Why an attorney is necessary before answering any questions...

[oldcorpgunny]

Agree 100%. I have been locked into that youtube channel that the interview was on and been watching a whole slug of interviews that show people opening their mouths too much. It has been a good lesson for me.

I spent six years as a sheriff's deputy and assure you that you NEVER want to talk to the cops. If they want to talk to you, you are a possible suspect. If they are conducting an investigation just tell them you want an attorney present at all times during the questioning. It may seem like you're guilty of something but the cops are anxious to put their cases to bed and they don't much care about protecting your rights.

 

[Hueco]

Insightful -- especially the part about the struggle to keep quiet. People have an incredibly hard time winning that struggle.

I actually really enjoy seeing this in action. Interviewing people, working with clients...people are as uncomfortable with silence as they are with speaking in front of crowds.

 

[EPS]

This guy tried to kill me.
Or this guy tried to kill us.
So I defended myself and the people with me

I will be more than happy to give you a full statement.
At the police station.
Only after I have my attorney present.
Until then I will remain silent.

 

[JohnnyMac]

I actually really enjoy seeing this in action. Interviewing people, working with clients...people are as uncomfortable with silence as they are with speaking in front of crowds.

I agree. It's captivating watching it go down in a real world situation. In some of those interview videos, the narrorator explains that it's a very successful tactic. They show how the interviewer/detective asks a question, and the perp answers. Then the detective just sits there, remains silent and keeps eye contact for an uncomfortable amount of time. The perp eventually gets all nervous and starts blabbing about other stuff so the detective gets a lot more out of him. Then there's this guy that goes all robot on them. Seems like he really stumped and pissed off the detectives. Only reason he got popped is because he left way too much evidence.

 

[revjen45]

1) "Sounds like you don't turn your underwear inside out when you wear it on the 2nd day...... classic!"
You don't have to turn it inside out if you haven't sharted, and if you have you needed a different pair anyway. Look for one without any obvious signs of blast damage or wet to the touch.

2) "Men don't get it. When they say "I do," they get one night of fun and frolic and a date to see the headsman with the dull ax. The only question is "How long do I have to wait?" After a while, the sooner the better is the date you're looking for."
I must have lucked out. My wife of 50 years has done nothing but grace my life.

3) "The self-defense legal community is of the consensus that Michael Drejka had an open window of opportunity to shoot Markeis McGlockton, but he waited too long and the jury determined that the legal window of opportunity had closed before the shot was fired."
I would hardly call any DGU an "opportunity". Having to shoot somebody is a tragic necessity, not an opportunity. The window of necessity closed.

4) "Brittany Jacobs goes into Angry Black Woman mode and says "I park where I want!"
Yup. Good time to GFOD before you find yourself smeared as a vicious racist & misogynist. In today's conditions you could be setting yourself up for a visit by a howling mob.

 

[Jonnyuma]

And watch out for this technique used at the end of unsuccessful interrogations - "Well, you beat us on this one." Or, "It looks like you outfoxed us and beat the wrap. Tell me, off the record, why'd (or how'd) ya do it?"

Does that actually ever work?

I guess it could, theoretically. Criminals often want everyone to know how smart they are... keeping their genius to themselves robs them of their due. A sick version of "returning to the scene", watching the fires you set, or keeping trophies, writing manifestos, taunting LE. I suppose appeal to ego can be pretty powerful.

For normal people, not mystery novel criminal masterminds, shutting the F up is the best policy.

 

[ditchtiger]

I caught myself apologizing for something I did in a dream my wife had. I was like wait a minute, I'm not going to apologize for what dream me did; he can make his own apology.

My wife once woke up mad as heck at me because of what I did in "her" dream.

 

[Rascal01]

somebody on this forum said it before and it really stuck with me

". I am a proponent of Law enforcement like yourself I will answer your questions after I have conferred with my lawyer... I have nothing else to say "

You could try that but it's a slippery slope. An interrogator will grab that and run with it. The adult in you just opened the door to conversation by telling the cops you are a good guy and on their side. That's not a crack in your armor, it's an invitation to tug on the unraveling thread you have just given them.

If you can hold that line you should be okay. After that remark most people will end up talking.

