7 ms·

The only time I ever did this, it was a routine traffic stop and I was with my wife and my parents. The cop was asking me a bunch of questions about why I was d

The only time I ever did this, it was a routine traffic stop and I was with my wife and my parents. The cop was asking me a bunch of questions about why I was driving so fast, and I just played it off like I didn't understand, just trying to say as little as possible. It was a bad tactic - it raised suspicion and I later learned that my mother thought I was actually holding drugs or something because I was being evasive. I still in general agree with the advice, but... it requires some subtlety.

ars 12y ago
I've written that before on HN and got massively downmodded, hopefully that doesn't happen to you. If you are actually guilty then keep your mouth closed. But if you are not guilty then staying quiet is not necessarily to your benefit.
- mikeash 12y ago
  Your guilt doesn't matter. You can still incriminate yourself even if you have committed no crime. It sounds like grandparent didn't go to jail, so even though he calls it a "bad tactic" it seems to have worked out fine. The people who actually know this stuff, i.e. lawyers and cops, all universally advise people not to talk to the police without counsel. Never have I seen one add the qualifier "but it's fine if you're not guilty." I'm inclined to take their word for it.
  - snowwrestler 12y ago
    You witness a mugging. You get a good look at the person who did it. A cop comes up to you and says "did you see what happened?" What's the right thing to do here? Shut up and demand a lawyer before you'll answer any questions? You hear about a shooting in your neighborhood on the radio. Walking to the subway, you see a person with a gun run down an alley. At the subway station a cop asks you if you've seen anything suspicious. What's the right thing to do here? Shut up and demand a lawyer before you'll answer any questions? Personally, I don't want to live in a society in which no one helps anyone because of fear. It's worth keeping in mind that Ken White is a defense attorney, writing from a particular perspective, which may not cover all possible situations. His advice is great if you are the subject of a criminal investigation. Most people are not subjects of criminal investigations. Specific to traffic stops, neither officers nor attorneys recommend shutting up and demanding a lawyer as the first move. They recommend: make the officer feel safe, be polite, don't lie, and decline a search if requested. Editing since I can't reply to rosser (what's the point of a discussion forum if I can't have a discussion?): My point is that writing as either a defense attorney or a prosecutor, his posts take a more a narrow view of police interactions than the entirety of how someone might interact with the police. I doubt he would recommend against reporting a crime if you are the victim or a witness, for instance, or if he did, I doubt he would find many peers to agree with him. "Keep your head down, never talk to a cop," is certainly a strategy for getting through life, but it's not necessarily globally optimal.
    - rosser 12y ago
      It's worth keeping in mind that Ken White is a defense attorney... It's also worth keeping in mind that he's a former federal prosecutor. He knows of what he speaks, and you would do very well to heed his counsel.
    - eropple 12y ago
      Cops are an active deterrent towards good citizenship because good citizenship is punished. The citizenry is under no obligation, moral or ethical or it-would-be-nice-if, to help them when they have proven unwilling to help the citizenry in aggregate or, especially as regards minorities and those weaker than they are, in particular. It's economics. People respond to incentives. I am not incentivized to help the cops because it's never going to be better for me to do so. I'll act differently when they are different, get me? . (You make a good point about traffic stops, though it speaks remarkably of the shitty nature of police interactions that somehow it's on you to make an officer feel safe. Never mind that an officer will regularly attempt to make you feel threatened or unsafe to get you to say something stupid...)
    - baddox 12y ago
      > Personally, I don't want to live in a society in which no one helps anyone because of fear. You shouldn't talk to police in the situations you describe. And of course we don't want to live in this type of society. It would be great if police behaved differently.
    - ptaipale 12y ago
      When we're this deep into a comment chain, you just need to wait for a few minutes before the "Reply" button appears. Design in HN to slow down flame wars, I suppose. I think you make good points. People say things like "don't ever talk to a police without lawyer", because they want to make a political point. I am not American, and not resident in the US, but I do not believe that a total "I don't talk to police without lawyer, ever" is really wise. Either in US or elsewhere - you have to understand your surroundings. My latest interaction with an American police officer was on a business trip on September 12, 2001. Independent of the bad TV shows the previous day, I was driving to the local office where I was visiting. Boss from Europe called me on my cell phone. I didn't think it was a good idea to speak on the phone while driving, so I took the exit from highway and stopped on the curb of a smaller road. After talking for a moment, I noticed a police car stopped next to me. I rolled down the window, and the police asked me why I stopped there. I told him, to speak on the phone. He told me to move over because I would be blocking other traffic. I hadn't noticed it but he was right. I said "sorry, I didn't notice, I'll get moving", put the phone away and got moving. End of story. Instead of telling him "Speaking on the phone", should I have responded with "No comment, I want my lawyer"? That would have been absurd, and probably a very good reason for this officer to get suspicious of me, possibly starting to check my papers - which I'm sure he's the right to do - and possibly ticket me for simply breaking the traffic law and then being a prick about it.
