5 ms·

I don't pity SBF, but this advice is important for innocent citizens. It's unfortunate that anything you say to law enforcement can be used against you - but no

I don't pity SBF, but this advice is important for innocent citizens. It's unfortunate that anything you say to law enforcement can be used against you - but none of it can be used for you. A police officer can testify against you, but if they try to support you it will be dismissed as "hearsay".

hprotagonist 4y ago
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=d-7o9xYp7eE https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=d-7o9xYp7eE obligatory “don’t talk to the police” link.
- TrickyRick 4y ago
  I'm impressed it took a whole 33 minutes for this to be linked!
  - belter 4y ago
    Yes but they always miss Part 2 :-) "Don't Talk to the Police Part 2" - https://youtu.be/tIt-l2YmH8M https://youtu.be/tIt-l2YmH8M
  - danso 4y ago
    I'm surprised this classic video is 10+ years old but has only 18M views. edit: Saw that the professor, James Duane [0], has his own Wikipedia page, almost entirely on the popularity of the Youtube lecture. Even more surprising, his Talk page seems to be free of debate over Duane's notability. Pretty impressive for a single videoed lecture! [0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/James_Duane_(professor) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/James_Duane_(professor)
    - lotsofpulp 4y ago
      Should be shown in elementary schools as part of the curriculum.
      - p0pcult 4y ago
        But then youd be disrupting the school-to-prison pipeline![1] [1] https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/School-to-prison_pipeline https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/School-to-prison_pipeline
      - smegger001 4y ago
        I was shown it in high-school by a particularly good social studies teacher.
- paulpauper 4y ago
  It all depends. For a speeding ticket, giving your info to the police tends to make it easier, although you do not have to answer his questions.
  - TremendousJudge 4y ago
    The lawyer mentions this in his talk.
- thathndude 4y ago
  Lawyer here. I give this guy’s book out to anyone I care about. Friends, family. I even highlight the bit at the end with the practical advice. Everyone needs to know this. The friendliest police officer in the world is not your friend
- gamblor956 4y ago
  OTOH, as a former public defender I have no problems talking with the police. The police aren't your friend. They're also not your enemy. Talking to the police as part of an investigation doesn't make you a suspect. Seriously, how do people think criminal investigations are done? Talking to witnesses is a huge part of investigating. People very rarely finger themselves as potential suspects; it's almost always the other witnesses who identify them as suspects. If you're worried that you've done something wrong, talk to a lawyer first. 99.9% of the time, they'll tell you it's fine. Of course, if you tell the police you need to talk to your lawyer first, they'll want to know why you think you need a lawyer; if I were your lawyer, that's the first thing I'd wonder too. And if you weren't considered a potential suspect before you definitely will be on their short list after.
  - rurp 4y ago
    I can see why someone familiar with the law would be comfortable speaking with the police, but it's tough for a lay person to know if they are being lied to or will inadvertantly say something seemingly benign that causes them grief. Given that police are allowed to lie with impunity and might become your enemy, it's almost all downside for oneself to speak to them. If cops were obligated to be honest in more respects I would be more willing to open up, but of course they don't want any restrictions in that area. Cops in the US want to be able to lie whenever it's convenient and also have everyone trust them, but that's not a very fair bargain for the general public.
    - gamblor956 4y ago
      If the police are asking you questions, they're not lying to you...they're just asking questions. And if the police say something seemingly benign that causes you grief, you can look forward to a large-ish settlement to make up for your troubles. People on HN rarely interact with the police and it seems they have an unrealistic, media-driven perception of how cops actually act. For point of reference, it's the same as how non-techies assume that every tech employee can hack their way into a bank account or rig together a go-kart from spare parts.
      - 4y ago
andrewmutz 4y ago
If an officer testified in support of you about what he witnessed, why would that be hearsay?
- pliftkl 4y ago
  If you tell a police officer that you did a crime, then your words are admissible as evidence against you. If you tell a police officer that you did not commit a crime, you can't have the police officer testify in your defense that you told him that you did not commit the crime. Witnessing things is a completely different matter.
  - SilasX 4y ago
    Ehhh that's still misleading. It makes it sound like when the officer testifies about your statements, it goes through a magical filter in which only the inculpatory(is that the word?) stuff can come in, but not the exculpatory. Like... During Mirandized interrogation: Doe: "I grabbed her wrists after she picked up a knife to attack me." In court: Prosecutor: "What, if anything, did you learn from questioning Mr. Doe?" Officer: "He said he grabbed her wrists." Defense attorney on cross-examination: "In what context did Mr. Doe grab her wrists?" Officer: "After she picked up a kni--" Prosecutor: "Objection! Hearsay!" Judge: "Sustained. Jury will disregard anything about the accuser picking up a knife. Wrist grabbing stuff is fine." ^Not remotely how it works, at all, but what you might falsely believe from being told "your words are admissible against you, not for you".
  - anotherman554 4y ago
    "If you tell a police officer that you did a crime, then your words are admissible as evidence against you." This is because the people who wrote the evidence rules believe nobody would admit to a crime unless they are guilty. So it's a hearsay exception. The exception isn't meant to be a sinister trick to treat you unfairly, it's meant to lead to the right people going to jail and the right people not going to jail.
  - kkielhofner 4y ago
    Talking to the "regular" police and talking to a federal investigator are two completely different things. At the federal level they have "false or misleading statements"[0] which is a felony with a five year max. People have been convicted and done prison time on this alone based on nothing other than the notes and testimony from a federal investigator. At the state level probably the best they have is "obstruction of justice"[1] which requires things like physically interfering with the police or destroying evidence and even those actions have lesser penalties than "false or misleading statements". I have a friend who is a federal criminal investigator and his advice when/if the feds show up is to say nothing other than "Do you have a business card? Someone will be in touch." and get a lawyer ASAP. [0] - https://www.iannfriedman.com/blog/2019/april/federal-charges-for-false-misleading-statements/ https://www.iannfriedman.com/blog/2019/april/federal-charges... [1] - https://www.pallegarlawfirm.com/obstructing-justice-in-florida.html https://www.pallegarlawfirm.com/obstructing-justice-in-flori...
2devnull 4y ago
There are times when it doesn’t apply. But yes, for most people in most situations, as most of us know, you don’t talk. It’s called the fifth amendment. School children learn about it in civics class.
- thefaux 4y ago
  Do we even have civics in most schools anymore?
  - tptacek 4y ago
    Yes.
    - p0pcult 4y ago
      Let me guess: you live in the suburbs, or your kids go to a private school, or you are relying on your past.
      - tptacek 4y ago
        I live in Illinois, where it's a statewide requirement for graduation.
rootusrootus 4y ago
> It's unfortunate that anything you say to law enforcement can be used against you - but none of it can be used for you. Is it really unfortunate? There is simply an implicit assumption that humans avoid incriminating themselves when possible but are very quick to offer excuses. That seems to align pretty well with my experience. Therefore, we assume that if someone says something contrary to their own interest is is more likely to be true.
- p0pcult 4y ago
  >Is it really unfortunate? Yes; the system should not be biased towards guilt.
  - rootusrootus 4y ago
    This is arguably biased towards justice, not guilt.
    - MacsHeadroom 4y ago
      "It is better that ten guilty persons escape than that one innocent suffer."[0] [0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Blackstone%27s_ratio https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Blackstone%27s_ratio
freejazz 4y ago
Because one is hearsay and one is a party admission. This is basic evidence law.
coffeebeqn 4y ago
He didn’t speak to the police though. Just to randos with podcasts in the crypto sphere

