5 ms·

> There is no upside to allowing them in I get what you are saying, and agree with your decision to not talk to the police, but it isn’t true that there can be

> There is no upside to allowing them in I get what you are saying, and agree with your decision to not talk to the police, but it isn’t true that there can be NO upside to talking to the police. For all the bad things police do, they DO also solve some crimes and arrest some dangerous people. If someone killed one of my loved ones, I would hope the police would be able to find, arrest, and successfully prosecute the murderer. If no witness will speak to the police, it makes solving a homicide much more difficult. This is why the current approach to policing is so awful. We should work on fixing the system so talking to the police is a good thing.

Jkvngt 6y ago
Police barely ever solve crimes. Murder, the most serious crime, is hardly ever solved. There is no fixing the situation with talking to police, how would you fix the system? It would take decades of action on the part of the police to regain the public’s trust. One wrong move by one cop, one time would reset that back to zero.
- neartheplain 6y ago
  That’s overstating things. Most murder cases in the US are solved. 40% aren’t, though. https://www.statista.com/statistics/194213/crime-clearance-rate-by-type-in-the-us/ https://www.statista.com/statistics/194213/crime-clearance-r...
  - stretchcat 6y ago
    To be fair, solving a great many murders is probably a simple matter of finding the family member with literal blood on his hands and a history of domestic abuse. It doesn't take Sherlock Holmes to figure that out.
  - Jkvngt 6y ago
    https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=3566383 https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=3566383 Seems it’s only about 22% of serious crimes which are solved. Of course the beauty of these “facts” is they differ wildly.
  - vmception 6y ago
    Yeah solved with the real killer still out there. Imagine a life insurance broker that moonlights as a serial killer offing someone's spouse soon after the policy is open. The remaining spouse is going to prison for a very long time every single time.
    - stretchcat 6y ago
      I can imagine that, but I'm having a harder time imagining it to be common.
      - vmception 6y ago
        just non-negligible
  - throwaway81523 6y ago
    60% of murder cases result in someone getting arrested. So we still have to ask: a) how many of those arrests result in a conviction? b) how many of those convictions are of the right person? c) and how many murders result in murder cases? A murder case basically starts with police opening a file saying "X has been murdered" and goes on from there. So if the death looks enough like accident or natural causes or suicide, no murder case is opened and it doesn't count as an uncleared murder. Therefore it wouldn't surprise me if the majority of murders (51%, anyway) are unsolved.
techsupporter 6y ago
> This is why the current approach to policing is so awful. We should work on fixing the system so talking to the police is a good thing. Exactly. Addressing your example, as it's a good one: To be blunt, me risking the legal standing or overall safety of my family just to bring your family some closure is not a trade-off I'm willing to make. I'm genuinely sorry because I would absolutely like to help, but the downside risk is too great. I am in an incredibly privileged position in our society, and I've gotten grief at the hands of the police while I was being a "good citizen" and offering information. Never again. If they want to know something we will be doing it in full view of the public out on the street or with my lawyer present.
- StillBored 6y ago
  "public out on the street or with my lawyer present." Isn't a large reason why one shouldn't talk to the police because they may intentionally misconstrue what you say? Being in public won't solve that, hence the lawyer bit.
  - jaywalk 6y ago
    They don't even have to misconstrue it. You could unintentionally change some facts in your story from what you had said 5-10 minutes ago, for example. Cops are trained to pick up on little stuff like that, while you might not even realize you did it. That's why you need a lawyer present.
  - techsupporter 6y ago
    Completely agreed; I was addressing the concerns of the people who would or wouldn't allow a police officer into their residence. If I absolutely must speak to an officer without a lawyer present, we will be outside in public, not indoors in private. If that's not acceptable to the officer...well, too bad. (Though, the hilarity of it is, I am in a position where I can even say no to an officer and the officer will likely respect it. I "look like" I have the resources to push back on police abuse, so police are less likely to abuse me. If I didn't look like that, I probably wouldn't even have the chance to say no, at least not without a lot of pressure.)
Nbox9 6y ago
The current homicide clearance rate is 61.4% (That’s only arrest, not a conviction). If resolving the adversarial relationship between citizens and police would improve that then it’s something we should explore. Right now I’m not sure how that could happen, given the deep problems with American Law Enforcement, Correctional, and Justice systems.
caturopath 6y ago
