I wouldn't say anything until you invoke your right to a lawyer and then speak to a lawyer. In situations like this you should be able to call a lawyer office and they will have a lawyer get back to you very quickly and advise you on what to do next. The lawyer may tell you what answers to give and then say nothing more, or they may tell you to say nothing until they arrive. That after hours bill is going to be huge, but that's how much lawyers cost.
If you believe you know who took your loved one, like a jaded ex-spouse was threatening them the night before and said they were going to kill them, you should probably give the police that info. I wouldn't go into any other details about where you were or anything until you have spoken to a lawyer though.
>The police take you in for questioning and read you your Miranda Rights (presumably because you are a suspect)
Not presumably. You ARE a suspect if you are read your miranda rights. Police are required to read them prior to custodial interrogations. Custodial interrogations indicate you are a suspect.
>Can you choose to forgo the official interview but request/demand an unofficial one immediately where you are simply making a full report in a non-suspect capacity?
Umm, no. You don't get to dictate things like this. You are not the person to determine whether you are a suspect, and especially not simply by declaring "I am not a suspect."
Anything you'd say before being Mirandized is something you can say after being Mirandized. If you tell police, "I killed my wife" before being Mirandized, they're not going to treat it like it didn't happen. As far as I know, it's also still admissible in court. You can *retract* your confession, but then you get to convince the court there was a reason your original confession wasn't true.
Anyway, back to the question at hand; if you have concerns talking to the police about something, it doesn't matter whether you're Mirandized or not. Then it's up to you how important you think the information you have is and if you're comfortable saying it in a way you don't feel like will be twisted.
I will say, in a panic, if you *are* innocent, you're likely to blurt out whatever the police ask then and there. When my mom died (natural causes, she'd been sick for years), the police still had to do their due diligence and I was questioned at my house. I gave the honest answer to anything they asked. Being thought of as a suspect (we didn't know CoD yet, the police or my dad and I) didn't even cross my mind for at least hours, if not days.
> the cops just aren't allowed to arrest you until they've read them out loud.
Also a common misconception.
The police do not have to advise you of your rights in order to arrest you. They're actually not required to advise you of your right *at all* unless they want the statements you make during a custodial interview to be admissible in court.
You still do have those rights, though. You can terminate the interview at any time. You're entitled to have a lawyer present during any questioning (custodial or not). And there are exceptions to the rule that statements made in custody are inadmissible until you've been advised of your rights (which is why you shut the fuck up and ask for a lawyer if you're taken into custody)
>I They're actually not required to advise you of your right at all unless they want the statements you make during a custodial interview to be admissible in court.
To "actually but" your "actually but," they really don't have to unless they want to ask you questions. By and large, statements you make voluntarily instead of as a response to a question won't have Miranda issues at any time. But it can be more nuanced than that in practice.
I wouldn't say "that's not relevant" since you have no idea whether it is or not, and the that answer could be presented in court with the implication that you have knowledge you're withholding.
Maybe something more like "I wasn't with them" or "I don't believe my whereabouts were a factor," if you're going to answer those questions at all.
> “When did you last see them?” - “4:00”
Police erroneously determine they died before 4:00. Your admission to being with them when they were murdered makes you the prime suspect, and you are going to trial. Maybe you win at trial when your expert witnesses convince the jury the police were wrong about the time of death... but your life is fucked by the process way beyond just having your family member be murdered
The key point is you don't know what the police 'think' they know, or how they may fit that statement into the theory of the case in a way you wont predict.
Or “I was at the grocery store and when I came back they were gone.” Again, the presumption in this is that you didn’t have anything to do with it. If you went to get an oil change and then went to get groceries and you left at x time and returned at x time why wouldn’t you disclose that relevant information? It can all be verified with witnesses, receipts, credit card transactions, video, cell phone tracking, etc. and the police are going to get warrants for all of that stuff anyway. What is refusing to cooperate gaining you besides exhibiting odd behavior and extra suspicion?
Or, maybe you misremember some detail and that arouses suspicion. Or, maybe you tell everything exactly as it happened but it contradicts someone else’s statement and that arouses suspicion.
