah...his advise is correct. But I just do not care for someone who claims to be a LEO making the comment "the police are not your friends". .

What we have here is typical police arrogance boys and girls. There are plenty of reasons not to like Mas Ayoob (he did not leave a favorable personal impression with me the one and only time that I met him but I have read his articles for years), and there are reasons that some do not like his advice and there may be some validity in that but we need to acknowledge that he was a pioneer in the field of analyzing armed encounters with the police and the dynamics of lethal force, before, during and after a shooting. Some of what he has written has been superseded by those who have followed him, just like in any other field. But what we have here is the fact that Mas Ayoob is in fact a bona fide sworn officer of the law in the state of New Hampshire . The major problem for Half-Cocked and others of his ilk is that Ayoob is a part-time police officer in an extremely small department; less than ten officers part-time and full-time and a department that doesn't experience a lot of violent crime. That is because of the demographics of the area. There are parts of NYC which have low crime rates as well, so knocking somebody because they mainly respond to barking dog complaints is hardly fair, because the next traffic stop could concievably be one where a heavily armed felony suspect chooses to engage in a firefight. If that were to happen, the perpetrator wouldn't distinguish between a "hobby cop" and a full-timer, he or she would just see a cop. I wonder what Half-Cocked feelings would be, if God forbid, Captain Ayoob were to be killed in the line of duty during one of his "hobby cop" tours of duty?

Part- time coppers irk a lot of the boys and girls who wear blue uniforms and carry badges and get paid for it, don't ya know? First, part-time cops are not seen as being "real" even though they have to undergo the same standards of training as a full timer in all jurisdictions that I am familiar with, second and probably more importantly they are seen as threats to precious overtime that seems to be the the reason many desire to be LEOs these days especially in those departments with very generous salaries and OT pay scales. I suppose that attitude is not dissimilar from persons engaged in another profession who look with disdain at those who " give it away for free" instead of paying for it.

I appreciate Half-Cocked's candor and on a personal level I bear him no ill will and find myself in agreement with many of the things that he has stated on this forum in the years that I have been a member of this forum. His presence here is a positive force in my opinion and he offers a perspective that is often times helpful in trying to understand a particular issue. His job is necessary for the maintenance of societal order. One has to respect the fact that many if not most LEOs are just as dedicated to serving their communities as they are furthering their own financial gain through overtime and paid details (especially flagman details here in the PRM) and there is no doubt that they lay their lives on the line everytime they get in their cruisers to go out on patrol even if it is just down the street to the nearest Dunkin' Donuts. On one level none of us can ever understand what it is like to be a police officer unless one has actually been on the Job; I will concede that. I will also state, however, that after working for the pampered princes and princesses of the Commonwealth and dealing on a regular basis with their municipal counter-parts for over a decade now, I can only reiterate the basic theme of this thread which is: "The police are not your friends."


Mark L.

P.S. I thought it interesting that the law professor had a police officer reiterate the points made in the lecture. So here we have a "real cop" saying the same thing.

 

[Baystatesuks]

Help me help you!

In this situation and if you look at it from a defense attorney perspective, the police are not your friends. They work for the prosecution. Because the prosecution bears the burden of proving guilt, the police will be helping them and not you, i.e., if you are found guilty, the police helped get that verdict in some way.

Keep in mind that anything you say to the police will not (and I repeat) will not help you at trial. Even the most mundane things can be taken out of context and used against you. So HUSH UP out there...and join the Scrivener Tough Love Club.

While we can all opine about the ethics of trying to get a "guilty" person found not guilty, this result is what defense attorneys are hired to do.

 

[Half Cocked]

Mark,

I appreciate your post but you are a little off. My personal dislike for Ayoob is just that, personal. The fact of him being a part-time officer is very low on the list of reasons.

My original post was not out of arrogance it was in making fun of Ayoob. As I stated he could have made the same point worded in a different way.

If there was any perceived arrogance in the statement I apologize.

 

[drgrant]

Oh yeah...his advise is correct. But I just do not care for someone who claims to be a LEO making the comment "the police are not your friends". The same could be said differently.

I have run into LEOs that have basically said the same thing "Under those circumstances, a cop is not your friend".

-Mike

 

[Half Cocked]

Mark,

I have never disputed the substance of the statement.

It is like saying that a woman is a "fat pig" as opposed to that she is "overweight".

 

[In_God_We_Trust]

Hu?

But I just do not care for someone who claims to be a LEO making the comment "the police are not your friends". The same could be said differently.

Apparently...were you half cocked when you watched the video. If you have been arrested, either being pulled over for speeding or a serious crime, a Police Officer IS NOT YOUR FRIEND. That is like saying, in the example they used, that the IRS wanted to have a friendly discussion on a tax return. Are you kucking futs???!!!

