3 ms·

"Anything you say can and will be used against you in a court of law." I thought I knew what this phrase meant, but its truth never hit home until I stood befo

"Anything you say can and will be used against you in a court of law." I thought I knew what this phrase meant, but its truth never hit home until I stood before a judge. Perhaps it would be better phrased as "everything you say can and will be used against you" It's shocking and frightening how a comment that you'd think is a positive for yourself will be cynically twisted to make you look terrible. The comment above about the prosecutor is telling: the man who prosecuted me used self-created fabrications to make up for his lack of a case against me. The judge told him that the documents that he had on his desk directly refuted what the prosecutor claimed, and the prosecutor continued with his case as though getting caught lying was just a matter of course. And it was. Lying is only a problem for the defendant. If the prosecutor doesn't ruin your life with imprisonment, the legal system will ruin it with the money that it takes to defend yourself.

pc86 7y ago
Not only that, but it specifically says against you. Note that it doesn't say anything you say can and will be used as evidence in a court of law. A police officer can testify to statements you made or actions you took that will incriminate you. But if the defense counsel asks them to testify to similar statements or actions that will exonerate you, the prosecution will object to it as hearsay, and it will be sustained. You'll need to take the stand to make such claims, which opens you up to cross-examination.
- Nasrudith 7y ago
  Yeah it is transparently a fucked up assymetrical system in that behavior that looks like it should be grounds for disbarring a judge for not being impartial is instead expected behavior and /not/ doing so would itself be judicial misconduct for allowing blatant hearsay.
- vageli 7y ago
  > A police officer can testify to statements you made or actions you took that will incriminate you. But if the defense counsel asks them to testify to similar statements or actions that will exonerate you, the prosecution will object to it as hearsay, and it will be sustained. This sounds like an incredibly broad statement that, by its breadth alone, seems false. Do you have any/many examples of this happening? I would think this is an extremely common occurrence by your statement.
  - gknoy 7y ago
    This is covered fairly specifically in the famous "don't talk to the police" (parts 1 and 2) lecture on Youtube, and was corroborated by the police officer that participated in the lecture.

pc86 7y ago

Not only that, but it specifically says against you. Note that it doesn't say anything you say can and will be used as evidence in a court of law. A police officer can testify to statements you made or actions you took that will incriminate you. But if the defense counsel asks them to testify to similar statements or actions that will exonerate you, the prosecution will object to it as hearsay, and it will be sustained. You'll need to take the stand to make such claims, which opens you up to cross-examination.

Nasrudith 7y ago
Yeah it is transparently a fucked up assymetrical system in that behavior that looks like it should be grounds for disbarring a judge for not being impartial is instead expected behavior and /not/ doing so would itself be judicial misconduct for allowing blatant hearsay.
vageli 7y ago
> A police officer can testify to statements you made or actions you took that will incriminate you. But if the defense counsel asks them to testify to similar statements or actions that will exonerate you, the prosecution will object to it as hearsay, and it will be sustained. This sounds like an incredibly broad statement that, by its breadth alone, seems false. Do you have any/many examples of this happening? I would think this is an extremely common occurrence by your statement.
- gknoy 7y ago
  This is covered fairly specifically in the famous "don't talk to the police" (parts 1 and 2) lecture on Youtube, and was corroborated by the police officer that participated in the lecture.