# Say what?



## milquetoast (Nov 25, 2006)

You have just been involved in a self-defense shooting. You reasonably believed that it was necessary to shoot, to keep from being killed. There is a body over there, lying in a puddle of blood. When the police arrived, your hands were in plain sight, and they could see you were not a threat. Your gun was placed in plain view where the police could see it, but without perceiving a threat. They have retrieved your gun. Investigator Friendly approaches you and says, "What happened?" You say:


----------



## Shipwreck (Jan 26, 2006)

You say:

_*I would rather not make a statement until I have the opportunity to speak with a lawyer*_ - 1 and only thing to say.

Other than that, I always refrain from "what if" scenarios and such online. I don't want my decisions or tactics spelled out, and then 1 day if something happens, I have my post out there for the world to see. And depending on the situation, it might not be something that would look too good on ya. Prosecutors use the internet too. Trust me, I know that


----------



## Wandering Man (Jul 9, 2006)

+1 with Shipwreck.

I've read some of the research on false confessions, and it is scary. I will never go into a private conference with a police officer and naively believe that my innocence will protect me.

FYI, John Grisham's latest book is a good read: The Innocent Man.

-WM


----------



## Mr. P (Sep 16, 2006)

Shipwreck said:


> You say:
> 
> _*I would rather not make a statement until I have the opportunity to speak with a lawyer*_ - 1 and only thing to say.
> 
> Other than that, I always refrain from "what if" scenarios and such online. I don't want my decisions or tactics spelled out, and then 1 day if something happens, I have my post out there for the world to see. And depending on the situation, it might not be something that would look too good on ya. Prosecutors use the internet too. Trust me, I know that


So NOW lawyers are ok? I love it!:smt082 :smt082 :smt082


----------



## Shipwreck (Jan 26, 2006)

Trust me - I've been in criminal justice in various jobs all my adult life - No matter what a prosecutor, police officer, detective says - U will probably not be cut any slack if you just "level" with him. They want your confession, or some other slip up by a person in order to catch the criminal/perpetrator so they can deal with the case and get on with the next case. U will not get any favors.

Quite often, the very fact that a person who is being prosecuted "cooperated" with the police never even makes it up to the DA's level of the chain (more so in a larger city). 

And, unless U take it to trial, it doesn't always have a bearing on an agreed upon plea either (I've seen people who are jerks and don't cooperate or who fought w/ police get the same deal as someone who did cooperate).

So, keep your mouth shut. U can REALLY be the victim - be innocent, but screw up and say the wrong word in a sentence, and make your life very difficult for a long time to come...


----------



## Mr. P (Sep 16, 2006)

I know SW, I’d keep my mouth shut as well. I was laughing at the ‘I would rather not make a statement until I have the opportunity to speak with a lawyer’ statement. Since lawyers are ALWAYS being bashed until they’re needed, it was funny.

Trust me..I have connections with a Judge.:mrgreen:


----------



## jpruett79 (Sep 23, 2006)

i was listing to gun talk a couple of months ago and they said the best thing to do was ask for a glass of water. the reasoning behind that was it would put the officer in more of a mind state of helping you than just interrogating you. Makes sense to me but i still wouldn't talk without a lawyer.


----------



## tony pasley (May 6, 2006)

Mr. P said:


> So NOW lawyers are ok? I love it!:smt082 :smt082 :smt082


No lawyers aren't okay, but when you have to wade thru the pasture it is better to have someone who knows where all the piles are to avoid stepping in any


----------



## Mr. P (Sep 16, 2006)

tony pasley said:


> No lawyers aren't okay, but when you have to wade thru the pasture it is better to have someone who knows where all the piles are to avoid stepping in any


That makes em ok when ya need em, doesn't it?:smt033


----------



## scooter (May 9, 2006)

Lemme see......we need lawyers cuz of..........other lawyers,most of which only want......................money!!!! to hell with justice


----------



## Mr. P (Sep 16, 2006)

scooter said:


> Lemme see......we need lawyers cuz of..........other lawyers,most of which only want......................money!!!! to hell with justice


Yeah! Get yer gun, that'll do er!:smt082


----------



## Baldy (Jun 21, 2006)

Justice is usually not served in a court of law. Man made laws are broke, bent and twisted in a court of law but very little to no justice is served.


----------



## tony pasley (May 6, 2006)

Mr. P said:


> That makes em ok when ya need em, doesn't it?:smt033


No ; needed does not make them okay. Lawyers make the law, lawyers hear the cases, lawyers are for and against you, it is a trap. The legal system has nothing to do with Justice, Justice is what is needed.


----------



## john doe. (Aug 26, 2006)

I agree with SW. I use to feel disgust with most lawyers but find myself good friends the chief defense attorney in my area. Is is a conservative who is trying to fix many unfair practices done by other defense attorneys. But he is an exception it seems.


----------



## Mr. P (Sep 16, 2006)

tony pasley said:


> No ; needed does not make them okay. Lawyers make the law, lawyers hear the cases, lawyers are for and against you, it is a trap. The legal system has nothing to do with Justice, Justice is what is needed.


Legislators make the law, your 'elected' officials. It's true some are lawyers, but not all.
Don't dump the publics' poor choice of who they elect on one profession.


----------



## Mr. P (Sep 16, 2006)

Baldy said:


> Justice is usually not served in a court of law. Man made laws are broke, bent and twisted in a court of law but very little to no justice is served.


What is 'Justice'?


----------



## scooter (May 9, 2006)

Mr. P said:


> What is 'Justice'?


I would say a good 80% of the time " justice" damn sure aint the "LAW":smt076


----------



## Baldy (Jun 21, 2006)

Well it can have several meanings if you want to look it up. In a court it should be the handing down of a sence to a covicted felon. He gets life and in some states thats 25 or 30 years. With good time and all he gets out 15 to 20 years. Now is that justice. Now if he kills again he might stay in for life.


----------



## scooter (May 9, 2006)

or judges sentencing convicted child molesters to....counselling???????????
or giving armed bank robbers 20 years and then giving a convicted murder 7 years?????????
I read an article somwhere 3-4 years ago that someone wrote about the statistics and on average a robber got """LESS""" time in prison if he killed someone than if he didnt, Now THAT is our current legal system "mostly" fucked up by greedy and/or corrupt LAWYERS. It is in NO WAY a Justice system anymore!!


----------



## Shipwreck (Jan 26, 2006)

Granted - Judges WERE/ARE lawyers. But not all of this is due to lawyers. A lot is due to the people we elect in the state governments.

In TX in the 1980s, they left people out quick due to over crownding. They didn't wanna raise taxes to build more prisons. So, criminals typically served 1 month for a year of their sentence at that time. Finally, some situations happened with the violent offenders who got out, and people got fed up after the murderers kept killing.

Then, they built prisons in the 1990s. Now they are full again.

These are issues because of the elected officials and the way the prison system operates...

Something else to consider....


----------



## milquetoast (Nov 25, 2006)

Interesting. 19 replies so far, but only one and a half answers:
- "I don't want to make a statement until I have a lawyer"; and
- (implied) "May I have a glass of water, please?"
Both worthy of consideration.
All other replies have been talking _about_ the _difficulty_ of finding the right thing to say (true, that's why I started the thread), and some irrelevant digressions about lawyers, that would make a fine separate topic, but don't address the question, "What do you say?"
Seriously, give it some thought. I'd like to have some words in my head that I could practice, just like I practice my firing stroke, sight alignment and trigger press.
What about "I don't want to make a _statement_..." Should it be "I don't want to answer any _questions_..."? The cops are supposed to stop asking _questions_ when you invoke the right to a lawyer. What do you think about that drink of water idea? That sounds pretty clever. Pros and cons?
Other ideas?
I'm especially interested in concrete ideas, like "I would say..." or "One thing you could say is ..."
Thanks.


----------



## 2400 (Feb 4, 2006)

milquetoast said:


> *I'd like to have some words in my head that I could practice*
> 
> *"I don't want to make a statement until I have a lawyer"*


Here you go, short and sweet.


----------



## Baldy (Jun 21, 2006)

Real simple {I wish to speak to my Lawyer} How many times can it be said. Even LEO's involved in a shooting have 24hrs before they have to give a statement.


----------



## tony pasley (May 6, 2006)

What you say is not the problem, it is the how the police, D.A. think that is the problem. You can be totally justified in shooting in self-defense and tell the complete truth and end up in jail because some one in the SYSTEM doesn't believe in self-defense. It is not right or wrong anymore it is how some one wants to apply the Law.


----------



## Mr. P (Sep 16, 2006)

milquetoast said:


> Interesting. 19 replies so far, but only one and a half answers:
> - "I don't want to make a statement until I have a lawyer"; and
> - (implied) "May I have a glass of water, please?"
> Both worthy of consideration.
> ...


IMO, you're asking too much here. "What do you say' will vary depending on EACH situation. There is NO PAT answer.

I think a description of what happened is fair, then if further questions seem to be fishing for something and you feel funny about them the 'I'd like to speak with my lawyer' would be in order.


----------



## tony pasley (May 6, 2006)

The only thing to say is " I want to speak to my lawyer" because you need to protect yourself again from the legal system.


----------



## Mr. P (Sep 16, 2006)

tony pasley said:


> The only thing to say is " I want to speak to my lawyer" because you need to protect yourself again from the legal system.


If you hit and killed a pedestrian. Would you tell the police the truth, that the person stepped out from behind that bush right in front of my car? Or would you speak to your lawyer first?


----------



## Baldy (Jun 21, 2006)

My lawyers advise is to give a general short account of what has happened and then shut up and call for him. One time only account in any type of grave injury or death case you are involed in. Don't say things like I didn't mean to kill him. That would be real stoopid. Tell them that and you are going to the jail house for sure. 
In a pedestrian case I would say he came out of no where before I could react and shut up.


----------



## milquetoast (Nov 25, 2006)

Well, it seems like the consensus is that, whatever you say, and whatever the circumstances, the word "lawyer" should be in there. (Except for the drink of water suggestion, which I find intriguing and worthy of consideration).
In some jurisdictions, police officers carry cards in their wallets, invoking their rights to defer interrogation until they have their lawyer or union rep alongside. That way, they don't have to remember what to say. They just whip out their card that says something like "I hereby invoke my rights yadda yadda yadda."
Question: Do you think it would be wise to carry a similar card that invokes your various rights (there's more to it than just right to a lawyer), so that you don't have to say anything, just hand over the card?


----------



## Mr. P (Sep 16, 2006)

This sure is getting convoluted.

I don’t know where you’re going with this but it’s obvious you have a point. So what is it? Do you want to recite your Constitutional rights on the street, instead of just telling what happened?


----------



## milquetoast (Nov 25, 2006)

Mr. P said:


> This sure is getting convoluted.
> 
> I don't know where you're going with this but it's obvious you have a point. So what is it? Do you want to recite your Constitutional rights on the street, instead of just telling what happened?


My point is, what should I/you/we say when the cops arrive? I don't know the answer, so I invite thoughtful (and cordial) guidance. Do I want to recite my Constitutional rights on the street? Honestly, I don't know -- do I? Would that be a good idea or a bad idea, and why?


----------



## Mr. P (Sep 16, 2006)

milquetoast said:


> My point is, what should I/you/we say when the cops arrive? I don't know the answer, so I invite thoughtful (and cordial) guidance. Do I want to recite my Constitutional rights on the street? Honestly, I don't know -- do I? Would that be a good idea or a bad idea, and why?


Ok...



> IMO, you're asking too much here. "What do you say' will vary depending on EACH situation. There is NO PAT answer.
> 
> I think a description of what happened is fair, then if further questions seem to be fishing for something and you feel funny about them the 'I'd like to speak with my lawyer' would be in order.


That's my answer from page one.