By the way, if you were Mirandized at the time of your arrest, you were warned that anything you say can - and will - be used against you in a court of law. It is entirely possible that you will not be warned again. Other than identifying yourself and asking for legal representation, your conversation with police should be limited to getting a telephone call, use of the bathroom, getting a drink and being fed. If you have been injured ask for medical care.

By the way, your interrogations will likely be recorded and reviewed for lies and inconsistencies which will be used in an attempt to break you. Your lawyer is your shield and your mouthpiece.

You likely will not have been arrested for a felony prior to this encounter. You are excited, emotional and afraid. Your interrogators are trained professionals with solid track records. If they weren't good they wouldn't be in the room with you. Now, are you going to trust your rattled and frightened self to talk your way out of a possible charge of manslaughter or murder?

You were smart enough to get a gun to protect yourself. Your lawyer is like your firearm In that he/she is your safeguard when you are threatened or in trouble. Your lawyer is your defensive tool against this new threat to your well being, and quite possibly to your life. Be smart enough to use it.

If I remember correctly, the same Bill of Rights that gave you the second amendment gave you legal rights in another amendment. Both serve to provide for you and protect you. Those rights are yours to be used. You will have to ask for the lawyer. After that, silence is your weapon of choice as you fight to save yourself.

 

[Rascal01]

Does that actually ever work?

I guess it could, theoretically. Criminals often want everyone to know how smart they are... keeping their genius to themselves robs them of their due. A sick version of "returning to the scene", watching the fires you set, or keeping trophies, writing manifestos, taunting LE. I suppose appeal to ego can be pretty powerful.

For normal people, not mystery novel criminal masterminds, shutting the F up is the best policy.

'Yes, it does work. It is used outside of the interrogation room after the suspect thinks he has beaten the interrogator. The person asking most often is not the interrogator but a non-involved Officer or detective.

Everything else you mention is on the mark.

 

[MannyGlocks]

Rascal,

Why would an LEO act with such routine malice?

Or, are they so hardened by dirt-bag criminals, they're so burned/disgusted, they end up hating everyone not in Law Enforcement?

Sounds like a rotten way to frame an innocent person. Not saying you're incorrect about your cautionary advice, but another reason (maybe) some want to defund the police. They actually have been mistreated when innocent of wrong doing and are left bitter towards Law Enforcement they once had a high opinion of...

Does Law Enforcement perform this type railroading of someone perhaps even when they believe the suspect was within their rights to self defense? But hey, what do I care, I'm gonna get promoted tout suite, because I sent a whole bunch of folks to prison, some who should'nt be there, but tough bubblegumt?

Or, do they only go through this routine when they're convinced it was murder, not self defense?

Thanks!

 

[Joe13]

'Yes, it does work. It is used outside of the interrogation room after the suspect thinks he has beaten the interrogator. The person asking most often is not the interrogator but a non-involved Officer or detective.

Everything else you mention is on the mark.

Good of you to share your experience.

Too many new CC holders that have not done their homework.

First thing they should teach in the CC classes is what to do IF you use your gun imo.

I think (Hope) most long timers have not only practiced shooting but also run thru the what if this ever happens mentally.

I have always been a de-escalator and that's seems even more important when carrying.

I've always been a big guy and knew at 18 that even in a fist fight that they will look at me and then look at the person on the floor and I assume I will most likely be assumed to be the aggressor so I avoid conflicts as mich as possible. I'm not the manners police...

 

[SBC97281]

Why would an LEO act with such routine malice?

Or, are they so hardened by dirt-bag criminals, they're so burned/disgusted, they end up hating everyone not in Law Enforcement?

It is easy to attribute to malice from this mostly law abiding side of the discussion. From the investigator's side all to many suspects continue
to claim their "not guilty status" even through prison sentences even in the face of overwhelming evidence to the contrary. I taught in a prison
where most all of my students continued those claims of innocence. The investigator has thus learned to be suspicious at a minimum.

 

[Joe13]

Married early, went thru a lot of fights over stupid stuff.

But learned how to work thru a disagreement so our 'fights' now last minutes and not hours.

Still married 26 years later and with the work I've done I never wore a wedding ring. On our 10 year anniversary I gave her a gold puzzle ring and had the design tattooed on my finger.

I have joked that if she ever leaves she's got to take my finger with her, but we got thru all the hard stuff and married for life at this point.

IMO if marriage is a give and take. If not it will end in divorce eventually or you'll be miserable.

