Is it just me or does this guy sound annoying as shit? Don't get me wrong, it's really informational, but how the hell are people going to listen if you're talking at the speed of light..
The socialogical and psychological liturature (esp. Kamisar and Leo & Oshfe) supports everything these two videos propose. Modern police interrogation is often called a "psychological third degree" due to its reliance on manipulation and deception. It's fantastic for persuading criminals to confess--but far too many innocent people have been coerced into confessing and convicted on that fact alone, without any other evidence. Let the cops do their job. Suspects aren't required to help them.
@verstehetmich twist and contort the Bill of Rights? actually, all of the rights mentioned in this video are clearly laid out within the Constitution.
@weeny069 lol,a retarded trying to sound intelligent on the internet. Who are you fooling weeny? xD Got tired of the people laughing of you on that blink 182 video? Why you dont insult people there anymore? Everyone, Watch this video too:
to see everyone laughing of this stupid idiot. Dont even take a single letter of this stupid troll of failure seriously, fuck face ignorant idiot ┌∩┐ xD
@TheKrustaceox Do you think that an accused person - guilty or not - is "twisting and contorting" the Bill of Rights (specifically the Fourth and Fifth Amendment) when they take advantage of due process rights?
@weeny069 the answer is: you are not intelligent weeny. You can't discuss about things you dont understand 5%. Give up of trying to sound intelligent on the internet and keep spamming your Teodore "Ted" Flanigan disturbingly retarded comments. I tell you, someone whose capable of writting so many retarded things in just one comment can't possibly have half of a normal human brain. You are just a sack of shit, full of shame ;)
@TheKrustaceox Quit beating around the bush. If you don't know, that's fine, but don't accuse me of discussing things I don't understand when you won't give any sort of opinion. You seem completely clueless, I'd be surprised if you could provide any kind of reasoned response to my question.
@weeny069 here is the response: watch?v=AW3Z7PtiF04&feature=plcp&context=C35a04aeUDOEgsToPDskLTlv5ZVtThn74nN2PQJruo You want me to think the retarded laughing in this video doesnt have a major brain damage?You want me to take this retarded seriously? I would suggest that you accept your situation already weeny, stop lying to yourself. You are invalid, retarded, you need mental care.
He is mistaken in his conclusion that one should never speak to the police.
Here is an example: see 625 ILCS 5/11-401(b) and People v. Brady, App. 2 Dist.2007, 308 Ill.Dec. 356, People v. Walker, App. 1 Dist.1974, 18 Ill.App.3d 351, People v. Lucus, 41 Ill.2d 370, 372
I have some awesome dvdsfor sale beat traffic tickets , ,liens , your rights in court made so simple I know most of you will be pissed you did't even know this ! made easy ..... contact me @ geminieast77@yahoo.com
Most cops are fucking lairs -_- only about 1 out 10 are ok guys/girls
I would also like to say every cop I talked to over dramatizes, which means my sister would be great cop. Now dont get me wrong I have done nothing bad, all I have done is run away from home a few times and brake a few items when I was younger I mean like really young like I was idk 7 or 8 years old? I never trust a cop now since that time one lied to me, NEVER. >:(
my step-dad is DEA and I talk to him all the time. just for debate: a guy calls me and he knows I take pain medicine, I tell him no I can't give you my medication bc it's against the law. the next day the druggie shows up at your door, he's crying, apparently sick from withdrawals, he tells me that he's getting into the methadone clinic in 2 or 3 days but he needs something for the next couple days. at this point i start feeling bad, i decide to give him 5 tablets after multiple calls from this
@cmharding69 guy asking me for meds. so he gets ready to leave and drops 50 dollars cash on the table. i say no no, you take that. he leaves it and goes. 1 month later the DEA bust in the door, find the same meds, charge me with trafficking in narcotics class b two counts. one from the guy coming and one because some of my meds were in a pill daily counter thing. i hire a private investigator after arrest and bail and find out he's narced approximately 35 people in town.