>> There is no upside to allowing them in > I get what you are saying, and agree with your decision to not talk to the police They DID talk to the police. (They said, "We'll answer any questions here") Bringing them inside your home really doesn't have an upside. I don't invite armed strangers inside my home as a rule, and making an exception is unnecessary.
- Fnoord 6y ago
  > I don't invite armed strangers inside my home as a rule, and making an exception is unnecessary. If your trust in a police officer is so low that you put them on equal ground as people who carry guns (criminals or police, in my country) then something is very wrong. You might be paranoid, you might live in a country where the law is corrupt, a combination of that, or something else. For sure, something is very wrong. I've helped the police with crime cases. Doing so, makes my society a little bit more safe and just. I also got help from police when I needed them. Then again, not living in USA. My secret is sauce is simple: be honest. If being honest gets you into trouble in your country, something's off.
  - moate 6y ago
    Are you aware that one of the largest political issues in the US right now is exactly that: a complete lack of trust and respect in the police and how they go about their jobs? A popular slogan in the US is ACAB (All Cops Are Bastards) This is a comment on an article about how cops need to stop lying to people during investigations. I'm glad you think your cops are great, but we're trying to talk about how to reform them, we already know there is a problem. US police can lie to you in order to get information, in addition to a host of other abuses. Saying "be honest to cops and everything will be fine" feels a bit glib.
    - Fnoord 6y ago
      Yeah, I'm aware of that. ACAB in my country is forbidden, because its insulting a civil servant in office. If police are not allowed to lie while civilians can lie, the police are in a severe disadvantage. Perhaps the balance is tipped the wrong way, but the mere notion that police are allowed to lie isn't wrong in itself.
powersnail 6y ago
"Don't talk to the police" is a bit of a slogan, rather than really saying zero word when you can help. I'll be happy to provide the police with any information as long as I'm under the advisement of a lawyer. I'll willingly testify in a court. The problem is talking to the police directly by myself, as the police naturally see all related people as suspects. You are a witness in your own eyes; you are a suspect in theirs.
- corty 6y ago
  Don't talk, even with a lawyer. Get written questions and give written testimony through the lawyer.
  - powersnail 6y ago
    That's why I said "provide information" in my comment. I suppose that my lawyer would advise me on the appropriate medium of communication.
- cortesoft 6y ago
  This won't work for most people. Lawyers are expensive, and you only get a free one if you are charged with a crime. You won't be provided a lawyer if they want to question you as a witness.
  - AaronM 6y ago
    Ha, in many places, you aren't just given a lawyer. You have to prove to the court you can't afford one. Can't prove it? Judge don't care.
  - powersnail 6y ago
    If the police aren't willing to provide a witness with legal protection, it's their fault that people don't want to talk to them. If I can't get a lawyer when question by a police officer, I don't answer a question. (It's different if I'm in a courtroom, obviously)
dkarl 6y ago
I agree. Not talking to the cops is an easy policy to adopt if, like most of us, you live in a pretty safe neighborhood with nothing but victimless drug crimes, but a lot of people who have the most reason to fear the police also have the most reason to need them to do their job effectively. It's not so simple for them. If they talk to the police, maybe they go to jail, but if they don't talk to the police, maybe the next house that gets burgled is their mom's. Maybe the next car that gets stolen is theirs. It's a shitty bind to be in.
idoubtit 6y ago
> We should work on fixing the system so talking to the police is a good thing. I don't think I will live long enough to see it, at least in my country. The French police is less dangerous than the US one, but they're still dangerous, even for those that committed no crime, and and not only for minorities. A (white) delivery driver was recently strangled to death by police officers in Paris in broad daylight, despite repeatedly telling them he could not breath. No administrative penalty was applied, though an inquiry has started due to the large popular outcry. In a broader perspective, the worst terrorist attack in French history was in Paris in autumn... not 2015 but 1961. The French police wanted to terrify the Algerian people (which had French citizenship at that time). Police killed 150-200 unarmed people in a single night. The man in charge (M. Papon), like many other members of the police, had played an important role in the deportation of Jews during WWII. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paris_massacre_of_1961 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paris_massacre_of_1961 There was a recent commotion when French policemen could be heard joking about this event, especially about "drowning the Algerians". Some sociological studies prove that the racist terms dating from the Algeria war are still pervasive in the French police more than 60 years after the war.
- gremlinsinc 6y ago
  Damn, now I see why the French love revolutions lol. I thought it was bad here in USA, but I guess it's a global problem. We need to stomp out authoritarianism everywhere but heck if I know how to do that.