hprotagonist 4y ago

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=d-7o9xYp7eE https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=d-7o9xYp7eE obligatory “don’t talk to the police” link.

TrickyRick 4y ago
I'm impressed it took a whole 33 minutes for this to be linked!
- belter 4y ago
  Yes but they always miss Part 2 :-) "Don't Talk to the Police Part 2" - https://youtu.be/tIt-l2YmH8M https://youtu.be/tIt-l2YmH8M
- danso 4y ago
  I'm surprised this classic video is 10+ years old but has only 18M views. edit: Saw that the professor, James Duane [0], has his own Wikipedia page, almost entirely on the popularity of the Youtube lecture. Even more surprising, his Talk page seems to be free of debate over Duane's notability. Pretty impressive for a single videoed lecture! [0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/James_Duane_(professor) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/James_Duane_(professor)
  - lotsofpulp 4y ago
    Should be shown in elementary schools as part of the curriculum.
    - p0pcult 4y ago
      But then youd be disrupting the school-to-prison pipeline![1] [1] https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/School-to-prison_pipeline https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/School-to-prison_pipeline
    - smegger001 4y ago
      I was shown it in high-school by a particularly good social studies teacher.
paulpauper 4y ago
It all depends. For a speeding ticket, giving your info to the police tends to make it easier, although you do not have to answer his questions.
- TremendousJudge 4y ago
  The lawyer mentions this in his talk.
thathndude 4y ago
Lawyer here. I give this guy’s book out to anyone I care about. Friends, family. I even highlight the bit at the end with the practical advice. Everyone needs to know this. The friendliest police officer in the world is not your friend
gamblor956 4y ago
OTOH, as a former public defender I have no problems talking with the police. The police aren't your friend. They're also not your enemy. Talking to the police as part of an investigation doesn't make you a suspect. Seriously, how do people think criminal investigations are done? Talking to witnesses is a huge part of investigating. People very rarely finger themselves as potential suspects; it's almost always the other witnesses who identify them as suspects. If you're worried that you've done something wrong, talk to a lawyer first. 99.9% of the time, they'll tell you it's fine. Of course, if you tell the police you need to talk to your lawyer first, they'll want to know why you think you need a lawyer; if I were your lawyer, that's the first thing I'd wonder too. And if you weren't considered a potential suspect before you definitely will be on their short list after.
- rurp 4y ago
  I can see why someone familiar with the law would be comfortable speaking with the police, but it's tough for a lay person to know if they are being lied to or will inadvertantly say something seemingly benign that causes them grief. Given that police are allowed to lie with impunity and might become your enemy, it's almost all downside for oneself to speak to them. If cops were obligated to be honest in more respects I would be more willing to open up, but of course they don't want any restrictions in that area. Cops in the US want to be able to lie whenever it's convenient and also have everyone trust them, but that's not a very fair bargain for the general public.
  - gamblor956 4y ago
    If the police are asking you questions, they're not lying to you...they're just asking questions. And if the police say something seemingly benign that causes you grief, you can look forward to a large-ish settlement to make up for your troubles. People on HN rarely interact with the police and it seems they have an unrealistic, media-driven perception of how cops actually act. For point of reference, it's the same as how non-techies assume that every tech employee can hack their way into a bank account or rig together a go-kart from spare parts.
    - 4y ago

