5 ms·

What a nightmare. If you (God forbid) find yourself falsely charged/arrested: Shut up. Get a lawyer. Don't talk to the police: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=d

What a nightmare. If you (God forbid) find yourself falsely charged/arrested: Shut up. Get a lawyer. Don't talk to the police: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=d-7o9xYp7eE https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=d-7o9xYp7eE You might think you can convince the authorities to see reason, but you're wrong. If they were reasonable people they would be in a different line of work. This is a problem to be fixed by a lawyer. You can afford it. You can repay debt when you're alive and free.

eesmith 4y ago
How would that have played out here? Would shutting up have resulted in less jail time? After he got out of jail, he "decided to find a lawyer. After weeks of searching for one he could afford, Lowe retained Palmer." What should have have done that while in jail?
- TedDoesntTalk 4y ago
  I think there is some information missing. He would have been offered a public defender before the judge.
  - lokar 4y ago
    Probably not until he made it to Texas.
    - staticautomatic 4y ago
      He would have been entitled to an attorney when he went before the NM judge if he’d asked for one. Whatever that proceeding was, it would definitely have triggered the right to counsel.
- wbl 4y ago
  Shutting up and asking for a lawyer even an overworked public defender would have gotten him better advice that would lead to him being arraigned and out on bail instead of letting his constitutional rights get violated for a fortnight.
- teakettle42 4y ago
  Reading between the lines, I would guess that this poor soul believed that the system is reasonable, and if he just had a chance to speak, everything would be cleared up. That's how a justice system should work, but that's not the reality. In fact, there never should have been an arrest warrant issued with such a weak "case" comprised entirely of exculpating evidence. What he should have done was stop speaking immediately, use the first available opportunity to call family, a friend, or anyone else capable of securing a competent defense attorney, and retained their services. Unfortunately, it can be hard to find a competent criminal attorney even when you're not in jail. If you unexpectedly find yourself in jail, you have no access to any resources other than a payphone, and whatever phone numbers the desk officer allowed you to copy out of your phone. All your outgoing calls use an exploitative collect-call system that charges obscene amounts and requires the receiver to listen to a robo-caller greeting — and set up an account with a credit card — before they can accept your call. If you received a random call from an unknown New Mexico number, with the caller ID of "Quay County Jail", would you even answer? If you answered, and heard a robocall announcement asking if you want to accept a collect call from an inmate, would you even wait for the message to finish? > What should have have done that while in jail? He should have found a lawyer as soon as he could — but that's easy to say when you're not experiencing the incredibly dehumanizing reality that is our criminal "justice" system.
  - somenameforme 4y ago
    I'm not defending our system, but I do want to point out one problem with any ideal of how the system ought work. In reality, most of everybody will claim that they're innocent, including those that are not. And so from the perspective of anybody working in law enforcement/corrections, somebody claiming they're innocent is not only a criminal but a liar on top. And the vast majority of the time, they'd be right. And every system enabling you to challenge your detention is going to be built with the knowledge of the sort of system it's working within. I live abroad now and in the system here defendants who lie about their innocence will face greatly lengthened sentences, so most people not only don't bother lying, but actually have to reenact their crime for police. But of course the obvious problem there is that it greatly increases the risk for challenging any arrest when you actually are innocent, though for a case like this (where there was 0 argument whatsoever that he was guilty) - that would obviously be a better system.