 

[MannyGlocks]

SBC,

I understand that criminals are rarely going to admit guilt.

But, the questions in my last post remain unanswered, perhaps Rascal will chime in when he can.

 

[Rascal01]

Rascal,

Why would an LEO act with such routine malice?

Or, are they so hardened by dirt-bag criminals, they're so burned/disgusted, they end up hating everyone not in Law Enforcement?

Sounds like a rotten way to frame an innocent person. Not saying you're incorrect about your cautionary advice, but another reason (maybe) some want to defund the police. They actually have been mistreated when innocent of wrong doing and are left bitter towards Law Enforcement they once had a high opinion of...

Does Law Enforcement perform this type railroading of someone perhaps even when they believe the suspect was within their rights to self defense? But hey, what do I care, I'm gonna get promoted tout suite, because I sent a whole bunch of folks to prison, some who should'nt be there, but tough bubblegumt?

Or, do they only go through this routine when they're convinced it was murder, not self defense?

Thanks!

I thought so much of your post that I wrote a huge detailed response, then thought better of it. Management here would have fired me for using up their digits.

I never met an investigator who had any interest in putting an innocent person in jail. That's the opposite of what we do.

Three types of self defense shootings come to mind.

The first is a clear cut case of self defense, in other words, a good shoot.

The second would be a shooting where police need more information to determine what happened. It's an open case until resolved one way or the other.

In these first two types of shootings you can expect to be interviewed. The police ask questions and you answer them. It is not hostile or confrontational. The purpose is to gather information. You are not a suspect, nor are you off the hook.

The third type of shooting is when it appears possible that a criminal act took place. That is where both interviews and interrogations will likely take place. An interview is when you provide facts and information about what happened. An interrogation is when somebody may have been involved in a criminal act and the police ask very direct questions to gather information. Interrogations come in different flavors but all are directed to get results. No one should.get railroaded if they are innocent. The idea is to find out what happened and enter the suspect, if there is one, into the criminal justice system.

Self defense shooters are in a difficult arena because killing a person is big time serious business. On one hand you might walk. On the other you might go to prison. And that's why you need a lawyer from the get go. And that's why you don't talk to the police without one.

You won't go to interrogation unless there is a reason. Again, that's why you have a lawyer who will be present during questioning.

The final say in this will be with the prosecuting attorney in your jurisdiction. They don't take every case sent to them. They may very well find the shoot justified. They may send the case back for further investigation. They may choose to drop the case. If they go to trial it is because they think they have a good case.

Much may depend on where you are located. What works in Dallas may not fly in Philly.

 

[WillametteWill]

Another thread recently discussed the "don't talk to the police" narrative as well. A few of us noted all the reasons this is horrible advice if you are innocent. Remember, on average about 97% of people defended by attorneys are guilty. If you are in that 97%...don't talk to police.

Self defense is an affirmative defense, you have to admit shooting / killing someone and be able to explain why he needed it. If you don't set the narrative and say very limited, specific things (and ABSOLUTELY not the rehearsed, "I was in fear for my life," saying we so often hear), you are going to have problems. You need to point out evidence that supports your reasons for using force. You need to point out witnesses. You need to set the narrative, briefly, of why you needed to use force. (And we seriously need to think about this more than we practice mag changes and Bill drills). Then you need to wait for your attorney. George Zimmerman would have been convicted if he waited for his attorney. He honestly explained his position which allowed for the correct evidence to be collected.

The self-defense legal community is of the consensus that Michael Drejka had an open window of opportunity to shoot Markeis McGlockton, but he waited too long and the jury determined that the legal window of opportunity had closed before the shot was fired.

I don't think there is remotely a consensus this was a lawful shoot, or could have been, since it seemed pretty clear that he could not explain why. And being such...he should have kept his mouth shut. As others quoted from his interview, he could not remotely justify using force and shot on speculation of what could have happened.

As an officer I interviewed many people that defended themselves who did not go to jail because they explained what happened and why. If they would have shut up and asked for a lawyer they would have gone to jail and likely been convicted because evidence of their innocents would possibly not been collected.

