4 ms·

> Law enforcement is basically allowed to lie to you Is this pretty universal or is it an American thing?

by skrebbel 3y ago

fullarr 3y ago
This is universal lmao And it's not just a current events thing
- diggan 3y ago
  > This is universal lmao It is not universal. Not sure why you'd claim so unless you've looked up the laws for every country. One example, Sweden: > 23 kap. 12 § rättegångsbalken (https://lagen.nu/1942:740#K23P12S1 https://lagen.nu/1942:740#K23P12S1) > Under förhör må ej i syfte att framkalla bekännelse eller uttalande i viss riktning användas medvetet oriktiga uppgifter, löften eller förespeglingar om särskilda förmåner, hot, tvång, uttröttning eller andra otillbörliga åtgärder [...] Meaning, the one who is doing the interrogation is not allowed to "use deliberate misrepresentation, promises or promises of special benefits, threats, coercion, hardship or other improper measures.", basically not allowed to lie. How it works usually works out in practice, is most likely different though. I've only been to one interrogation with Swedish police and they definitely lied about a bunch of stuff. I'm sure there are other countries where the police isn't allowed to lie either.
  - fullarr 3y ago
    We are talking past each other. There are two truths: 1. It is forbidden by law in many places (including the US). 2. They will get away with it regardless, in nearly every case. So often that practically speaking it's allowed
    - skrebbel 3y ago
      Was it so hard just to lead with this?
      - Anthony-G 3y ago
        Indeed. That was a much better response – and there was no call for laughing their ass off at a genuine question. They may have been laughing at the concept of a police force that doesn’t lie to citizens but it still came across as a rude response.
    - diggan 3y ago
      > We are talking past each other. Well, be more clear and maybe we could avoid it :) In some US states, the police are legally allowed to lie, it's not forbidden for them to do so. In some other states and outside countries, they are allowed, in others, they're not.
  - the-dude 3y ago
    Not a Swede, but I wouldn't be surprised if the police is allowed to lie about for example which evidence they have. The sentence you refer to seems to refer to 'pressurization'.
  - coldtea 3y ago
    >It is not universal. Not sure why you'd claim so unless you've looked up the laws for every country. Probably because humans are not formal proof automata. When the parent said universal they meant "it is a thing across the world and across periods", and not "no X exists, where X is a country, and in X it's against the law".
    - diggan 3y ago
      Ah, maybe it's my non-native English-ness that shines through, but I've always understood "universal" as something implies like it is everyone, not "just in some places". So I could accurately say "English language is universal" even though there are countries where people generally don't speak English at all?
      - coldtea 3y ago
        >So I could accurately say "English language is universal" even though there are countries where people generally don't speak English at all? In math or formal logic, no. In casual english all the time. Here is an example from the dictionary for universal, that's not actually formally universal: (a) One reason for the author's success is that her novels have a universal appeal. Obviously not everyone, even if they do read a lot of novels, would like the author's novels, or even the genre they are in. Some will also just hate them. Or how about: (b) Love and relationships will always be a topic of universal interest. (c) Music is often thought of as a universal language. There are of course absolutely people who don't care for "love and relationships" or are totally indifferent to music. Or here's an example from a blog: https://www.thelanguagegallery.com/blog/why-has-english-become-a-universal-language https://www.thelanguagegallery.com/blog/why-has-english-beco... "According to statistics shared by Babbel Magazine, the English language is spoken by 20% of the world’s population. Apart from being one of the most popular languages in the world, English is also the most commonly studied foreign language. Before we learn how it became a universal language" Note how they call it "universal" even though just spoken by 20% of the people at best. In general universal in such contexts means "quite common or prevalent, within different population groups (even if the groups belong to a specific type)", e.g.: "the Latin language (qua Medieval Latin) was in effect a universal language of literati in the Middle Ages" "In a more practical fashion, trade languages, such as ancient Koine Greek, may be seen as a kind of real universal language, that was used for commerce" (note that the Koine "universal" language was just spoken in the regions around the Mediterranean, North Africa, and Middle East). (both examples from: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Universal_language https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Universal_language )