@cmharding69 they are all saying that they don't sell drugs, they were harassed to the point they just wanted to get rid of him. so my private investigator talks to the rat and he admits that he entrapped these people. every charge gets dismissed except mine. that is a true story. the guy was my ex gf's son.
I've actually talked my way out of getting arrested. well they took me to the county and let me go then dropped the charges because i made it look like the defendant was lying, but in general, never let the police search your vehicle or answer any questions. i have buried myself in trouble by talking to the police so i learned this at a young age. if i had never said a work i would of never spent a day in jail, but every circumstance is different, no two crimes are alike.
and no I am not a criminal. the first i mentioned was because i broke my own cell phone, the second was thinking i was helping the police and I knew of the crime and the suspect involved me and they made me take a plea. burglary.
It's not only guilty people that benefit from pleading the fifth it would be advised for anyone innocent to do so as well did you not just watch the same thing as me hummm best thing I've ever watched smart s.o.b
@Dynamike4ever Or innocent people who are easily influenced or intimidated. It's pretty sad when people who tell us about the rights we're supposed to have are accused of helping criminals.
I'm surprised he said nothing about searches. Never consent to any search! I've never seen anyone on cop reality shows say no to being searched -- even when they're hiding shit. People get in trouble for some random petty things cops find when there was no legal cause to look. Saying no preserves your right to contest any search.
@kudosdc that is 100% true. cops only have the right to "frisk you" for weapons. ONLY if you have something that feels "hard" do they have the right to empty your pockets or open your bags.
almost as useful as i want a lawyer -"im not resisting but i do not consent to any searches"
there is a video called 10 rules for dealing with police on here. its in 4 different parts. its long as hell and has horrendous acting but its one of the most useful videos you will ever see.
@Ctmotorcop your question is addressed by the video. And the attitude conveyed by your dismissive tone leads me to believe there would be no benefit in answering your questions.
@aceofhearts WTF are you talking about? For any act to be criminal, there has to be a law that defines it so. Legislators define what is illegal. There are no "default crimes" that exist outside written law. Also, breach of contract is rarely a criminal act.
So it would stand to reason that since we are not obliged to engage in conversation with police PRIOR to arrest, by the same reasoning, there is no obligation to pull over at a traffic stop. You are not yet under arrest. If there is no obligation to talk to police AFTER arrest (sans lawyer), then there certainly is none PRIOR to arrest. This would clearly also include the arbitrary (yes, arbitrary) traffic stop. If possible drive to your house. You'll at least avoid towing and impound charges.
Yes, I work with mentally challenged adults, and the words "yes" and "no" are blurred in their minds. I never believed it until I began working with this section of the population.
@Livepsalm1 dont you know? everyone in the court systems do cocaine lol seriously tho, in my only time in court for some association with "the wrong people", i discovered one judge was a user, all the while sentencing alot of people with a smaller intake of narcotics
@jimmynorton1001 You're wrong for the most part, but I would love you to beg like the cop-loving bitch you are when you get taken in for questioning for something and need a lawyer. Now that would be really funny.
Mr. Duane, you are an extremely intelligent man. Your advice is something all citizens should get the opportunity to hear. Our society needs more men and women like you, and less corrupt cops!
@chicago6584 This is the quality of videos that You Tube was filled with, - back in it's Golden years.
Informative, intellectual videos that made you think. Most have been lost because their Channels were taken off YT. When a Channel is deleted by YT, it's treasure of Videos is gone.
@MrNubjin For most of the country, no. We DO fear facing consequences for actions that we did not take, especially when they include spending time in jail, threatening our liberty, and hurting our future ability to find a job, threatening our "pursuit of happiness".
There ARE some that are afraid, and doubtlessly areas that give them good cause for fear. Not all cops follow all of the rules.
What most people don't realize is that it is never lawful to incarcerate anyone unless they commit murder, physical injury to another, property damage, or dishonor their contracts. Everything else is legislated (corporate) policy created by grumpy old men who haven't had a decent erection in 30 years without Viagra who profit from the suffering and misery they create. The highest form of evil is the so-called 'public servant'. There is no such thing as 'public'. Just man and woman.
