RickD427
Member
No silence can EVER get you in more trouble than running your mouth without benefit of counsel.
I don't know that cop.
I don't know his motivations.
Not only is he allowed to lie to me, he's ENCOURAGED to.
Since I can't trust his word, why on earth would I just open myself up to a vast spectrum of potential criminal liability by speaking without benefit of counsel?
You said it yourself, "An OFFICER can use your silence as evidence of guilt." A COURT can't.
I'd much rather invoke my right to remain silent and trigger an actionable false arrest than to falsely incriminate MYSELF by answering questions without benefit of counsel, the REAL purposes of which I have no idea.
Perhaps the name "Richard Jewell" means nothing to you...
Sir,
You really need to read Salinas. A court can very certainly use silence as evidence of guilt, just as can the officer.
I'm familiar with the Jewell case, just as I'm familiar with many others where someone could easily have dispelled any perception of guilt through simple explanation but chose not to. Those folks needlessly went to jail and stayed there until a diligent detective sorted things out. Pretty much a waste of everyone's time. The system isn't perfect as the Jewell case pointed out, but you had to reach back 22 years to pull out the Jewell case. On any given day, you can pull out hundreds of investigative releases from Los Angeles County were I speak from.