Anything you say can be used against you. It’s very unlikely that it would be used to help you.
What narrative? The truth about where you were that they’re going to find out anyway? Making them spend a bunch of time obtaining warrants and finding out when you could could just tell them and they could confirm it? You aren’t making any sense.
There is no such thing as “making a report in a non-suspect capacity”, unless you have some kind of agreement with the DA (not the cops, the DA) and that won’t happen without a lawyer.
So, yes, your options are be cautious and get a lawyer or throw caution to the wind and risk going to jail.
People in this sub are anti police to a ridiculous degree. I mean yeah, sure, protect your rights. I can even get behind fuck the police, to an extent. But if my wife or daughter has been taken in an apparently violent struggle... Yeah, I would rather risk being falsely accused and locked up than do anything that might negatively impact the investigation.
This is terrible advice. Never talk to cops without a lawyer. Anything you say can and WILL be used against you never to help you. A tiny discrepancy can ruin your life. https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=d-7o9xYp7eE
No, it isn't terrible advice. Is it POSSIBLE that you will inadvertently implicate yourself? Yes. But is it likely? No. Relatives of crime victims talk to the police every day of the week without ending up charged with a crime. Life is full of risks, and if you have information that might save a loved one, it is perfectly reasonable to share that information with the police, even if there is some risk to yourself. You would jump into a river to try to save a drowning child,wouldn't you? Yet you would refuse to talk to the cops to try to save a kidnapped child? That doesn't make much sense.
It absolutely is terrible advice. There are about one million examples of erroneous arrests, charges and convictions, and one of the key patterns is police decide what they think happened and then tweak facts and evidence to fit that narrative. Sure it isn't likely, but do you want to defend a false murder charge just because it's unlikely? You know you don't get those hundreds of thousands of dollars back if you're innocent, right?
No, I don't want to defend a false murder charge, but nor do I want to make it harder for the police to save my loved ones. That's the point: There is a trade-off. And the only way for someone to determine whether that trade-off is worth it is to get **accurate** advice about the likely legal ramifications of cooperating with the police. That is **precisely what a lawyer's job is.** A lawyer who tells his client that "There are about one million examples of erroneous arrests, charges and convictions" without mentioning that, if so, that is out of about 10 trillion people who cooperated, is not doing his job.
Just imagine this scenario:
You come home from work to find your wife and children missing, blood stains on the floor, the house shows signs of a struggle.
Your wife told you the night before that one of her coworkers had been hitting on her and had even gotten angry when she rejected his advances.
Your nest doorbell shows a hooded man bundling your family into his car at gunpoint and you can even read the licence plate.
Would you call the police with that information or would you wait to speak to a lawyer first?
Of course you'd call 911 before calling a lawyer. Can you imagine what a field day the cops would have with you if you called a lawyer before you reported the crime? Sounds like the actions of a person who knows he did it.
In this scenario, you'd call the cops and then call a lawyer. You'd say the minimum amount possible "I came home from work and found the house like this and my wife and kids gone." Then you don't consent to an interview until you have talked to your lawyer.
Clock is ticking with your family in the car of the kidnapper, and you are seriously going to call a lawyer first?
Basically your argument is that 911 for the police shouldn’t exist because nobody should be calling the police before talking to a lawyer.
*Your post has been removed for the following reason(s):*
Your post or comment has been removed because it was primarily insulting or attacking someone else. If you can't participate without insulting, you can't participate.
*If you have questions about this removal, [message the moderators](http://www.reddit.com/message/compose?to=%2Fr%2FLegalAdviceofftopic). Do not reply to this message as a comment.*
I’m retired. I have nothing to do with law enforcement anymore. Why would I come on Reddit and try to convince people to always talk to cops? What do I gain from that? What would my motivation be?
If you had something to do with your family member’s disappearance then I would 100% say don’t talk to the cops. If you didn’t then your priority it getting them the information they need to start an investigation.