@MrNubjin - Not just in the US. Everywhere. Cops no longer serve the people. That ended sometime in the 1960's, and has been declining ever since. I'm the most law abiding person imaginable, but when I see a cop, I just make sure to make no eye contact, do nothing to draw attention, and try to have no interaction. That's today's state of affairs. If I was a good cop who really wanted to help people, I'd be very sad about where their profession has gone.
Bullcrap, bullcrap, bullcrap. Here are some people who successfully got their constitutional rights upheld in court: Oliver L. Brown, Clarence Earl Gideon, Ernesto Arturo Miranda, Dollree Mapp, Estelle Griswold, John Geddes Lawrence, Gathie Barnette.
Requiring that all interviews conducted after a suspect is arrested (aside from in-transit questions), along with any interviews conducted when someone agrees to voluntarily meet with the police for an interview (as opposed to being picked up at a crime scene) be recorded, and the interviewee informed of such recording in advance, would be a more moderate solution. This would reduce the "statements repeated out-of-context" and "misremembering" problems.
"The right... to have the assistance of counsel is a fundamental right essential to a fair trial..." "...any person...cannot be assured a fair trial unless counsel is provided for him." "...the widespread belief that lawyers in criminal courts are necessities, not luxuries. The right of one charged with crime to counsel may not be deemed fundamental and essential to fair trials in some countries, but it is in ours." - Gideon v. Wainwright
@tifforo1 I have not done sufficient research into that issue. At this point all I can offer is that when a defendant fails to honor the court and even himself, and demonstrates to the court that his intent is to fight, then the court may interpret the actions of the "indigent" defendant as a plea of not guilty. The court presumes you are one of the people, and presumes it is acting constitutionally (lawfully) and therefore presumes it has jurisdiction.
@tifforo1 If the defendant is physically present and has been read the charges (accusation), he is presumed and concluded to be within the personal jurisdiction of the court. He has "appeared." Many people have attempted to "specially appear" to avoid jurisdiction while challenging jurisdiction. In some courts, this fails because they are courts of law. Everyone is presumed subject to the law (not necessarily statutes).
The MC of 1215 had 60 clauses, and the 1295 version only had 37 articles (with art. 28 corresponding to art. 38 of the original.) Incidentally, much of the Magna Carta (including that part) was repealed in the UK in 1863, long after U.S. independence.
Article 28, 1295: No Bailiff from henceforth shall put any man to his open Law, nor to an Oath, upon his own bare saying, without faithful Witnesses brought in for the same.
@tifforo1 Just to correct the facts a bit, the MC of 1215 had 63 articles. I was in fact revised in 1216, 1217, and again in 1225. Later the said Great Charter (MC) was "confirmed" as law by King Edward in 1297 in the "Confirming Charter" (Confirmatio Cartarum). Such has been the written "common law" ever since. The fact that the Brits have repealed it is of no consequence to Americans. Any American can claim MC as law.
@tifforo1 The concept here is that no government officer could bring a charge against a free man in the name of the law or king ON HIS TESTIMONY ALONE. Officials must have the support of at least one NON-GOVERNMENT witness. This provision was meant to prevent exactly what is happening today in the U.S. when officers and courts subject you to their tickets and proceedings when the only fact witness the prosecution has is the officer himself. Nice, huh?
One thing they use is that an offense that cannot carry a jail sentence is (in my state) not, technically, a crime. It's an "infraction," which is less than a "misdemeanor."
Numerically, I read on wikipedia that article 38 of the original MC corresponded to article 28 of the 1295 one.
@tifforo1 Although I'm not old enough to have first-hand knowledge of the facts, I tend to trust my multi-source research over "Wiki-anything" ! You are hitting the "trifle" button. This is how they try to get away with these shitty proceedings. A crime is a crime. The constitution does not provide the government with authority to subject people to any proceedings other than those that are criminal or civil in nature. This "infraction" crap is just that.
