5 ms·

I recommend you watch the video. If the cops ask you about a missing kid, you don't know that you are not a suspect. You cannot know, actually. If you are a su

by the_af 4y ago

I recommend you watch the video. If the cops ask you about a missing kid, you don't know that you are not a suspect. You cannot know, actually. If you are a suspect -- regardless of your innocence -- and you talk to the cops without a lawyer, you may implicate yourself in some way. Yes, innocence doesn't matter one iota. Having factual evidence about the kidnapping could conceivably implicate you faster. Recollecting what you thought happened and making an honest mistake can potentially implicate you. The video goes into examples of this. Really, watch the video.

lukan 4y ago
I watched that video, but I refuse to see cops always as the enemy. So maybe let me refine my question, what if it is your neighbors child, you know closely or even your own child. You still would not talk to the cops, out of the fear that they wrongly suspect you and have a dead child on your consciousness? I mean, I am not from the US, but if your police is really that bad, I think you gotta change something. And I watched that video (some years ago) and if I remember it right, in his example the person that stupidly talked to the cops, was actually guilty.
- the_af 4y ago
  I'm not from the US either, and this is about their legal system I think. Whether they need to change this is up to them. I think your intuition from another country doesn't apply to the US. If you ever live in the US, ignore his advice at your own peril. This attorney seems to think the Fifth is enough, but people don't know they can use it. He doesn't think all cops are bad, where did you get this idea? > So maybe let me refine my question, what if it is your neighbors child, you know closely or even your own child. You still would not talk to the cops, out of the fear that they wrongly suspect you and have a dead child on your consciousness? Yes, that's the advice. You shouldn't talk to the cops without a lawyer even in this case, lest you end up implicated in a crime. If you want to talk, lawyer up! (Note: if the missing kid is your neighbor's, you can bet your ass you are a suspect and should definitely lawyer up. People the victim knew are suspects! If the missing kid is your own, you have more pressing concerns than being careful and will probably ignore this advice; know that you are definitely a suspect). By the way, in my country you can give information about missing children through a hotline (unrelated to the police), no need to go talk to cops. Not sure how it works in the US. > And I watched that video (some years ago) and if I remember it right, in his example the person that stupidly talked to the cops, was actually guilty. You misremember. Most of the examples he gives are of innocent people (or of not obviously guilty people). He claims the people who are more at risk when talking to the cops are innocent people. In a followup video he mentions the Innocence Project and that his primary motivation is preventing a lot of wrongful convictions in the US.
- the_af 4y ago
  To my other comment, let me add that this follow up video by Duane specifically addresses your scenario: the concerned parents of a missing girl unwisely spoke to the cops, without knowing they were suspects in the case (because the cops regularly suspect this, "9 out of 10 times, the caller is the one who committed the crime" as one cop put it). In this case, the cops suspected the father. After they found the body of the daughter, which had drowned, they didn't tell the father (because he was a suspect but they didn't want to be forced to read him his rights) and claimed to be still looking for her in order to continue incriminating her father, who thought he was aiding the investigation but was actually being interrogated as the prime suspect. His mistake: volunteering to talk to the cops without a lawyer. Watch it here, I've picked the right timestamp for you: https://youtu.be/-FENubmZGj8?t=1202 https://youtu.be/-FENubmZGj8?t=1202 By volunteering to talk to the police, you may also end up providing information that -- according to the cops -- "only the killer could have known". Oops! Even worse, if the interview wasn't taped (and in some cases, even if it was!) the cops can claim, either mistakenly or on purpose, that you provided self-incriminating evidence even if you didn't. Duane provides examples of how, even if your answers are taped but the cops' questions aren't, seemingly innocent answers can get you in trouble. Example: "I swear I've never touched a gun in my life" (cops: "we didn't mention the murder weapon, how did he know it was a gun? We didn't ask this. Suspicious!").
  - lukan 4y ago
    And what about this scenario, I described above: "because you happened to see the number plate from a black van speeding off at time X? " Assuming the kid is still alive and was in that van (which you do not know) - but by providing that info to the cops, they could track down the adress of the kidnappers and save that child. I see no downside with providing that information. Only lots of downsides of not providing it. But like I said, if the assumption is (like Duane apparently has), that cops are always bad, corrupt and the enemy, well, then this is the problem to deal with. And about that poor father: "but was actually being interrogated as the prime suspect. His mistake: volunteering to talk to the cops without a lawyer." He didn't ended up in jail, right? He was just wrongfully accused and interrogated in a very wrong way adding to his misery. That chance wouldn't stop me from cooperating with the police, if there is a chance to save someone.