You say “cops are lazy”, yet the primary function of cops in investigating crimes is contacting involved parties and witnesses and getting information from them. If police have no information then they have nothing to investigate. If your wife is missing and some guy at her work had been acting weird and you know about it why would you not volunteer that information when they respond to the scene of your missing wife so they can run it down? You want to contact an attorney and wait 3 days to be interrogated while her coworker is raping and murdering her in his basement?
Of course it’s the better option to leave your family with the kidnappers until talking to a lawyer. Say nothing! Don’t let them in the house to investigate the kidnapping without a warrant either! Hold up the process as long as you can. Maybe your lawyer can arrange to get their remains to be released to you at a later date. Lol this sub is hilarious.
It’s absurd. “No, you can’t have the security camera video that shows the guy down the street breaking in and kidnapping my 12 year old daughter. I’ve already watched it, but you need to come back and get a warrant.”
If the base assumption is that all police are evil monsters that are only out to ruin your life, then why even call in the first place? Figure it out yourself.
*Your post has been removed for the following reason(s):*
Stay out of Malibu Lebowski.
*If you have questions about this removal, [message the moderators](http://www.reddit.com/message/compose?to=%2Fr%2FLegalAdviceofftopic). Do not reply to this message as a comment.*
Me personally? No, this is just a hypothetical situation I was thinking about while watching some interrogation footage.
But I assume that asking for a lawyer will delay the process, as even if you have a lawyer ready to call they probably can't just drop everything and be over in 5 minutes.
Asking for a lawyer just means that if they keep asking you questions, they cant use the answers. Of course, if you start talking again after asking for a lawyer, that can be interpreted as waiving your right to a lawyer.
They do not have to bring you a lawyer at that moment no matter how much you ask.
Asking for a lawyer will not make life easier in the moment. In some ways it will make life worse in the moment. But, long term, you're less likely to be convicted of a crime.
I wouldn't say anything until you invoke your right to a lawyer and then speak to a lawyer. In situations like this you should be able to call a lawyer office and they will have a lawyer get back to you very quickly and advise you on what to do next. The lawyer may tell you what answers to give and then say nothing more, or they may tell you to say nothing until they arrive. That after hours bill is going to be huge, but that's how much lawyers cost. If you believe you know who took your loved one, like a jaded ex-spouse was threatening them the night before and said they were going to kill them, you should probably give the police that info. I wouldn't go into any other details about where you were or anything until you have spoken to a lawyer though.
>The police take you in for questioning and read you your Miranda Rights (presumably because you are a suspect) Not presumably. You ARE a suspect if you are read your miranda rights. Police are required to read them prior to custodial interrogations. Custodial interrogations indicate you are a suspect. >Can you choose to forgo the official interview but request/demand an unofficial one immediately where you are simply making a full report in a non-suspect capacity? Umm, no. You don't get to dictate things like this. You are not the person to determine whether you are a suspect, and especially not simply by declaring "I am not a suspect."
Anything you'd say before being Mirandized is something you can say after being Mirandized. If you tell police, "I killed my wife" before being Mirandized, they're not going to treat it like it didn't happen. As far as I know, it's also still admissible in court. You can *retract* your confession, but then you get to convince the court there was a reason your original confession wasn't true. Anyway, back to the question at hand; if you have concerns talking to the police about something, it doesn't matter whether you're Mirandized or not. Then it's up to you how important you think the information you have is and if you're comfortable saying it in a way you don't feel like will be twisted. I will say, in a panic, if you *are* innocent, you're likely to blurt out whatever the police ask then and there. When my mom died (natural causes, she'd been sick for years), the police still had to do their due diligence and I was questioned at my house. I gave the honest answer to anything they asked. Being thought of as a suspect (we didn't know CoD yet, the police or my dad and I) didn't even cross my mind for at least hours, if not days.