@tifforo1 Felonies, Misdemeanors, Infractions, and Violations are all just categories of CRIMES. They are all criminal in nature. The category is primarily determined by the severity of the penalties or punishment.
"1. An offense...constitutes an infraction if it is so designated or if no other sentence than...fine...or other civil penalty is authorized.
2. An infraction does not constitute a crime and conviction of an infraction shall not give rise to any disability or legal disadvantage based on conviction of a crime.
3. ...the procedure for infractions shall be the same as for a misdemeanor."
@tifforo1 First, criminal codes are not law, they are statutory in nature. Second, apparently in your state the legislature has clearly designated "infractions" to mean a civil tort. They have categorized infractions out of criminal into civil. Then they decree in #3 that the proceedings for an infraction are to proceed according to the rules of criminal procedure, which I would presume means the burden of proof is "beyond a reasonable doubt."
@tifforo1 Third, it appears to me that in your state, if you have been charged with an "infraction", the state is suing you "civilly" and most likely at common law, believe it or not. The good news is that in a civil case or suit at common law THERE MUST BE EVIDENCE OF AN INJURED PARTY, AND AN INJURED PARTY to proceed. Not only that, but the injury must be palpable and its cause traceable and proximate to the acts of the defendant.
@tifforo1 It applies to the government. It doesn't matter how they want to proceed against you. Whatever "law" they want to use is irrelevant, except to the extent that is it THEIR law. Read article 38 again but in light of that bit of information. "38. No [government officer] from now on shall, upon his own unsupported complaint, put anyone to ***his law***, without credible witnesses brought for this purposes." (Magna Carta 1215, Art. 38, translated to modern English) (emphasis added)
Yeah, but interpreted narrowly, it looks like it basically says that the officer who BRINGS THE CHARGES cannot be the sole witness. If the DA is bringing the charges, then the cop who arrested the person being the sole witness would not imply that the person bringing the charges was the sole witness.
@tifforo1 The officer is the person who instigated the action and filed the complaint. The DA is simply acting as his attorney, as the officer is the acting for the state. The point is, that the sole witness cannot be an officer.
@tifforo1 Further, for the reasons I just gave, the court does not have to find "criminal agency" in order for you to be found guilty. One essential element of a crime is that you meant to do it, or were so negligent that you might as well have meant to do it. This is why the "I didn't even know I was speeding" defense doesn't work, among other reasons.
FRICKEN AWESOME. Mr. Duane, you are appreciated. So often I tell my son, "There is something the police can charge you for" , meaning, there are so many laws that we are unaware of the no matter what, if they want to, they can charge you. With that in mind, NEVER SAY ANYTHING NO MATTER WHAT! Sadly, our system requires the expertise of lawyers, this expensive but can and WILL save your ass. FIRST, make it easy, SAVE YOUR OWN ASS by saying NOTHING. GREAT INFORMATION!
All cops are all out two - faced dicks. What you must understand, is every person, and so every cop, has a good cop / bad cop personality. But underneath they are all bad because they have one agenda... to put your ass in jail, and make money by criminalizing you, imprisoning you, and billing the tax payer for it, and so keeping their fat salary job. They will wear their friendly social chatty face to gather information, but they can switch it off in a NY minute. They are masters of lying.
The main reason why the police teaches Sunday school classes coach Little League ball teams become Boy Scout leaders. Because children will say anything that goes on in their homes. And a policeman knows how asked questions to get information that the children would not normally give. I do not have anything to hide I don't have small children now but if I had a child they would not be coached or taught by a policeman. Police are armed and retarded and the common enemy of the people.
A good friend of mine has been a locksmith for upwards of 20 years and I asked him if he ever had to help a cop get back in the car after accidentally locking himself out. He told me that he hasn't done that for years because nowadays, they just break the window and charge taxpayers for the bill. So take from that what you will.