By speaking to a LEO after being arrested, YOU ARE DOING THEIR JOB FOR THEM. They need to do little investigative work, and all of the preconceived notions and prejudices about the crime you have committed and assumptions about your character will bury you jack, period.

All I have to say is "Anything you say may be used against you."
What that really should say is "Anything you say WILL be used against you."

 

[Half Cocked]

Apparently...were you half cocked when you watched the video. If you have been arrested, either being pulled over for speeding or a serious crime, a Police Officer IS NOT YOUR FRIEND. That is like saying, in the example they used, that the IRS wanted to have a friendly discussion on a tax return. Are you kucking futs???!!!

By speaking to a LEO after being arrested, YOU ARE DOING THEIR JOB FOR THEM. They need to do little investigative work, and all of the preconceived notions and prejudices about the crime you have committed and assumptions about your character will bury you jack, period.

All I have to say is "Anything you say may be used against you."
What that really should say is "Anything you say WILL be used against you."

Ummm....apparently you have not been understanding what I was saying. I never disagreed with that!

 

[jdubois]

It is like saying that a woman is a "fat pig" as opposed to that she is "overweight".

If you're trying to help and she won't do anything about controlling her weight unless you call her a "fat pig", then calling her "overweight" won't do any good. In other words, if Ayoob said, "Remember that a police officer responding to a shooting is not necessarily going to have the same goals as the shooter does," it may be kinder, but the point is just not going to sink home.

 

[Rob Boudrie]

The police will talk to you as if they are your friend and want to help

If you get a chance, read the classic interrogation textbook by Reed and Inbau covering this very issue and others including the importance of "minimizing the moral seriousness of the offense", offering a "reassuring hand on the shoulder", "making sure the interrogation takes place in a atmosphere that does not remind the suspect of the custodial nature of his situation"; and the fact that the officer should be prepared for the sense of betrayal when the information thusly gathered is used to extract the maximum penalty possibility.

 

[clinotus]

Blood in the water....

 

[45 acp]

A quote from a superior leo and a very good friend and shooting partner. "More people talk themselves into jail than not. The less said to the us when dealing with the police the better. If you can't shrug, nod. If you can't nod then answer in one word answers yes and no." His quote not mine.

 

[center442]

In the case in question, Chieppa's attorney was Kevin Reddington. He's a very prominent criminal defense attorney (and a life member of the NRA, btw). That defense likely cost Chieppa well north of $75k.

You are close to the cost; about 100k. BTW, I didn't know that Reddington was an NRA member. In any event, if I am ever "detained" in any fashion for a defensive use of a firearm he would be the guy I would call.

 

[Half Cocked]

One of Kevin's recent self defense cases..

http://www.boston.com/news/local/articles/2007/08/18/cape_doctor_will_face_no_charge/

 

[namedpipes]

It is pretty simple...you shoot and kill someone and you will be arrested.

When you excercise your right to not speak until you have consulted with your attorney (which is fine), the police do not have the facts that would determine whether it was self defense or not. They are left with not much of a choice than to arrest you. This is a position you put the police in by choosing not to talk. This is fine and in many cases smart but please prepare your self for the arrest and subsequent monetary and emotional nightmare.

Self defense is not a statutorial right to shoot someone. It is a defense which is often left up to a jury to decide in all but the most blatent and obvious cases.

I've been reading quietly, but I have to comment on this.

SD does not give you the right as such to kill your attacker. Only if necessary to protect yourself and others. And even then, only if you didn't start it. I get that.

On the other hand, becoming a victim of a violent crime through no fault of your own should not place an onus on you to defend yourself.

One number in a post some back was $75k. I don't have $75k to drop because some jerkwad decided he wanted my dvd player. Do you? I just paid off my car loan at long last and I feel like the weight of the world is off my shoulders.

You're basically saying, the LEO on the scene shouldn't make the call to let you off the hook. Fine. But to jump from that to, put the victim on trial is assinine. Probably accurate, but assinine.

Respectfully, it IS the job of the police, if not the LEO on scene, then certainly the detective(s) after the fact, to determine if you actually did something before prosecuting you.

NOBODY in a SD situation in their own home, should ever be prosecuted for killing an intruder because "the jury ought to decide that one." That is presumption of guilt.

And btw, if the courts would actually convict real criminals and keep them locked up, the siutation wouldn't be as likely to come up in the first place, would it. And then our LEOs would HAVE the time and resources to be effective.

This represents my opinion on what ought to be. I swear I'd have "the big one" if my "ought-to-be" were even on the same planet as reality.

 

[M1911]

This represents my opinion on what ought to be.

That, and $3.50, will get you latte.

It isn't a foregone conclusion that you would be prosecuted after a self defense shooting in your home. As the link above showed, Dr. Gryboski was not prosecuted. Her defense was undoubtedly far less than $100k. Then again, I'm sure it wasn't cheap

Chieppa was actually outside of his home when the shooting took place.