- alexb_ 4y ago
  >Would shutting up have resulted in less jail time? Talking will never, absolutely never, result in anything but more jail time. There is absolutely zero benefit for you to answer police questions past basic things such as identifying yourself/things like showing license/registration at a traffic stop. At no point would talking ever make your case better.
  - makeitdouble 4y ago
    You are absolutely right. Also, it should be seen as a torture situation: they are professionals that will throw the full arsenal at you, including delaying your requests as long as they can get away with (I assume there can just lie about getting you a lawyer and have your requests memory holed. BTW do you even have rights to one depending on what form they took to keep you ?). They can put physical and mental pressure on you for days and days, and your only path is to shut up, if you’re not willing to give them what they want. And at no point you can afford to break down. Overall, that’s a stacked game I’m not sure you can really win depending on how dirty they want to play it, except if you get external help that they couldn’t shut down.
anonymouse008 4y ago
For those of us who are slower: Shut the f*k up, Pot Brothers At Law https://twitter.com/facebookvillain/status/1366166608268435461 https://twitter.com/facebookvillain/status/13661666082684354...
paulpauper 4y ago
Crime TV shows often show investigators chatting with suspects. There is no law that requires you chat with anyone but your lawyer. It would make for a boring show though if everyone was silent though.
dehrmann 4y ago
On one hand, yes, but on the other, the way they allegedly honored habeas corpus, I find it hard to believe they'd find a lawyer.
- Simon_O_Rourke 4y ago
  I completely agree, but it's got to be one of the most razor thin thresholds for habeas corpus I've seen. It reads like something written by Kafka (no, not the queue)!
somenameforme 4y ago
Police have a lot of nasty tricks they can use to get people to talk, including the ability to lie about nearly anything. They can claim things are 'off the record' when they're not, lie about evidence or witness testimony, claim you being silent will result in them e.g. arresting your family members, and all other sorts of insane stuff. All completely legal. It's easy to say don't talk, it's another altogether when you're surrounded by people whose entire profession includes getting people who don't want to talk, to talk.
Taniwha 4y ago
As explained by the cops of Homicide: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3DH4FdxKCNg https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3DH4FdxKCNg
zugi 4y ago
I love that "Don't talk to the police" video and recommend it to everyone I can. But it doesn't look like his words led to his arrest or incarceration here. The warrant was from a distant jurisdiction, so the police who picked him up and incarcerated him didn't really know anything about the original charges. This case highlights about a dozen different horrific government abuses and systemic injustices, yet the airline is the organization he's most likely to get any sort of restitution from. That in itself is a sad state of affairs.
- tomas_nort 4y ago
deleted 4y ago
[deleted]
biaachmonkie 4y ago
Even more, though this would only have delayed the inevitable, was that he should not have identified himself to the police when questioned about the incident unrelated to him, that led to his arrest. You do not have to identify yourself unless, and this varies by State in the U.S., you are arrested or they have "RAS" Reasonable Articulable Suspicion informed by Specific Articulable Facts that you have or are committing a crime. So basically, NEVER TALK TO POLICE!