Go to aetv's website and and watch the episode of The First 48 (a show about real homicide cases) called "Double Murder on Haskell / Back Alley Revenge." This will show that witnesses, even witnesses who didn't see the crime, are usually what makes the difference between criminals being arrested and getting away with murder.
Another episode of crime documentary series "The First 48" that does an even better job of demonstrating the importance of the willingness to talk and trust/distrust of police issue and how it affects important investigations is the episode "Killing Spree," which comes right after "Double Murder on Haskell / Back Alley Revenge" on AETV's free online playlist.
The biggest problem with people's response to this video is:
100% of what this lawyer says is about talking to the police without a lawyer while being interrogated while in police custody as a suspect. Yet people are taking this as advice to never talk to the police.
Plus, he's advising aspiring DEFENSE LAWYERS to advise their clients to invoke the right to remain silent. That means that the people they're dealing with are people who thought they were in enough of a tight spot that they talked to a defense lawyer. Chances are the average non-suspect witness wouldn't reach that point.
This is not true. The second part of the lecture involving the cop confirms what was said by the prof and includes examples of how talking to the cops is not a good idea in situations ranging from burglary investigations to minor traffic stops.
Furthermore, the quote from the Supreme Court and point no. 8 concerning why you shouldn't talk to the police indicates that even coming forward to help as an innocent witness can backfire, especially if someone unknown to you contradicts what you said.
The hypothetical example in point 8 involved someone who had already been charged. The probability of being charged solely because two witnesses made conflicting statements and you're one of them is pretty small. If people got prosecuted just for that, in his example, the woman who said she had seen the defendant would be prosecuted for disagreeing with the defendant.
But you don't need to have been charged to get dragged into investigations that really have nothing to do with you. I think the hypothetical is actually broader in scope and encompasses a wider variety of situations than you seem to think. People like Eddie Joe Lloyd, mentioned in the first few minutes, is another example of someone attempting to help the police "with suggestions on ho to solve various crimes", only to find himself the target of said investigations.
Jeffrey Deskjovic also hadn't been "charged" for the homicide of a classmate, but his attempts to "help" the police merely gave them a wealth of material and statements to use against him.
Also, how on earth are you supposed to even know what charges, if any, the authorities are going to bring against you? It's not like they're going to tell you, or give you an accurate idea of what they really think of you. They'll just let you talk and talk, to no real benefit to you.
Police only serve and protect rich people and their friends. If you fall into certain categories then they're only there to put you in jail. If you tell them more than your name you've said too much. Never talk to cops and stay out of jail. Also don't commit crimes and stay away from low life criminals as well cause they're only good for robbing, killing, and snitching on their criminal associates.
Drive-by shooting happens. Innocent bystander gets killed. So cops find these 4 guys who they're think were responsible. No chargeable evidence yet, though. Just enough for an interview.
So 3 of the 4 don't talk, but the 4th does. Tells the whole story. He wasn't the shooter, wasn't driving, was in the backseat.
And so, because he admitted his role, he went to prison for being an accessory, and because he can't testify against his co-defendants, the other 3 walked.
I'm not aware of any rule that says that people "can't" testify against co-defendants. They definitely can in California - two of the six people involved in the armed robbery case in which O.J. Simpson was a defendant agreed to testify against co-defendants. That probably wouldn't be enough for a conviction if there was no other chargeable evidence, though.
@ChamberOfAvici You shut up you obnoxious little douchebag. Kids like you are the reason why cops turn into dicks- that constant berating for someone doing their job. "Pig"... how original.
Shut up you obnoxious little cop-lover. Cops who turn into dicks do so because they had ego problems to begin with, and don't really understand the effects of their own foul, obnoxious behavior.
@zolagerminal haha nice comeback, you do not know a thing about police officers it would seem. Go pick up a book- or better yet, go talk to some local cops- You have no clue what you are talking about- You're a sheep- You're buying into an opinion about officers that is hip. But I guess ignorance is bliss, right?