Plan for the worst and hope for the best. Assume you will be arrested. Assume that you'll have to empty your savings and you may be paying your attorney for a long time.

 

[Half Cocked]

You're basically saying, the LEO on the scene shouldn't make the call to let you off the hook. Fine. But to jump from that to, put the victim on trial is assinine. Probably accurate, but assinine.

Respectfully, it IS the job of the police, if not the LEO on scene, then certainly the detective(s) after the fact, to determine if you actually did something before prosecuting you.

NOBODY in a SD situation in their own home, should ever be prosecuted for killing an intruder because "the jury ought to decide that one." That is presumption of guilt.

I think you missed the point of my post which is in line with the topic of this thread.

If you do not talk to the police at the scene how are they to make a determination that it was self defense and not murder? That is it!

 

[codenamepaul]

The inference (half-cocked) you make is that if you do talk, then the police will be able to make a determination of SD and let the victim walk. I don't believe (and don't believe you do either) that this would be the case. Talk or no, the shooter is going to jail that night, so why screw yourself?

 

[rscalzo]

Respectfully, it IS the job of the police, if not the LEO on scene, then certainly the detective(s) after the fact, to determine if you actually did something before prosecuting you.

More accurately it will be the determination of the Prosecutor's Office and not the local LEA if charges are to be filed in a most civilian shootings. As far as the shooter spending the night in a cell, that's BS. None of our civilian shootings involved incarceration. Unless there is a reasonable suspicion of a act other than a self defense they aren't seeing the inside of a cell. Short of probable cause to suspect a murder, they go home.

 

[Half Cocked]

The inference (half-cocked) you make is that if you do talk, then the police will be able to make a determination of SD and let the victim walk. I don't believe (and don't believe you do either) that this would be the case. Talk or no, the shooter is going to jail that night, so why screw yourself?

Not necessarily....depending upon the situation...the shooter may not get arrested. I have seen situations of self defense where the person has not been arrested and never charged.

It depends on the situation.

My only point in this was that if you do not talk I can almost guarantee that you will be arrested..that is all.

I just want to make people mentally prepared for the fact that even in the most obvious self defense situation you will be arrested if you chose not to speak (Which is your right to do...and I do not have a problem with that) and not to blame the police for arresting you or criticize them for arresting you. You are excercising your rights and the police are excercising theirs.

If it was good self defense it will hopefully work itself out.

 

[doobie]

Never talk to the police without a lawyer

http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-4097602514885833865&q=source:013978398324611204467&hl=en

http://video.google.com/googleplayer.swf?docid=6014022229458915912&hl=en&fs=true

Two google videos that explain why you should never talk to a police officer without a lawyer.

 

[doobie]

I hate the fact that you can't treat a public servant like another human; you have to behave as if they're going to throw you in jail--they just might if they see an opening.

I honestly think most police officers aren't out to get you, but some of them are. It's unfortunate.

I gave a talk on the history and how to use a 'red box' to an English class. After the class someone comes up to me and tells me he is a police officer and that I better not use it in his town...lol.

 

[rep308]

damn good post, thank you

 

[bostonasphalt2]

I gave a talk on the history and how to use a 'red box' to an English class. After the class someone comes up to me and tells me he is a police officer and that I better not use it in his town...lol.

what is a red box??

also, that cop can go eat a d*ck if he actually came up to you and said that, lol

 

[rscalzo]

http://www.redbox.com/home.aspx ???????

 

[doobie]

what is a red box??

also, that cop can go eat a d*ck if he actually came up to you and said that, lol

Red Box. A device used to make free phone calls at (older) payphones.

 

[rscalzo]

I remember those things years ago. Finding a phone booth is a thing of the past much less finding one that works with one of these devices. Unlimited minutes on cell phones made them useless.

I had one of those Radio Shack dialers to override the limits put on a older Centrex system. That had to be in the early 80's.

Curious on how the use of the device related to an English class. History maybe...

 

[doobie]

I remember those things years ago. Finding a phone booth is a thing of the past much less finding one that works with one of these devices. Unlimited minutes on cell phones made them useless.

I had one of those Radio Shack dialers to override the limits put on a older Centrex system. That had to be in the early 80's.

Curious on how the use of the device related to an English class. History maybe...

We had to give a speech on something... I don't remember the requirements just remember talking about how a red box worked and it's history.

 

[rscalzo]

If it was a class of young kids, you would have to spend the first ten minutes explaining what a pay phone was to them....

If they were older, you could have set up a bar and made mixed drinks explaining each one to the class. After ten minutes no one would remember what you were talking about.

 

[doobie]

If it was a class of young kids, you would have to spend the first ten minutes explaining what a pay phone was to them....

If they were older, you could have set up a bar and made mixed drinks explaining each one to the class. After ten minutes no one would remember what you were talking about.

I was 18/19. I was on the young side of the class... and it was before cell phones were really popular.