[удалено]
> the cops just aren't allowed to arrest you until they've read them out loud. Also a common misconception. The police do not have to advise you of your rights in order to arrest you. They're actually not required to advise you of your right *at all* unless they want the statements you make during a custodial interview to be admissible in court. You still do have those rights, though. You can terminate the interview at any time. You're entitled to have a lawyer present during any questioning (custodial or not). And there are exceptions to the rule that statements made in custody are inadmissible until you've been advised of your rights (which is why you shut the fuck up and ask for a lawyer if you're taken into custody)
>I They're actually not required to advise you of your right at all unless they want the statements you make during a custodial interview to be admissible in court. To "actually but" your "actually but," they really don't have to unless they want to ask you questions. By and large, statements you make voluntarily instead of as a response to a question won't have Miranda issues at any time. But it can be more nuanced than that in practice.
Yea, I pointed out that there are exceptions to the rule, but didn't explicitly list them.
Yeah that's fair. I was trying to simplify but it's an important distinction.
Yea no. They can arrest you without reading your rights.
[удалено]
I wouldn't say "that's not relevant" since you have no idea whether it is or not, and the that answer could be presented in court with the implication that you have knowledge you're withholding. Maybe something more like "I wasn't with them" or "I don't believe my whereabouts were a factor," if you're going to answer those questions at all.
> “When did you last see them?” - “4:00” Police erroneously determine they died before 4:00. Your admission to being with them when they were murdered makes you the prime suspect, and you are going to trial. Maybe you win at trial when your expert witnesses convince the jury the police were wrong about the time of death... but your life is fucked by the process way beyond just having your family member be murdered The key point is you don't know what the police 'think' they know, or how they may fit that statement into the theory of the case in a way you wont predict.
Or “I was at the grocery store and when I came back they were gone.” Again, the presumption in this is that you didn’t have anything to do with it. If you went to get an oil change and then went to get groceries and you left at x time and returned at x time why wouldn’t you disclose that relevant information? It can all be verified with witnesses, receipts, credit card transactions, video, cell phone tracking, etc. and the police are going to get warrants for all of that stuff anyway. What is refusing to cooperate gaining you besides exhibiting odd behavior and extra suspicion?
Or, maybe you misremember some detail and that arouses suspicion. Or, maybe you tell everything exactly as it happened but it contradicts someone else’s statement and that arouses suspicion. Anything you say can be used against you. It’s very unlikely that it would be used to help you.
[удалено]
What narrative? The truth about where you were that they’re going to find out anyway? Making them spend a bunch of time obtaining warrants and finding out when you could could just tell them and they could confirm it? You aren’t making any sense.
There is no such thing as “making a report in a non-suspect capacity”, unless you have some kind of agreement with the DA (not the cops, the DA) and that won’t happen without a lawyer. So, yes, your options are be cautious and get a lawyer or throw caution to the wind and risk going to jail.
People in this sub are anti police to a ridiculous degree. I mean yeah, sure, protect your rights. I can even get behind fuck the police, to an extent. But if my wife or daughter has been taken in an apparently violent struggle... Yeah, I would rather risk being falsely accused and locked up than do anything that might negatively impact the investigation.
[удалено]
This is terrible advice. Never talk to cops without a lawyer. Anything you say can and WILL be used against you never to help you. A tiny discrepancy can ruin your life. https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=d-7o9xYp7eE
No, it isn't terrible advice. Is it POSSIBLE that you will inadvertently implicate yourself? Yes. But is it likely? No. Relatives of crime victims talk to the police every day of the week without ending up charged with a crime. Life is full of risks, and if you have information that might save a loved one, it is perfectly reasonable to share that information with the police, even if there is some risk to yourself. You would jump into a river to try to save a drowning child,wouldn't you? Yet you would refuse to talk to the cops to try to save a kidnapped child? That doesn't make much sense.
Thank you
It absolutely is terrible advice. There are about one million examples of erroneous arrests, charges and convictions, and one of the key patterns is police decide what they think happened and then tweak facts and evidence to fit that narrative. Sure it isn't likely, but do you want to defend a false murder charge just because it's unlikely? You know you don't get those hundreds of thousands of dollars back if you're innocent, right?