----------



## tony pasley (May 6, 2006)

The less you say ( in todays world) the better, You will be upset and your words might not come out the way you mean to say. The police will have several groups coming to see what happened and how it happened and will pretty well know in a short time. Getting that time to calm down, gather your thoughts, before you make a statement to the police can make the difference in time behind bars or freedom. It is a shame you can't just tell the truth and be done with it, but that is the way it is today.


----------



## Mr. P (Sep 16, 2006)

So, when were you arrested, Tony? I could be wrong in my assumption that you have something you didn’t do, were innocent of, wrong place wrong time etc. You seem to soured on the law not to have a background.


----------



## tony pasley (May 6, 2006)

Mr. P said:


> So, when were you arrested, Tony? I could be wrong in my assumption that you have something you didn't do, were innocent of, wrong place wrong time etc. You seem to soured on the law not to have a background.


Watched a partner go thru hell because of the legal system on a righteous shoot.


----------



## Mr. P (Sep 16, 2006)

tony pasley said:


> Watched a partner go thru hell because of the legal system on a righteous shoot.


IC..then again LEOs (if thats what he was) are held to a high standard, as they should be. I think that system is good, although it may appear cruel it insures the highest standard.


----------



## tony pasley (May 6, 2006)

No the system is in need of repair. When right or wrong doesn't mean anything only the wording of the law means anything. When it is more important to keep from being sued than doing what is right. The system is broken.


----------



## Mr. P (Sep 16, 2006)

tony pasley said:


> No the system is in need of repair. When right or wrong doesn't mean anything only the wording of the law means anything. When it is more important to keep from being sued than doing what is right. *The system is broken.*


I think I'd call that *society*. It was them that let OJ walk, not the law. They said not guilty, not the law. It is them who doul out million dollar awards, not the law. The law isn't broken, we are.


----------



## scooter (May 9, 2006)

Mr. P said:


> I think I'd call that *society*. It was them that let OJ walk, not the law. They said not guilty, not the law. It is them who doul out million dollar awards, not the law. The law isn't broken, we are.[/quote]
> *B.S. B.S. B.S.*
> The JUDGES/LAWYERS/COURTS INTERPRETATION of the laws have been so perverted the law is useless anymore.They do as they damn well please and tell the people to fuck off when we protest their whims.The second revolution isnt all that far in the future Im afraid.


----------



## Mr. P (Sep 16, 2006)

scooter said:


> Mr. P said:
> 
> 
> > I think I'd call that *society*. It was them that let OJ walk, not the law. They said not guilty, not the law. It is them who doul out million dollar awards, not the law. The law isn't broken, we are.[/quote]
> ...


----------



## scooter (May 9, 2006)

You take that spin every time because you're a lawyer,The sheeple on the juries are told what the laws "meaning" is by the judge and lawyers as the trial proceeds and as they are about to be sequestered and how many of these sheeple are lawyers that have any training in the law and the "legal" interpretation of it? When evidence is "not admissible" because, well lets say, it was found in a trash can without a warrant that is our FU legal system and the judges and lawyers got it where it is today.
I think I will now bow out of any further activity in this thread before I say something that gets me banned. Good bye counselor


----------



## Shipwreck (Jan 26, 2006)

scooter said:


> You take that spin every time because you're a lawyer


Ok, I'm gonna step in now while things haven't gone too far... We may all have our opinions of the legal system. But a while back, I got insulted on a thread because I am a probation officer, and someone took the opportunity to drag my profession down. I very much did not appreciate that. When I asked for an apology, the thread got even worse. This thread is not at that level yet, but I don't want it to get close.

*IF* someone on this thread IS a lawyer - if we have a lawyer as a member here (I didn't know that Mr P was, I'm just going off of what was said), I'm not gonna allow all sorts of insults to his profession be directly aimed at him. Not when that person is a polite, participating member.

Many of us do have opinions on things. But, you should be able to control what and how U say it.

I have my own opinions on a lot of stuff. Most of the time when I see someone's comments here on a topic that STRONGLY are objectionable to my personal beliefs, I just keep my mouth shut and don't even reply to it. At least not if I can't do so civilly.


----------