- skrebbel 3y ago
  Hahah lmao he asked a reasonable question lol! If you don’t know, just don’t answer.
the-dude 3y ago
I believe in The Netherlands it is the same. I always assumed it to be universal.
- skrebbel 3y ago
  Are you sure? I don’t believe that this is the case, esp for super heavy stuff like telling someone they don't have a right to a lawyer when actually they do.
  - the-dude 3y ago
    Police is definitely bound to the law, like the right you are referring to. This doesn't mean everything has to be true : an example from an earlier comment of mine is lying about which evidence they actually have. edit: https://nieuws.nl/algemeen/20180203/de-politie-in-nederland-mag-liegen/ https://nieuws.nl/algemeen/20180203/de-politie-in-nederland-...
    - skrebbel 3y ago
      Thats very far removed from “you dont have a right to a lawyer” IMO
      - the-dude 3y ago
        I never claimed that.
- hcfman 3y ago
  More than that. In the Netherlands the prosecutors are allowed to lie under oath in court. You might then ask "Well what value has the court then? Good question. The thing is, this doesn't just work against suspects. This works when prosecutors lie in court in order to protect the informants that they have been using in an illegal manner to commit crimes against non-criminals. And every single person in all of the parts of government will just roll over to allow the injustice to continue. Except for Peter Omzigt...
darksoulpants 3y ago
I think it’s universal. It started in the United States though. Look at this case: Frazier v. Cupp (1969). That is what started it all. Many other nations picked up on it. This case was argued before the Supreme Court. In hindsight we can see that police are very dishonest, lying, thugs. They have no real ethics. FBI was caught sleeping with female “suspects”’for intelligence. Think about that. Fucking for intelligence. They were exploiting women. NSA has intelligence analysts that were using and still are using a program called “section 702” of the intelligence act to spy on women they want to have sex with, ex girlfriends, others. Intimate details of their lives. It was written up in Wired. It looks to be renewed. So you have power hungry cops, FBI, NSA Analysts who are ugly, fat and corrupt. Can’t get laid, ethical issues. Who the Supreme Court says can lie straight to your face. But they can arrest you if they think you are lying? Stop trying to help them. Let them drown. They are the real threat. The real terrorists. If we did this we be in jail.
- pcthrowaway 3y ago
  > They have no real ethics. FBI was caught sleeping with female “suspects”’for intelligence. Think about that. Fucking for intelligence. They were exploiting women I assume you're talking about Mark Kennedy[1], but it's even worse! He was dating one of the people of interest for over a year while undercover, and I believe he was married at the time too [1] https://www.vice.com/en/article/epxbpj/kate-wilson-mark-kennedy-undercover-cop-sex-with-activists https://www.vice.com/en/article/epxbpj/kate-wilson-mark-kenn...
stef25 3y ago
Law enforcement isn't a big cuddly teddy bear that's there to protect and serve. It can be, but it can also not be ... You don't accidentally end up in a situation where cops tell you that you don't have the right to a lawyer. The west still isn't Iran.
- zlg_codes 3y ago
  You need to shove the boot a bit further down your throat. Words are still escaping!
sobkas 3y ago
> > Law enforcement is basically allowed to lie to you > Is this pretty universal or is it an American thing? In court: You: They lied to me about my right to a lawyer Cop: No we didn't, also he admitted during this talk to being on the site of theft and taking of someone else property. Now who will Jury or Judge believe, cop or a thief?
- sobkas 3y ago
  > > > Law enforcement is basically allowed to lie to you > > Is this pretty universal or is it an American thing? > In court: You: They lied to me about my right to a lawyer Cop: No we didn't, also he admitted during this talk to being on the site of theft and taking of someone else property. > Now who will Jury or Judge believe, cop or a thief? And cops lie because no one is willing to prosecute them.