Jkvngt 6y ago

Police barely ever solve crimes. Murder, the most serious crime, is hardly ever solved. There is no fixing the situation with talking to police, how would you fix the system? It would take decades of action on the part of the police to regain the public’s trust. One wrong move by one cop, one time would reset that back to zero.

neartheplain 6y ago
That’s overstating things. Most murder cases in the US are solved. 40% aren’t, though. https://www.statista.com/statistics/194213/crime-clearance-rate-by-type-in-the-us/ https://www.statista.com/statistics/194213/crime-clearance-r...
- stretchcat 6y ago
  To be fair, solving a great many murders is probably a simple matter of finding the family member with literal blood on his hands and a history of domestic abuse. It doesn't take Sherlock Holmes to figure that out.
- Jkvngt 6y ago
  https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=3566383 https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=3566383 Seems it’s only about 22% of serious crimes which are solved. Of course the beauty of these “facts” is they differ wildly.
- vmception 6y ago
  Yeah solved with the real killer still out there. Imagine a life insurance broker that moonlights as a serial killer offing someone's spouse soon after the policy is open. The remaining spouse is going to prison for a very long time every single time.
  - stretchcat 6y ago
    I can imagine that, but I'm having a harder time imagining it to be common.
    - vmception 6y ago
      just non-negligible
- throwaway81523 6y ago
  60% of murder cases result in someone getting arrested. So we still have to ask: a) how many of those arrests result in a conviction? b) how many of those convictions are of the right person? c) and how many murders result in murder cases? A murder case basically starts with police opening a file saying "X has been murdered" and goes on from there. So if the death looks enough like accident or natural causes or suicide, no murder case is opened and it doesn't count as an uncleared murder. Therefore it wouldn't surprise me if the majority of murders (51%, anyway) are unsolved.

techsupporter 6y ago

> This is why the current approach to policing is so awful. We should work on fixing the system so talking to the police is a good thing. Exactly. Addressing your example, as it's a good one: To be blunt, me risking the legal standing or overall safety of my family just to bring your family some closure is not a trade-off I'm willing to make. I'm genuinely sorry because I would absolutely like to help, but the downside risk is too great. I am in an incredibly privileged position in our society, and I've gotten grief at the hands of the police while I was being a "good citizen" and offering information. Never again. If they want to know something we will be doing it in full view of the public out on the street or with my lawyer present.

StillBored 6y ago
"public out on the street or with my lawyer present." Isn't a large reason why one shouldn't talk to the police because they may intentionally misconstrue what you say? Being in public won't solve that, hence the lawyer bit.
- jaywalk 6y ago
  They don't even have to misconstrue it. You could unintentionally change some facts in your story from what you had said 5-10 minutes ago, for example. Cops are trained to pick up on little stuff like that, while you might not even realize you did it. That's why you need a lawyer present.
- techsupporter 6y ago
  Completely agreed; I was addressing the concerns of the people who would or wouldn't allow a police officer into their residence. If I absolutely must speak to an officer without a lawyer present, we will be outside in public, not indoors in private. If that's not acceptable to the officer...well, too bad. (Though, the hilarity of it is, I am in a position where I can even say no to an officer and the officer will likely respect it. I "look like" I have the resources to push back on police abuse, so police are less likely to abuse me. If I didn't look like that, I probably wouldn't even have the chance to say no, at least not without a lot of pressure.)

Nbox9 6y ago

The current homicide clearance rate is 61.4% (That’s only arrest, not a conviction). If resolving the adversarial relationship between citizens and police would improve that then it’s something we should explore. Right now I’m not sure how that could happen, given the deep problems with American Law Enforcement, Correctional, and Justice systems.

caturopath 6y ago

>> There is no upside to allowing them in > I get what you are saying, and agree with your decision to not talk to the police They DID talk to the police. (They said, "We'll answer any questions here") Bringing them inside your home really doesn't have an upside. I don't invite armed strangers inside my home as a rule, and making an exception is unnecessary.