You are on a completely different planet from the rest of us. Every realistic, honest piece of journalism about cops, including David Simon's "Homicide", illustrates that talking to the cops is a bad idea and that much so-called "policework" is just tricking poeple into saying incriminating things rather than objective analysis of the facts. Go suck a cop's baton if it makes you feel better.
@zolagerminal Ok cool guy... let's see this "honest piece of journalism"... in fact, let's see any of them. If you trust the media, you're dumber than you claim the people who talk to cops are.
OK, I'm beginning to think you can't read English because I just listed a major work of non-fiction for you. You can go to the library can't you? Or better yet, go buy it on Amazon since even knuckledraggers like you seem to know of the existence of the internet.
the scum of the earth are defense attorneys...
setmedic 1 day ago
no jury could listen to this guy
TheTimeStorm 3 days ago
There can be no justice on stolen land. . . .
hoppinonabronzeleg 5 days ago
@hoppinonabronzeleg
Which is why property tax on residential property needs to be abolished.
Hardwyre 1 day ago
@Hardwyre It was more of a comment on America's Judicial system, than the cost of living . . But I like your thinking!!
hoppinonabronzeleg 1 day ago
This guy is good, I know it is 27 minutes long, but the first rule of public speaking is slow down, and speak loudly!! (projecting)
hoppinonabronzeleg 5 days ago
Is it just me or does this guy sound annoying as shit? Don't get me wrong, it's really informational, but how the hell are people going to listen if you're talking at the speed of light..
leoelliondeux 6 days ago
@leoelliondeux He is not talking too fast, your brain is functioning too slow, lol.
yoyo762 2 days ago
how the hell do i tern off html5????
killwize 6 days ago
OJ Simpson made 180 accounts
del1128 1 week ago
socialism
dictatorship
police state
loss of civil rights
loss of FREEDOM
Americans = slaves
southport97 1 week ago
The socialogical and psychological liturature (esp. Kamisar and Leo & Oshfe) supports everything these two videos propose. Modern police interrogation is often called a "psychological third degree" due to its reliance on manipulation and deception. It's fantastic for persuading criminals to confess--but far too many innocent people have been coerced into confessing and convicted on that fact alone, without any other evidence. Let the cops do their job. Suspects aren't required to help them.
jadedmajor 1 week ago
He really sounds like a young Regis Philbin. Great video, though.
joesimmons90 1 week ago
I don't get why speeches like this are only given to college students. They should all be uploaded to the internet for everybody.
CCPcakes 1 week ago 4
typical defense attorney. "don't talk to the police! let me twist and contort the Bill of Rights to help you, literally get away with murder"
verstehetmich 1 week ago
@verstehetmich twist and contort the Bill of Rights? actually, all of the rights mentioned in this video are clearly laid out within the Constitution.
weeny069 1 week ago
@weeny069 lol,a retarded trying to sound intelligent on the internet. Who are you fooling weeny? xD Got tired of the people laughing of you on that blink 182 video? Why you dont insult people there anymore? Everyone, Watch this video too:
watch?v=REA97Fmklqw&lc=jj1R9SE29OHFSGvBoM6FSm08-q_pydekeAS3MSrZRO0&feature=inbox
to see everyone laughing of this stupid idiot. Dont even take a single letter of this stupid troll of failure seriously, fuck face ignorant idiot ┌∩┐ xD
TheKrustaceox 1 week ago
@TheKrustaceox If you don't agree with my statement, feel free to explain why. Otherwise, everything you just said is complete idiot-babble.
weeny069 1 week ago
@TheKrustaceox Do you think that an accused person - guilty or not - is "twisting and contorting" the Bill of Rights (specifically the Fourth and Fifth Amendment) when they take advantage of due process rights?
weeny069 1 week ago
@weeny069 the answer is: you are not intelligent weeny. You can't discuss about things you dont understand 5%. Give up of trying to sound intelligent on the internet and keep spamming your Teodore "Ted" Flanigan disturbingly retarded comments. I tell you, someone whose capable of writting so many retarded things in just one comment can't possibly have half of a normal human brain. You are just a sack of shit, full of shame ;)
TheKrustaceox 1 week ago
@TheKrustaceox Quit beating around the bush. If you don't know, that's fine, but don't accuse me of discussing things I don't understand when you won't give any sort of opinion. You seem completely clueless, I'd be surprised if you could provide any kind of reasoned response to my question.
