4 ms·
According to the article it's OK for the cops to lie about almost anything. There's not a lot to stop them saying "I have the authority to grant immunity" or "I
by dmurray 6y ago
According to the article it's OK for the cops to lie about almost anything. There's not a lot to stop them saying "I have the authority to grant immunity" or "I am an official from the DA's office" or "I just called the DA and he approved the immunity" or "I just called the DA and he approved the immunity and he sent this confirmation by fax".
Some of these might not really be de jure OK for the cops to tell you, but would you want to rely on a court upholding that?
- nullc 6y agoPolice have even pretended to be the accused's attorney-- not lawful-- but generally the only consequence of an unlawful interrogation technique is that they lose the conviction. ( https://reason.com/2011/03/08/tennessee-cops-posed-as-a-defe/ https://reason.com/2011/03/08/tennessee-cops-posed-as-a-defe... in this case, the trial court even allowed it-- it had to get overturned on appeal ) There is a whole subreddit (/r/legaladvice) where the moderators are all (almost all?) law enforcement officers, where they remove good information from actual attorneys and promote bogus "cop law" that is highly detrimental to the interests of the users.
- selimthegrim 6y agoMy favorite is when they denied an insufficiently formal request for counsel. https://slate.com/news-and-politics/2017/10/suspect-asks-for-a-lawyer-dawg-judge-says-he-asked-for-a-lawyer-dog.html https://slate.com/news-and-politics/2017/10/suspect-asks-for...
- jakelazaroff 6y agoThat is horrifying.
- spacemanmatt 6y agoAgreed. In addition to my belief that they lack authority, I know that it would be extremely uncommon for a cop to be able to provide a notarized document that would protect later when the cop denies his verbal grant of immunity.