> Law enforcement is basically allowed to lie to you Is this pretty universal or is it an American thing?

fullarr 3y ago

This is universal lmao And it's not just a current events thing

diggan 3y ago
> This is universal lmao It is not universal. Not sure why you'd claim so unless you've looked up the laws for every country. One example, Sweden: > 23 kap. 12 § rättegångsbalken (https://lagen.nu/1942:740#K23P12S1 https://lagen.nu/1942:740#K23P12S1) > Under förhör må ej i syfte att framkalla bekännelse eller uttalande i viss riktning användas medvetet oriktiga uppgifter, löften eller förespeglingar om särskilda förmåner, hot, tvång, uttröttning eller andra otillbörliga åtgärder [...] Meaning, the one who is doing the interrogation is not allowed to "use deliberate misrepresentation, promises or promises of special benefits, threats, coercion, hardship or other improper measures.", basically not allowed to lie. How it works usually works out in practice, is most likely different though. I've only been to one interrogation with Swedish police and they definitely lied about a bunch of stuff. I'm sure there are other countries where the police isn't allowed to lie either.
- fullarr 3y ago
  We are talking past each other. There are two truths: 1. It is forbidden by law in many places (including the US). 2. They will get away with it regardless, in nearly every case. So often that practically speaking it's allowed
  - skrebbel 3y ago
    Was it so hard just to lead with this?
    - Anthony-G 3y ago
      Indeed. That was a much better response – and there was no call for laughing their ass off at a genuine question. They may have been laughing at the concept of a police force that doesn’t lie to citizens but it still came across as a rude response.
  - diggan 3y ago
    > We are talking past each other. Well, be more clear and maybe we could avoid it :) In some US states, the police are legally allowed to lie, it's not forbidden for them to do so. In some other states and outside countries, they are allowed, in others, they're not.
- the-dude 3y ago
  Not a Swede, but I wouldn't be surprised if the police is allowed to lie about for example which evidence they have. The sentence you refer to seems to refer to 'pressurization'.
- coldtea 3y ago
  >It is not universal. Not sure why you'd claim so unless you've looked up the laws for every country. Probably because humans are not formal proof automata. When the parent said universal they meant "it is a thing across the world and across periods", and not "no X exists, where X is a country, and in X it's against the law".
  - diggan 3y ago
    Ah, maybe it's my non-native English-ness that shines through, but I've always understood "universal" as something implies like it is everyone, not "just in some places". So I could accurately say "English language is universal" even though there are countries where people generally don't speak English at all?
    - coldtea 3y ago
      >So I could accurately say "English language is universal" even though there are countries where people generally don't speak English at all? In math or formal logic, no. In casual english all the time. Here is an example from the dictionary for universal, that's not actually formally universal: (a) One reason for the author's success is that her novels have a universal appeal. Obviously not everyone, even if they do read a lot of novels, would like the author's novels, or even the genre they are in. Some will also just hate them. Or how about: (b) Love and relationships will always be a topic of universal interest. (c) Music is often thought of as a universal language. There are of course absolutely people who don't care for "love and relationships" or are totally indifferent to music. Or here's an example from a blog: https://www.thelanguagegallery.com/blog/why-has-english-become-a-universal-language https://www.thelanguagegallery.com/blog/why-has-english-beco... "According to statistics shared by Babbel Magazine, the English language is spoken by 20% of the world’s population. Apart from being one of the most popular languages in the world, English is also the most commonly studied foreign language. Before we learn how it became a universal language" Note how they call it "universal" even though just spoken by 20% of the people at best. In general universal in such contexts means "quite common or prevalent, within different population groups (even if the groups belong to a specific type)", e.g.: "the Latin language (qua Medieval Latin) was in effect a universal language of literati in the Middle Ages" "In a more practical fashion, trade languages, such as ancient Koine Greek, may be seen as a kind of real universal language, that was used for commerce" (note that the Koine "universal" language was just spoken in the regions around the Mediterranean, North Africa, and Middle East). (both examples from: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Universal_language https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Universal_language )
skrebbel 3y ago
Hahah lmao he asked a reasonable question lol! If you don’t know, just don’t answer.