- caseysoftware 12y ago
  Please read the article. Whether you're guilty or not, you can be made guilty on various other charges from a simple conversation.
  - snowwrestler 12y ago
    But only if you lie during that conversation. Edit: this is literally what happens in Ken's hypothetical story. If the subject didn't lie about the phone call, they couldn't be charged with a false statement.
    - rosser 12y ago
      So ... what, be honest and incriminate yourself? No. LAWYER UP AND SHUT UP.
    - stavrianos 12y ago
      Which you may be deliberately manipulated into.
    - hoaTeRo 12y ago
      See: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6wXkI4t7nuc#t=1279 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6wXkI4t7nuc#t=1279 If the prosecutor wants to push it, almost any interaction with the police can be made to seem incriminating.
      - bigiain 12y ago
        And so it's been for half a millennium:' "If you give me six lines written by the hand of the most honest of men, I will find something in them which will hang him." – Cardinal Richelieu, 1641 It seems law enforcement never really changes.
    - dagw 12y ago
      Maybe he honestly didn't think he was lying, since he never discussed the case on the phone call. Someone told him it was happening and he hung up the phone. Most people wouldn't necessarily consider that talking about something.
- serve_yay 12y ago
  No, the whole point is that even what innocent people say can screw them later. And I agree with this!
- noonespecial 12y ago
  They do not care if you are guilty or not. They manufacture criminals. That's their job. To create "product". They need raw materials. Don't provide anything at all. Zero raw materials is always going to be better than potentially unsuitable materials that can't quite be hammered into prosecutable shape.
tempestn 12y ago
This is a good point though. What do you folks suggest for the standard traffic stop, along the lines of, "Sir, do you know how fast you were going?" Presumably both "yes" and "no" would be bad. (The former is obvious, and the latter could mean you're not paying sufficient attention, etc.) So, do you just stare at them in silence? Do you say something like, "I'd rather not answer," which while accurate, sure sounds like "yes". (At the very least, there goes your chance of a warning instead of a ticket...)[1] I agree with serve_yay that many of these situations start off seeming innocuous, and staying silent is easier said than done. Another example is the cops canvasing the area of a crime, looking for info. Do you just refuse to speak to them without a lawyer, even though you had nothing to do with it? It's certainly possible (albeit unlikely) that they actually have you as a suspect and are trying to trick you into some sort of false statement. (Or a statement that appears to be false because it conflicts with other evidence, even if it's true!) But in the vast majority of cases it'll be exactly what it seems. Or say you actually witnessed a crime. Or were the victim! Still lawyer up before talking to the cops? It appears the safest thing is, yes, always get a lawyer. But at some point on the spectrum, does the cost and inconvenience outweigh the insurance factor of doing so? [1] I've only been in that situation a couple times, but I've tried my best to answer politely without saying anything material. One way to do that is to answer questions with questions. "Do you know how fast you were going?" "How fast was I going, Sir?"
- dingaling 12y ago
  > "Sir, do you know how fast you were going?" The only responses you should use in such situations are: 'No comment' 'Am I free to go?' Plus the statutory minimum ( name, address, DoB according to your local legislation ). Psychologically it is very, very difficult. One way to try to handle it is to pretend you're responding to Emacs Eliza, which will always try to turn your words back onto you.
  - smcl 12y ago
    Have you used either of those responses before? Judging from my limited exposure with the police this sort of "technically I don't have to do this\answer this" response is an invite for a cranky cop to do everything they can to inconvenience you as a punishment. For example in my case if I'd carried on doing what I was doing (talking to my friend at conversational level and smiling, while a passing police officer told me "you can wipe that smirk off your face or I'll do it for you" followed by vague suggestions that I should be taken to the police station) I should be able to rest easy knowing I've done nothing wrong and there's not a single crime I could've been found guilty of at that moment. However, they probably could've made my life extremely unpleasant - taking me in for some sort of "questioning", spending a night in the cells - who knows. So this is a long-winded way to ask - is that totally ironclad\foolproof, or is there a non-zero chance that this response will make the situation worse despite being totally legal?