andrewmutz 4y ago

If an officer testified in support of you about what he witnessed, why would that be hearsay?

pliftkl 4y ago
If you tell a police officer that you did a crime, then your words are admissible as evidence against you. If you tell a police officer that you did not commit a crime, you can't have the police officer testify in your defense that you told him that you did not commit the crime. Witnessing things is a completely different matter.
- SilasX 4y ago
  Ehhh that's still misleading. It makes it sound like when the officer testifies about your statements, it goes through a magical filter in which only the inculpatory(is that the word?) stuff can come in, but not the exculpatory. Like... During Mirandized interrogation: Doe: "I grabbed her wrists after she picked up a knife to attack me." In court: Prosecutor: "What, if anything, did you learn from questioning Mr. Doe?" Officer: "He said he grabbed her wrists." Defense attorney on cross-examination: "In what context did Mr. Doe grab her wrists?" Officer: "After she picked up a kni--" Prosecutor: "Objection! Hearsay!" Judge: "Sustained. Jury will disregard anything about the accuser picking up a knife. Wrist grabbing stuff is fine." ^Not remotely how it works, at all, but what you might falsely believe from being told "your words are admissible against you, not for you".
- anotherman554 4y ago
  "If you tell a police officer that you did a crime, then your words are admissible as evidence against you." This is because the people who wrote the evidence rules believe nobody would admit to a crime unless they are guilty. So it's a hearsay exception. The exception isn't meant to be a sinister trick to treat you unfairly, it's meant to lead to the right people going to jail and the right people not going to jail.
- kkielhofner 4y ago
  Talking to the "regular" police and talking to a federal investigator are two completely different things. At the federal level they have "false or misleading statements"[0] which is a felony with a five year max. People have been convicted and done prison time on this alone based on nothing other than the notes and testimony from a federal investigator. At the state level probably the best they have is "obstruction of justice"[1] which requires things like physically interfering with the police or destroying evidence and even those actions have lesser penalties than "false or misleading statements". I have a friend who is a federal criminal investigator and his advice when/if the feds show up is to say nothing other than "Do you have a business card? Someone will be in touch." and get a lawyer ASAP. [0] - https://www.iannfriedman.com/blog/2019/april/federal-charges-for-false-misleading-statements/ https://www.iannfriedman.com/blog/2019/april/federal-charges... [1] - https://www.pallegarlawfirm.com/obstructing-justice-in-florida.html https://www.pallegarlawfirm.com/obstructing-justice-in-flori...

2devnull 4y ago

There are times when it doesn’t apply. But yes, for most people in most situations, as most of us know, you don’t talk. It’s called the fifth amendment. School children learn about it in civics class.

thefaux 4y ago
Do we even have civics in most schools anymore?
- tptacek 4y ago
  Yes.
  - p0pcult 4y ago
    Let me guess: you live in the suburbs, or your kids go to a private school, or you are relying on your past.
    - tptacek 4y ago
      I live in Illinois, where it's a statewide requirement for graduation.

rootusrootus 4y ago

> It's unfortunate that anything you say to law enforcement can be used against you - but none of it can be used for you. Is it really unfortunate? There is simply an implicit assumption that humans avoid incriminating themselves when possible but are very quick to offer excuses. That seems to align pretty well with my experience. Therefore, we assume that if someone says something contrary to their own interest is is more likely to be true.

p0pcult 4y ago
>Is it really unfortunate? Yes; the system should not be biased towards guilt.
- rootusrootus 4y ago
  This is arguably biased towards justice, not guilt.
  - MacsHeadroom 4y ago
    "It is better that ten guilty persons escape than that one innocent suffer."[0] [0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Blackstone%27s_ratio https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Blackstone%27s_ratio

freejazz 4y ago

Because one is hearsay and one is a party admission. This is basic evidence law.

coffeebeqn 4y ago

He didn’t speak to the police though. Just to randos with podcasts in the crypto sphere