by the_af 4y ago

lukan 4y ago

I watched that video, but I refuse to see cops always as the enemy. So maybe let me refine my question, what if it is your neighbors child, you know closely or even your own child. You still would not talk to the cops, out of the fear that they wrongly suspect you and have a dead child on your consciousness? I mean, I am not from the US, but if your police is really that bad, I think you gotta change something. And I watched that video (some years ago) and if I remember it right, in his example the person that stupidly talked to the cops, was actually guilty.

the_af 4y ago
I'm not from the US either, and this is about their legal system I think. Whether they need to change this is up to them. I think your intuition from another country doesn't apply to the US. If you ever live in the US, ignore his advice at your own peril. This attorney seems to think the Fifth is enough, but people don't know they can use it. He doesn't think all cops are bad, where did you get this idea? > So maybe let me refine my question, what if it is your neighbors child, you know closely or even your own child. You still would not talk to the cops, out of the fear that they wrongly suspect you and have a dead child on your consciousness? Yes, that's the advice. You shouldn't talk to the cops without a lawyer even in this case, lest you end up implicated in a crime. If you want to talk, lawyer up! (Note: if the missing kid is your neighbor's, you can bet your ass you are a suspect and should definitely lawyer up. People the victim knew are suspects! If the missing kid is your own, you have more pressing concerns than being careful and will probably ignore this advice; know that you are definitely a suspect). By the way, in my country you can give information about missing children through a hotline (unrelated to the police), no need to go talk to cops. Not sure how it works in the US. > And I watched that video (some years ago) and if I remember it right, in his example the person that stupidly talked to the cops, was actually guilty. You misremember. Most of the examples he gives are of innocent people (or of not obviously guilty people). He claims the people who are more at risk when talking to the cops are innocent people. In a followup video he mentions the Innocence Project and that his primary motivation is preventing a lot of wrongful convictions in the US.
the_af 4y ago
To my other comment, let me add that this follow up video by Duane specifically addresses your scenario: the concerned parents of a missing girl unwisely spoke to the cops, without knowing they were suspects in the case (because the cops regularly suspect this, "9 out of 10 times, the caller is the one who committed the crime" as one cop put it). In this case, the cops suspected the father. After they found the body of the daughter, which had drowned, they didn't tell the father (because he was a suspect but they didn't want to be forced to read him his rights) and claimed to be still looking for her in order to continue incriminating her father, who thought he was aiding the investigation but was actually being interrogated as the prime suspect. His mistake: volunteering to talk to the cops without a lawyer. Watch it here, I've picked the right timestamp for you: https://youtu.be/-FENubmZGj8?t=1202 https://youtu.be/-FENubmZGj8?t=1202 By volunteering to talk to the police, you may also end up providing information that -- according to the cops -- "only the killer could have known". Oops! Even worse, if the interview wasn't taped (and in some cases, even if it was!) the cops can claim, either mistakenly or on purpose, that you provided self-incriminating evidence even if you didn't. Duane provides examples of how, even if your answers are taped but the cops' questions aren't, seemingly innocent answers can get you in trouble. Example: "I swear I've never touched a gun in my life" (cops: "we didn't mention the murder weapon, how did he know it was a gun? We didn't ask this. Suspicious!").
- lukan 4y ago
  And what about this scenario, I described above: "because you happened to see the number plate from a black van speeding off at time X? " Assuming the kid is still alive and was in that van (which you do not know) - but by providing that info to the cops, they could track down the adress of the kidnappers and save that child. I see no downside with providing that information. Only lots of downsides of not providing it. But like I said, if the assumption is (like Duane apparently has), that cops are always bad, corrupt and the enemy, well, then this is the problem to deal with. And about that poor father: "but was actually being interrogated as the prime suspect. His mistake: volunteering to talk to the cops without a lawyer." He didn't ended up in jail, right? He was just wrongfully accused and interrogated in a very wrong way adding to his misery. That chance wouldn't stop me from cooperating with the police, if there is a chance to save someone.