• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

The Simple Way to Prevent False Confessions

radcen said:
The Simple Way to Prevent False Confessions

https://thecrimereport.org/2017/11/30/the-simple-way-to-prevent-false-confessions/
Click to expand...

I agree with that. I seen some of those 48 hours crime investigation type shows where the false confessions happen because the individual is being threatened with severe prison time or is being worn down by being interrogated for hours on end while information is being slowed fed to the suspect. Having a lawyer present would definitely cut down on that or even stop it.
 
Crovax said:
It’s also a simple way to prevent all confessions.
Click to expand...

You didn't read the link. If you had you would have noted this...

"Another argument is that police will never solve cases if lawyers are present because suspects will not talk. But in England, where the law has required lawyers for decades, research clarifies this is not the case—arrestees are just as likely to give statements with lawyers present."

There are sources all over that talk about this and how this fear is unfounded. Thirty second Google search if you're honestly interested.
 
radcen said:
You didn't read the link. If you had you would have noted this...

"Another argument is that police will never solve cases if lawyers are present because suspects will not talk. But in England, where the law has required lawyers for decades, research clarifies this is not the case—arrestees are just as likely to give statements with lawyers present."

There are sources all over that talk about this and how this fear is unfounded. Thirty second Google search if you're honestly interested.
Click to expand...

You can tell 'em never to talk about the case over the recorded prison phones and the next thing you know, you're holding a CD of calls with them saying/admitting all sorts of crap to friends, family; worse, trying to arrange the murder of a witness.

The right to an attorney doesn't help much with self-incrimination if the suspect thinks he's sneaky.
 
Mr Person said:
You can tell 'em never to talk about the case over the recorded prison phones and the next thing you know, you're holding a CD of calls with them saying/admitting all sorts of crap to friends, family; worse, trying to arrange the murder of a witness.

The right to an attorney doesn't help much with self-incrimination if the suspect thinks he's sneaky.
Click to expand...

Yeah. Boggles the brain cells, doesn't it?

I would be afraid to say anything anywhere within the walls of a police station, even if being allowed to meet privately with a family member and/or attorney.

I don't have the link handy, but it has been cited that the English system still works well because, simply, people like to talk about themselves.
 
radcen said:
You didn't read the link. If you had you would have noted this...

"Another argument is that police will never solve cases if lawyers are present because suspects will not talk. But in England, where the law has required lawyers for decades, research clarifies this is not the case—arrestees are just as likely to give statements with lawyers present."

There are sources all over that talk about this and how this fear is unfounded. Thirty second Google search if you're honestly interested.
Click to expand...

I was an LEO for 18 years and interrogated at least 350-400 suspects in all manner of criminal cases (misdemeanor property damage to double homicide). In the U.S., if you are a defense attorney the very FIRST thing you do is cut off all interrogation and tell your client to stop talking. There is no meaningful precedent with regard to how having an attorney present from the first interrogation to the last will result in anything other than this...when the suspect asks for an attorney, ALL questioning stops. It cannot resume unless the defendant recontacts law enforcement of his or her own free will, revokes their request to have an attorney present during questioning, or uses their attorney to schedule an interview which is absolutely controlled by the defense attorney (and rarely ends in a confession...it's often an attempt to trade information for leniency).

If having an attorney present before questioning is mandatory, it will absolutely result in much fewer confessions and potentially many guilty suspects escaping justice.
 
radcen said:
You didn't read the link. If you had you would have noted this...

"Another argument is that police will never solve cases if lawyers are present because suspects will not talk. But in England, where the law has required lawyers for decades, research clarifies this is not the case—arrestees are just as likely to give statements with lawyers present."

There are sources all over that talk about this and how this fear is unfounded. Thirty second Google search if you're honestly interested.
Click to expand...

There is a big difference between making a statement and giving a confession. Legally there is no advantage in confessing to the police since they don’t have any power to make a plea bargain.
 
Crovax said:
There is a big difference between making a statement and giving a confession. Legally there is no advantage in confessing to the police since they don’t have any power to make a plea bargain.
Click to expand...

Very good point. The one thing that police can do is approach the prosecutor and seek delaying the issuance of a charge or filing of a lesser charge.
 
Crovax said:
There is a big difference between making a statement and giving a confession. Legally there is no advantage in confessing to the police since they don’t have any power to make a plea bargain.
Click to expand...

I was watching Cops this morning and this cop was asking this girl if he could look through her purse. She was saying no, as is her right and his argument was that he didn't know what was going on, that she was within her right to say no, but he wanted to know who she was... anyway... this went on for a bit and it looked like they were gonna let her go but then she volunteers that she has drugs in her purse. The cop then arrests her. I couldn't believe it. She said, well, you were going to look in the bag anyway and he says, no, I was about to let you go. :lol:
 
Bodhisattva said:
I was watching Cops this morning and this cop was asking this girl if he could look through her purse. She was saying no, as is her right and his argument was that he didn't know what was going on, that she was within her right to say no, but he wanted to know who she was... anyway... this went on for a bit and it looked like they were gonna let her go but then she volunteers that she has drugs in her purse. The cop then arrests her. I couldn't believe it. She said, well, you were going to look in the bag anyway and he says, no, I was about to let you go. :lol:
Click to expand...

:doh

I totally believe that.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom