3 ms·

You mean the only evidence is what the police say you said.

• rootusrootus 3y ago
  No, I mean that "suspect said X" testimony wouldn't be admissible, so it would never be your word against the cop.
  • psychlops 3y ago
    Yes, we agree. I was just clarifying that "what you said" can be quite different from "what the police said you said". If it were recorded then that's different....
  • lcnPylGDnU4H9OF 3y ago
    This made me do some research into "hearsay" because I'm not really familiar with how it all works. > Per Federal Rule of Evidence 801(d)(2)(a), a statement made by a defendant is admissible as evidence only if it is inculpatory; exculpatory statements made to an investigator are hearsay and therefore may not be admitted as evidence in court, unless the defendant testifies. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hearsay#United_States https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hearsay#United_States So it's not hearsay if it makes you look bad (but it is if it makes you look good), and police don't even have to be telling the truth, nor do they really have to be worried about perjury charges if a given encounter was not recorded. I still can't imagine why a confession given in interview isn't logically nullified by: "How does the defense plead?" "Not guilty, Your Honor."
    • int_19h 3y ago
      On top of that, statistically, a guilty confession results in a massive bias from the jury, often to the point of completely overriding exculpatory evidence (like, say, witness testimonies of alibi, or forensics).