I would strongly recommend watching the Massad Ayoob video in post #56. He explains the "why" based on 40+ years of experience with these types of cases. Few attorneys have actually defended an innocent person in a self defense situation. (Side note, I was in this class where the Mas video was made with John from ASP). To quote attorney Andrew Branca, "Carry a gun so you are hard to kill, know the law so you are hard to convict." Recommend reading his book as well.

Sorry...long post, now back to taking about wives and listening. Been ignoring mine while typing this.

 

[Nick Burkhardt]

Firearms trainer and use of force expert Brannon Lebouef of Nolatac breaks it down for us.
Jump to time index 6:40 to skip the opening banter

 

[MannyGlocks]

Rascal & Willamette,

Thanks for taking the time to post about this very serious question.

Now, which hypothesis is best regarding having a lawyer present or not during the time you're questioned by Law Enforcement after you're involved in a self defense shooting?

If I read the two posts correctly, what I took away is: 1. Always have a lawyer present when being questioned.

2. No, don't have a lawyer present as it makes you look guilty...wing it if your innocent, get a lawyer if you're guilty as that what the guilty always do...

Do I have that right or ...?

Thanks!

 

[revjen45]

1) my wife has just come to terms with that im just inherently bad at loading a dishwasher, doing laundry, sweeping, mopping, organizing, vacuuming.....
This is called managed incompetence.

2) " No, don't have a lawyer present as it makes you look guilty. "
What it "looks like" is nowhere as important as the damage you inflict on yourself by talking to a hostile entity that's trying to destroy the rest of your life. "Anything you say can be used against you..." means just that.
Inculpatory utterances are admissible as a confession.
Exculpatory utterances are inadmissible as hearsay.
Whether or not the cops act with malice or honor is nowhere near as relevant as what the DA does, and Democrat DAs are just fine with using lawfare as a political weapon.

3) When the legal rectitude of their actions may be questioned the cops lawyer up, and they have some degree of immunity. If they don't trust the law, why should I?

 

[Andy54Hawken]

First before one reads further....
This happened a long while ago...and :
The victim has recovered...
I did not get charged , go to jail , etc...

And maybe most importantly ....
I am not at all interested in someone else's view or opinion about my actions....*
As I said it happened a while ago...and ended well.
I write this simply to state what happened to me...when I did talk to law enforcement after "using" a firearm for defense.
* I say this because my actions got the result that I needed :
The attack to stop....
The attacker to leave...
Me not being charged with anything , or jailed...
So it don't matter what someone thinks of my actions...since they worked to get the result that I needed.

I was awakened by my daughter , saying she heard someone yelling and crying.
I went to our door that faces our then neighbor....who I saw , getting her head repeatedly slammed against her porch railing , by a man....

I told my wife what was happening and to call 911...
Meanwhile....the man kept on yelling at my neighbor and hitting her...both with one hand and while slamming her head on her porch railing....
Blood was very visible on head , face and the railing itself...

Being deer season...I went and got the rifle I was using and levered a round into the chamber....
Keeping the rifle pointing down and low....I open our door and told the man to : "Stop...the police have been called you need to leave."

The man tells me to : "Go "F" myself "...
He then stops beating my neighbor and advances towards me....actually walking onto my driveway next to my porch steps and was advancing towards them....

I ,retreated back into my house , bringing my rifle up , and pointing it at him , telling him to : "Stop....you need to leave"
He actually thought about that for what seemed like forever....then he left.
( In reality it was only about a minute or two )

We applied first aid to my neighbor and waited for law enforcement and the medics to arrive.

I did talk to the responding officers...and lucky for me , I had other neighbors who were witnesses.
What I said was what I related above.

What worked in my favor was :
No one was shot...
The man was my neighbor's soon to be Ex...he had a restraining order against him and a police record...
I do not have a police record...
I have a military background ( that was mentioned by the responding officers )
I remained calm while talking....
I put my rifle back prior to law enforcement arriving...
I had witnesses...
The victim was seriously injured...

To talk or not...is your choice...in my case , it worked...
Would it have worked if this happened to someone else ....Maybe , or maybe not....
Would it have worked if I had to shoot him....I do not know.

A hard and fast rule of never talk to law enforcement without a lawyer , is not very helpful , since life does not play by hard and fast rules.
If one does talk...
Keep it to the 3 C's :
Be Clear , Be Complete , Be Concise.

With that said...a lawyer who can speak for you , may be the best...and is always something consider.
Andy