Fnoord 6y ago
> I don't invite armed strangers inside my home as a rule, and making an exception is unnecessary. If your trust in a police officer is so low that you put them on equal ground as people who carry guns (criminals or police, in my country) then something is very wrong. You might be paranoid, you might live in a country where the law is corrupt, a combination of that, or something else. For sure, something is very wrong. I've helped the police with crime cases. Doing so, makes my society a little bit more safe and just. I also got help from police when I needed them. Then again, not living in USA. My secret is sauce is simple: be honest. If being honest gets you into trouble in your country, something's off.
- moate 6y ago
  Are you aware that one of the largest political issues in the US right now is exactly that: a complete lack of trust and respect in the police and how they go about their jobs? A popular slogan in the US is ACAB (All Cops Are Bastards) This is a comment on an article about how cops need to stop lying to people during investigations. I'm glad you think your cops are great, but we're trying to talk about how to reform them, we already know there is a problem. US police can lie to you in order to get information, in addition to a host of other abuses. Saying "be honest to cops and everything will be fine" feels a bit glib.
  - Fnoord 6y ago
    Yeah, I'm aware of that. ACAB in my country is forbidden, because its insulting a civil servant in office. If police are not allowed to lie while civilians can lie, the police are in a severe disadvantage. Perhaps the balance is tipped the wrong way, but the mere notion that police are allowed to lie isn't wrong in itself.

powersnail 6y ago

"Don't talk to the police" is a bit of a slogan, rather than really saying zero word when you can help. I'll be happy to provide the police with any information as long as I'm under the advisement of a lawyer. I'll willingly testify in a court. The problem is talking to the police directly by myself, as the police naturally see all related people as suspects. You are a witness in your own eyes; you are a suspect in theirs.

corty 6y ago
Don't talk, even with a lawyer. Get written questions and give written testimony through the lawyer.
- powersnail 6y ago
  That's why I said "provide information" in my comment. I suppose that my lawyer would advise me on the appropriate medium of communication.
cortesoft 6y ago
This won't work for most people. Lawyers are expensive, and you only get a free one if you are charged with a crime. You won't be provided a lawyer if they want to question you as a witness.
- AaronM 6y ago
  Ha, in many places, you aren't just given a lawyer. You have to prove to the court you can't afford one. Can't prove it? Judge don't care.
- powersnail 6y ago
  If the police aren't willing to provide a witness with legal protection, it's their fault that people don't want to talk to them. If I can't get a lawyer when question by a police officer, I don't answer a question. (It's different if I'm in a courtroom, obviously)

dkarl 6y ago

I agree. Not talking to the cops is an easy policy to adopt if, like most of us, you live in a pretty safe neighborhood with nothing but victimless drug crimes, but a lot of people who have the most reason to fear the police also have the most reason to need them to do their job effectively. It's not so simple for them. If they talk to the police, maybe they go to jail, but if they don't talk to the police, maybe the next house that gets burgled is their mom's. Maybe the next car that gets stolen is theirs. It's a shitty bind to be in.

idoubtit 6y ago

> We should work on fixing the system so talking to the police is a good thing. I don't think I will live long enough to see it, at least in my country. The French police is less dangerous than the US one, but they're still dangerous, even for those that committed no crime, and and not only for minorities. A (white) delivery driver was recently strangled to death by police officers in Paris in broad daylight, despite repeatedly telling them he could not breath. No administrative penalty was applied, though an inquiry has started due to the large popular outcry. In a broader perspective, the worst terrorist attack in French history was in Paris in autumn... not 2015 but 1961. The French police wanted to terrify the Algerian people (which had French citizenship at that time). Police killed 150-200 unarmed people in a single night. The man in charge (M. Papon), like many other members of the police, had played an important role in the deportation of Jews during WWII. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paris_massacre_of_1961 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paris_massacre_of_1961 There was a recent commotion when French policemen could be heard joking about this event, especially about "drowning the Algerians". Some sociological studies prove that the racist terms dating from the Algeria war are still pervasive in the French police more than 60 years after the war.

gremlinsinc 6y ago
Damn, now I see why the French love revolutions lol. I thought it was bad here in USA, but I guess it's a global problem. We need to stomp out authoritarianism everywhere but heck if I know how to do that.