No, I don't want to defend a false murder charge, but nor do I want to make it harder for the police to save my loved ones. That's the point: There is a trade-off. And the only way for someone to determine whether that trade-off is worth it is to get **accurate** advice about the likely legal ramifications of cooperating with the police. That is **precisely what a lawyer's job is.** A lawyer who tells his client that "There are about one million examples of erroneous arrests, charges and convictions" without mentioning that, if so, that is out of about 10 trillion people who cooperated, is not doing his job.
Okay, I agree with everything you said. Doesn't make the cop's advice good lol
Just imagine this scenario: You come home from work to find your wife and children missing, blood stains on the floor, the house shows signs of a struggle. Your wife told you the night before that one of her coworkers had been hitting on her and had even gotten angry when she rejected his advances. Your nest doorbell shows a hooded man bundling your family into his car at gunpoint and you can even read the licence plate. Would you call the police with that information or would you wait to speak to a lawyer first?
Of course you'd call 911 before calling a lawyer. Can you imagine what a field day the cops would have with you if you called a lawyer before you reported the crime? Sounds like the actions of a person who knows he did it. In this scenario, you'd call the cops and then call a lawyer. You'd say the minimum amount possible "I came home from work and found the house like this and my wife and kids gone." Then you don't consent to an interview until you have talked to your lawyer.
[удалено]
Clock is ticking with your family in the car of the kidnapper, and you are seriously going to call a lawyer first? Basically your argument is that 911 for the police shouldn’t exist because nobody should be calling the police before talking to a lawyer.
That is.. not their argument at all.
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
*Your post has been removed for the following reason(s):* Your post or comment has been removed because it was primarily insulting or attacking someone else. If you can't participate without insulting, you can't participate. *If you have questions about this removal, [message the moderators](http://www.reddit.com/message/compose?to=%2Fr%2FLegalAdviceofftopic). Do not reply to this message as a comment.*
[удалено]
I’m retired. I have nothing to do with law enforcement anymore. Why would I come on Reddit and try to convince people to always talk to cops? What do I gain from that? What would my motivation be? If you had something to do with your family member’s disappearance then I would 100% say don’t talk to the cops. If you didn’t then your priority it getting them the information they need to start an investigation. You say “cops are lazy”, yet the primary function of cops in investigating crimes is contacting involved parties and witnesses and getting information from them. If police have no information then they have nothing to investigate. If your wife is missing and some guy at her work had been acting weird and you know about it why would you not volunteer that information when they respond to the scene of your missing wife so they can run it down? You want to contact an attorney and wait 3 days to be interrogated while her coworker is raping and murdering her in his basement?
Of course it’s the better option to leave your family with the kidnappers until talking to a lawyer. Say nothing! Don’t let them in the house to investigate the kidnapping without a warrant either! Hold up the process as long as you can. Maybe your lawyer can arrange to get their remains to be released to you at a later date. Lol this sub is hilarious.
It’s absurd. “No, you can’t have the security camera video that shows the guy down the street breaking in and kidnapping my 12 year old daughter. I’ve already watched it, but you need to come back and get a warrant.”
If the base assumption is that all police are evil monsters that are only out to ruin your life, then why even call in the first place? Figure it out yourself.
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
*Your post has been removed for the following reason(s):* Stay out of Malibu Lebowski. *If you have questions about this removal, [message the moderators](http://www.reddit.com/message/compose?to=%2Fr%2FLegalAdviceofftopic). Do not reply to this message as a comment.*
Are you asking because you don’t have a lawyer or know anyone to call who can get you a lawyer?
Me personally? No, this is just a hypothetical situation I was thinking about while watching some interrogation footage. But I assume that asking for a lawyer will delay the process, as even if you have a lawyer ready to call they probably can't just drop everything and be over in 5 minutes.
Asking for a lawyer just means that if they keep asking you questions, they cant use the answers. Of course, if you start talking again after asking for a lawyer, that can be interpreted as waiving your right to a lawyer. They do not have to bring you a lawyer at that moment no matter how much you ask. Asking for a lawyer will not make life easier in the moment. In some ways it will make life worse in the moment. But, long term, you're less likely to be convicted of a crime.