Randy Cassingham's Blog

Posted by John, Denver on June 5, 2009:

I noticed the police officer admitted lying to suspects, by telling the suspect something is off the record when he turns off the portable tape recorder even though the interview is still being recorded.

---

Yep, he freely and clearly admitted that cops lie to suspects -- and that it's allowed by the courts. If suspects lie, it's taken as evidence of guilt. The best course of action: shut up! -rc

Posted by Steve, Texas on June 6, 2009:

I'd like to remind you that talking to anyone on a legal matter (cops, prosecutors, anyone) is even more hazardous in the wake of the Scooter Libby case. As Scooter found out, even if you are cleared of the original charge, all it takes is for your memory to differ in any detail from the memories of anyone else involved to get you charged with perjury. All it takes after that is a jury that doesn't like you, or someone associated with you (at least one member of the jury openly admitted he voted Scooter guilty ONLY because he wouldn't get a chance to send Cheney or Bush to jail), and you're screwed.

Don't make any statement on any legal matter (or anything that might become a legal matter) without a full audio and video recording made under your or your lawyer's total control. Once you've made that statement, your response to any other questions should be "I've already stated for the record; I have nothing to change."

Posted by Greg - Florida on June 6, 2009:

The idea of asking for a lawyer before answering a police officer's questions is a double edged sword. If you ask for one, at trial the cop responds to the prosecution lawyer's question of, "What did he or she say," by saying, "He or She refused to talk to us or explain their actions and asked for a lawyer." As the trial jurors watch TV and all the crime programs, they immediately equate an accused person asking for a lawyer as "lawyering up"...which only guilty people do (in the shows). I think the only way to solve this is that it should be mandatory that police not question anyone unless an attorney is present.

---

I suspect such testimony would be inadmissible. -rc

Posted by Adam, Oklahoma on June 6, 2009:

Is there any way to find a transcript of this, or is it hosted somewhere that's available for download? I'm on dial-up and otherwise my only hope to watch these videos is to hope my connection doesn't crap-out while they're still buffering.

---

I'm not aware of any transcripts, sorry. And the professor, especially, talks really fast, so it'd be a hard job to do. What I do on videos is get them started, hit "pause", and do other things while it downloads. -rc

Posted by Panda, Missouri on June 6, 2009:

I heartily agree - Don't talk to the cops.... or the dog catcher, or the code enforcement officer.... anyone from the gov't. Your words can be used against you.

Perhaps Adam, if you can't view the videos at home, go to your library and watch them there, or ask a friend with high speed dial up to copy them to disk for you so you can have them for your own.

Posted by Andy, Dublin OH on June 6, 2009:

I'm still not sure how it would work if you got pulled over for (allegedly) speeding. The cop asks you what speed you were doing or makes a similar comment and then you ask for a lawyer? Isn't that likely to get you carted off for some jail time whilst you wait for a lawyer to arrive?

---

Cops don't ask for what speed you're going: that's specific questioning about a crime, and they have to Mirandize you first. Instead, they might ask "Do you know why I pulled you over?" or similar, which isn't specific enough to trigger anything -- but may lead you to say "Sorry I was speeding officer, but I was....", which is a confession. The point is to NOT admit anything, but instead just be pleasant, provide your identification, decline any searches, and if he asks you questions about a crime (speeding is a crime), say, "If you're investigating a possible crime, I wouldn't be able to answer any questions for you without my attorney present. Am I under arrest?" -rc

Posted by Adam, Oklahoma on June 7, 2009:

What I do on videos is get them started, hit "pause", and do other things while it downloads. -rc

That's what I do as well, for the 2-3 minute Youtube shorts. On something like this it's pushing my luck to hope that my connection won't 'hiccup' for a second during the many hours it would take to load-up one of these videos, at which point I'd have to start all over again. To my knowledge Youtube doesn't allow 'save to disk' which would be my first choice since it'd allow me to use a download manager to pick up where I left off in that event.

---

Another commenter had other ideas for you too. It does suck how hard it is to get broadband in rural areas -- something I've struggled with too. -rc

Posted by Bergman, Seattle WA on June 8, 2009:

Adam,

You can get plug-ins for Firefox (I don't know if any are available for Internet Explorer) that allow you to download video content from web pages, even if the page does not allow downloading. If you can play the video, the plug-in can download it.

Posted by Anthony, Netherlands on June 8, 2009:

My non-legal advice is this, if an officer stops you for speeding and then asks "why were you speeding sir?" reply with; "a month ago my wife left me for a police officer, I thought you were him trying to give her back!"

Posted by Bernard in Brisbane, Australia on June 8, 2009:

Instead, they might ask "Do you know why I pulled you over?" or similar, which isn't specific enough to trigger anything -- but may lead you to say "Sorry I was speeding officer, but I was....", which is a confession.

I had exactly that experience the one time I got pulled up when I was working in Detroit some years back. I responded "No, officer, I don't know why", and ended up having a discussion with the officer about timing on traffic lights (he thought I'd run a red) and he answered some questions I had about the differences in road rule enforcement between Australia & the US. He gave me a caution.

BTW, I drove by that intersection nearly every day, so I stopped off and watched the light cycle a day or two later - what I saw shocked me - there was no, and I mean NO delay between the light going red one way and green the other. The officer thought I'd run the red because it went green his way as I was exiting the intersection, and if the lights had had the usual two-second safety delay, he would have been right.