eesmith 4y ago

How would that have played out here? Would shutting up have resulted in less jail time? After he got out of jail, he "decided to find a lawyer. After weeks of searching for one he could afford, Lowe retained Palmer." What should have have done that while in jail?

TedDoesntTalk 4y ago
I think there is some information missing. He would have been offered a public defender before the judge.
- lokar 4y ago
  Probably not until he made it to Texas.
  - staticautomatic 4y ago
    He would have been entitled to an attorney when he went before the NM judge if he’d asked for one. Whatever that proceeding was, it would definitely have triggered the right to counsel.
wbl 4y ago
Shutting up and asking for a lawyer even an overworked public defender would have gotten him better advice that would lead to him being arraigned and out on bail instead of letting his constitutional rights get violated for a fortnight.
teakettle42 4y ago
Reading between the lines, I would guess that this poor soul believed that the system is reasonable, and if he just had a chance to speak, everything would be cleared up. That's how a justice system should work, but that's not the reality. In fact, there never should have been an arrest warrant issued with such a weak "case" comprised entirely of exculpating evidence. What he should have done was stop speaking immediately, use the first available opportunity to call family, a friend, or anyone else capable of securing a competent defense attorney, and retained their services. Unfortunately, it can be hard to find a competent criminal attorney even when you're not in jail. If you unexpectedly find yourself in jail, you have no access to any resources other than a payphone, and whatever phone numbers the desk officer allowed you to copy out of your phone. All your outgoing calls use an exploitative collect-call system that charges obscene amounts and requires the receiver to listen to a robo-caller greeting — and set up an account with a credit card — before they can accept your call. If you received a random call from an unknown New Mexico number, with the caller ID of "Quay County Jail", would you even answer? If you answered, and heard a robocall announcement asking if you want to accept a collect call from an inmate, would you even wait for the message to finish? > What should have have done that while in jail? He should have found a lawyer as soon as he could — but that's easy to say when you're not experiencing the incredibly dehumanizing reality that is our criminal "justice" system.
- somenameforme 4y ago
  I'm not defending our system, but I do want to point out one problem with any ideal of how the system ought work. In reality, most of everybody will claim that they're innocent, including those that are not. And so from the perspective of anybody working in law enforcement/corrections, somebody claiming they're innocent is not only a criminal but a liar on top. And the vast majority of the time, they'd be right. And every system enabling you to challenge your detention is going to be built with the knowledge of the sort of system it's working within. I live abroad now and in the system here defendants who lie about their innocence will face greatly lengthened sentences, so most people not only don't bother lying, but actually have to reenact their crime for police. But of course the obvious problem there is that it greatly increases the risk for challenging any arrest when you actually are innocent, though for a case like this (where there was 0 argument whatsoever that he was guilty) - that would obviously be a better system.
alexb_ 4y ago
>Would shutting up have resulted in less jail time? Talking will never, absolutely never, result in anything but more jail time. There is absolutely zero benefit for you to answer police questions past basic things such as identifying yourself/things like showing license/registration at a traffic stop. At no point would talking ever make your case better.
- makeitdouble 4y ago
  You are absolutely right. Also, it should be seen as a torture situation: they are professionals that will throw the full arsenal at you, including delaying your requests as long as they can get away with (I assume there can just lie about getting you a lawyer and have your requests memory holed. BTW do you even have rights to one depending on what form they took to keep you ?). They can put physical and mental pressure on you for days and days, and your only path is to shut up, if you’re not willing to give them what they want. And at no point you can afford to break down. Overall, that’s a stacked game I’m not sure you can really win depending on how dirty they want to play it, except if you get external help that they couldn’t shut down.

anonymouse008 4y ago

For those of us who are slower: Shut the f*k up, Pot Brothers At Law https://twitter.com/facebookvillain/status/1366166608268435461 https://twitter.com/facebookvillain/status/13661666082684354...

paulpauper 4y ago

Crime TV shows often show investigators chatting with suspects. There is no law that requires you chat with anyone but your lawyer. It would make for a boring show though if everyone was silent though.

dehrmann 4y ago

On one hand, yes, but on the other, the way they allegedly honored habeas corpus, I find it hard to believe they'd find a lawyer.

Simon_O_Rourke 4y ago
I completely agree, but it's got to be one of the most razor thin thresholds for habeas corpus I've seen. It reads like something written by Kafka (no, not the queue)!

somenameforme 4y ago

Police have a lot of nasty tricks they can use to get people to talk, including the ability to lie about nearly anything. They can claim things are 'off the record' when they're not, lie about evidence or witness testimony, claim you being silent will result in them e.g. arresting your family members, and all other sorts of insane stuff. All completely legal. It's easy to say don't talk, it's another altogether when you're surrounded by people whose entire profession includes getting people who don't want to talk, to talk.

Taniwha 4y ago

As explained by the cops of Homicide: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3DH4FdxKCNg https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3DH4FdxKCNg

zugi 4y ago

I love that "Don't talk to the police" video and recommend it to everyone I can. But it doesn't look like his words led to his arrest or incarceration here. The warrant was from a distant jurisdiction, so the police who picked him up and incarcerated him didn't really know anything about the original charges. This case highlights about a dozen different horrific government abuses and systemic injustices, yet the airline is the organization he's most likely to get any sort of restitution from. That in itself is a sad state of affairs.

tomas_nort 4y ago

deleted 4y ago

[deleted]

biaachmonkie 4y ago

Even more, though this would only have delayed the inevitable, was that he should not have identified himself to the police when questioned about the incident unrelated to him, that led to his arrest. You do not have to identify yourself unless, and this varies by State in the U.S., you are arrested or they have "RAS" Reasonable Articulable Suspicion informed by Specific Articulable Facts that you have or are committing a crime. So basically, NEVER TALK TO POLICE!