ars 12y ago

I've written that before on HN and got massively downmodded, hopefully that doesn't happen to you. If you are actually guilty then keep your mouth closed. But if you are not guilty then staying quiet is not necessarily to your benefit.

mikeash 12y ago
Your guilt doesn't matter. You can still incriminate yourself even if you have committed no crime. It sounds like grandparent didn't go to jail, so even though he calls it a "bad tactic" it seems to have worked out fine. The people who actually know this stuff, i.e. lawyers and cops, all universally advise people not to talk to the police without counsel. Never have I seen one add the qualifier "but it's fine if you're not guilty." I'm inclined to take their word for it.
- snowwrestler 12y ago
  You witness a mugging. You get a good look at the person who did it. A cop comes up to you and says "did you see what happened?" What's the right thing to do here? Shut up and demand a lawyer before you'll answer any questions? You hear about a shooting in your neighborhood on the radio. Walking to the subway, you see a person with a gun run down an alley. At the subway station a cop asks you if you've seen anything suspicious. What's the right thing to do here? Shut up and demand a lawyer before you'll answer any questions? Personally, I don't want to live in a society in which no one helps anyone because of fear. It's worth keeping in mind that Ken White is a defense attorney, writing from a particular perspective, which may not cover all possible situations. His advice is great if you are the subject of a criminal investigation. Most people are not subjects of criminal investigations. Specific to traffic stops, neither officers nor attorneys recommend shutting up and demanding a lawyer as the first move. They recommend: make the officer feel safe, be polite, don't lie, and decline a search if requested. Editing since I can't reply to rosser (what's the point of a discussion forum if I can't have a discussion?): My point is that writing as either a defense attorney or a prosecutor, his posts take a more a narrow view of police interactions than the entirety of how someone might interact with the police. I doubt he would recommend against reporting a crime if you are the victim or a witness, for instance, or if he did, I doubt he would find many peers to agree with him. "Keep your head down, never talk to a cop," is certainly a strategy for getting through life, but it's not necessarily globally optimal.
  - rosser 12y ago
    It's worth keeping in mind that Ken White is a defense attorney... It's also worth keeping in mind that he's a former federal prosecutor. He knows of what he speaks, and you would do very well to heed his counsel.
  - eropple 12y ago
    Cops are an active deterrent towards good citizenship because good citizenship is punished. The citizenry is under no obligation, moral or ethical or it-would-be-nice-if, to help them when they have proven unwilling to help the citizenry in aggregate or, especially as regards minorities and those weaker than they are, in particular. It's economics. People respond to incentives. I am not incentivized to help the cops because it's never going to be better for me to do so. I'll act differently when they are different, get me? . (You make a good point about traffic stops, though it speaks remarkably of the shitty nature of police interactions that somehow it's on you to make an officer feel safe. Never mind that an officer will regularly attempt to make you feel threatened or unsafe to get you to say something stupid...)
  - baddox 12y ago
    > Personally, I don't want to live in a society in which no one helps anyone because of fear. You shouldn't talk to police in the situations you describe. And of course we don't want to live in this type of society. It would be great if police behaved differently.
  - ptaipale 12y ago
    When we're this deep into a comment chain, you just need to wait for a few minutes before the "Reply" button appears. Design in HN to slow down flame wars, I suppose. I think you make good points. People say things like "don't ever talk to a police without lawyer", because they want to make a political point. I am not American, and not resident in the US, but I do not believe that a total "I don't talk to police without lawyer, ever" is really wise. Either in US or elsewhere - you have to understand your surroundings. My latest interaction with an American police officer was on a business trip on September 12, 2001. Independent of the bad TV shows the previous day, I was driving to the local office where I was visiting. Boss from Europe called me on my cell phone. I didn't think it was a good idea to speak on the phone while driving, so I took the exit from highway and stopped on the curb of a smaller road. After talking for a moment, I noticed a police car stopped next to me. I rolled down the window, and the police asked me why I stopped there. I told him, to speak on the phone. He told me to move over because I would be blocking other traffic. I hadn't noticed it but he was right. I said "sorry, I didn't notice, I'll get moving", put the phone away and got moving. End of story. Instead of telling him "Speaking on the phone", should I have responded with "No comment, I want my lawyer"? That would have been absurd, and probably a very good reason for this officer to get suspicious of me, possibly starting to check my papers - which I'm sure he's the right to do - and possibly ticket me for simply breaking the traffic law and then being a prick about it.
caseysoftware 12y ago
Please read the article. Whether you're guilty or not, you can be made guilty on various other charges from a simple conversation.
- snowwrestler 12y ago
  But only if you lie during that conversation. Edit: this is literally what happens in Ken's hypothetical story. If the subject didn't lie about the phone call, they couldn't be charged with a false statement.
  - rosser 12y ago
    So ... what, be honest and incriminate yourself? No. LAWYER UP AND SHUT UP.
  - stavrianos 12y ago
    Which you may be deliberately manipulated into.
  - hoaTeRo 12y ago
    See: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6wXkI4t7nuc#t=1279 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6wXkI4t7nuc#t=1279 If the prosecutor wants to push it, almost any interaction with the police can be made to seem incriminating.
    - bigiain 12y ago
      And so it's been for half a millennium:' "If you give me six lines written by the hand of the most honest of men, I will find something in them which will hang him." – Cardinal Richelieu, 1641 It seems law enforcement never really changes.
  - dagw 12y ago
    Maybe he honestly didn't think he was lying, since he never discussed the case on the phone call. Someone told him it was happening and he hung up the phone. Most people wouldn't necessarily consider that talking about something.
serve_yay 12y ago
No, the whole point is that even what innocent people say can screw them later. And I agree with this!
noonespecial 12y ago
They do not care if you are guilty or not. They manufacture criminals. That's their job. To create "product". They need raw materials. Don't provide anything at all. Zero raw materials is always going to be better than potentially unsuitable materials that can't quite be hammered into prosecutable shape.