the-dude 3y ago

I believe in The Netherlands it is the same. I always assumed it to be universal.

skrebbel 3y ago
Are you sure? I don’t believe that this is the case, esp for super heavy stuff like telling someone they don't have a right to a lawyer when actually they do.
- the-dude 3y ago
  Police is definitely bound to the law, like the right you are referring to. This doesn't mean everything has to be true : an example from an earlier comment of mine is lying about which evidence they actually have. edit: https://nieuws.nl/algemeen/20180203/de-politie-in-nederland-mag-liegen/ https://nieuws.nl/algemeen/20180203/de-politie-in-nederland-...
  - skrebbel 3y ago
    Thats very far removed from “you dont have a right to a lawyer” IMO
    - the-dude 3y ago
      I never claimed that.
hcfman 3y ago
More than that. In the Netherlands the prosecutors are allowed to lie under oath in court. You might then ask "Well what value has the court then? Good question. The thing is, this doesn't just work against suspects. This works when prosecutors lie in court in order to protect the informants that they have been using in an illegal manner to commit crimes against non-criminals. And every single person in all of the parts of government will just roll over to allow the injustice to continue. Except for Peter Omzigt...

darksoulpants 3y ago

I think it’s universal. It started in the United States though. Look at this case: Frazier v. Cupp (1969). That is what started it all. Many other nations picked up on it. This case was argued before the Supreme Court. In hindsight we can see that police are very dishonest, lying, thugs. They have no real ethics. FBI was caught sleeping with female “suspects”’for intelligence. Think about that. Fucking for intelligence. They were exploiting women. NSA has intelligence analysts that were using and still are using a program called “section 702” of the intelligence act to spy on women they want to have sex with, ex girlfriends, others. Intimate details of their lives. It was written up in Wired. It looks to be renewed. So you have power hungry cops, FBI, NSA Analysts who are ugly, fat and corrupt. Can’t get laid, ethical issues. Who the Supreme Court says can lie straight to your face. But they can arrest you if they think you are lying? Stop trying to help them. Let them drown. They are the real threat. The real terrorists. If we did this we be in jail.

pcthrowaway 3y ago
> They have no real ethics. FBI was caught sleeping with female “suspects”’for intelligence. Think about that. Fucking for intelligence. They were exploiting women I assume you're talking about Mark Kennedy[1], but it's even worse! He was dating one of the people of interest for over a year while undercover, and I believe he was married at the time too [1] https://www.vice.com/en/article/epxbpj/kate-wilson-mark-kennedy-undercover-cop-sex-with-activists https://www.vice.com/en/article/epxbpj/kate-wilson-mark-kenn...

stef25 3y ago

Law enforcement isn't a big cuddly teddy bear that's there to protect and serve. It can be, but it can also not be ... You don't accidentally end up in a situation where cops tell you that you don't have the right to a lawyer. The west still isn't Iran.

zlg_codes 3y ago
You need to shove the boot a bit further down your throat. Words are still escaping!

sobkas 3y ago

> > Law enforcement is basically allowed to lie to you > Is this pretty universal or is it an American thing? In court: You: They lied to me about my right to a lawyer Cop: No we didn't, also he admitted during this talk to being on the site of theft and taking of someone else property. Now who will Jury or Judge believe, cop or a thief?

sobkas 3y ago
> > > Law enforcement is basically allowed to lie to you > > Is this pretty universal or is it an American thing? > In court: You: They lied to me about my right to a lawyer Cop: No we didn't, also he admitted during this talk to being on the site of theft and taking of someone else property. > Now who will Jury or Judge believe, cop or a thief? And cops lie because no one is willing to prosecute them.