tempestn 12y ago

This is a good point though. What do you folks suggest for the standard traffic stop, along the lines of, "Sir, do you know how fast you were going?" Presumably both "yes" and "no" would be bad. (The former is obvious, and the latter could mean you're not paying sufficient attention, etc.) So, do you just stare at them in silence? Do you say something like, "I'd rather not answer," which while accurate, sure sounds like "yes". (At the very least, there goes your chance of a warning instead of a ticket...)[1] I agree with serve_yay that many of these situations start off seeming innocuous, and staying silent is easier said than done. Another example is the cops canvasing the area of a crime, looking for info. Do you just refuse to speak to them without a lawyer, even though you had nothing to do with it? It's certainly possible (albeit unlikely) that they actually have you as a suspect and are trying to trick you into some sort of false statement. (Or a statement that appears to be false because it conflicts with other evidence, even if it's true!) But in the vast majority of cases it'll be exactly what it seems. Or say you actually witnessed a crime. Or were the victim! Still lawyer up before talking to the cops? It appears the safest thing is, yes, always get a lawyer. But at some point on the spectrum, does the cost and inconvenience outweigh the insurance factor of doing so? [1] I've only been in that situation a couple times, but I've tried my best to answer politely without saying anything material. One way to do that is to answer questions with questions. "Do you know how fast you were going?" "How fast was I going, Sir?"

dingaling 12y ago
> "Sir, do you know how fast you were going?" The only responses you should use in such situations are: 'No comment' 'Am I free to go?' Plus the statutory minimum ( name, address, DoB according to your local legislation ). Psychologically it is very, very difficult. One way to try to handle it is to pretend you're responding to Emacs Eliza, which will always try to turn your words back onto you.
- smcl 12y ago
  Have you used either of those responses before? Judging from my limited exposure with the police this sort of "technically I don't have to do this\answer this" response is an invite for a cranky cop to do everything they can to inconvenience you as a punishment. For example in my case if I'd carried on doing what I was doing (talking to my friend at conversational level and smiling, while a passing police officer told me "you can wipe that smirk off your face or I'll do it for you" followed by vague suggestions that I should be taken to the police station) I should be able to rest easy knowing I've done nothing wrong and there's not a single crime I could've been found guilty of at that moment. However, they probably could've made my life extremely unpleasant - taking me in for some sort of "questioning", spending a night in the cells - who knows. So this is a long-winded way to ask - is that totally ironclad\foolproof, or is there a non-zero chance that this response will make the situation worse despite being totally legal?