weeny069 1 week ago
@weeny069 here is the response: watch?v=AW3Z7PtiF04&feature=plcp&context=C35a04aeUDOEgsToPDskLTlv5ZVtThn74nN2PQJruo You want me to think the retarded laughing in this video doesnt have a major brain damage?You want me to take this retarded seriously? I would suggest that you accept your situation already weeny, stop lying to yourself. You are invalid, retarded, you need mental care.
TheKrustaceox 1 week ago
With the new ndaa bill obama passed this is all thrown out the window
Fresh6s 1 week ago 2
FUCK THIS VIDEO. ALWAYS TALK TO COPS GUYS!
thesuperbeast46 1 week ago
This is a great couple vids. Great advice.
justinc71 2 weeks ago
This has been flagged as spam show
He is mistaken in his conclusion that one should never speak to the police.
Here is an example: see 625 ILCS 5/11-401(b) and People v. Brady, App. 2 Dist.2007, 308 Ill.Dec. 356, People v. Walker, App. 1 Dist.1974, 18 Ill.App.3d 351, People v. Lucus, 41 Ill.2d 370, 372
nothosaur 2 weeks ago
"Which is not fair to you..." HAHAHA! Freudian slip.
MoodyGroove 2 weeks ago
So at 5:10 this lawyer speaking basically says the cop lied in court to set the lawyer up by saying he choked the woman, when he did not.
typical police
79Testo 2 weeks ago
Never talk to the police? Great advice! Glad we watched this...
goswingstreet 2 weeks ago
My housemate came in to my room thinking it was Larry David talking, now I can't unhear
donaal 2 weeks ago
cops are there to arrest you and make their quota not protect and serve
happysour420 2 weeks ago
I want to take his class
Degeneratemoron 2 weeks ago 5
I have some awesome dvdsfor sale beat traffic tickets , ,liens , your rights in court made so simple I know most of you will be pissed you did't even know this ! made easy ..... contact me @ geminieast77@yahoo.com
geminieast11 3 weeks ago
Of course they lie the whole country is based on Defacto ! this means Colorable law ! they are making it Up ! Study ,study , study ...
geminieast11 3 weeks ago
if you see a crime being committed and call the police and they question you about it what should you do?
DavisTheNovice 3 weeks ago
@DavisTheNovice
report what gave you the awareness to call them. your not a suspect.
16JAM77 2 weeks ago
OUTSTANDING!
DesigningWorldwide 3 weeks ago
Most cops are fucking lairs -_- only about 1 out 10 are ok guys/girls
I would also like to say every cop I talked to over dramatizes, which means my sister would be great cop. Now dont get me wrong I have done nothing bad, all I have done is run away from home a few times and brake a few items when I was younger I mean like really young like I was idk 7 or 8 years old? I never trust a cop now since that time one lied to me, NEVER. >:(
wolfur1 3 weeks ago
@wolfur1 no wait I was 12 bleh
wolfur1 3 weeks ago
my step-dad is DEA and I talk to him all the time. just for debate: a guy calls me and he knows I take pain medicine, I tell him no I can't give you my medication bc it's against the law. the next day the druggie shows up at your door, he's crying, apparently sick from withdrawals, he tells me that he's getting into the methadone clinic in 2 or 3 days but he needs something for the next couple days. at this point i start feeling bad, i decide to give him 5 tablets after multiple calls from this
cmharding69 3 weeks ago
@cmharding69 guy asking me for meds. so he gets ready to leave and drops 50 dollars cash on the table. i say no no, you take that. he leaves it and goes. 1 month later the DEA bust in the door, find the same meds, charge me with trafficking in narcotics class b two counts. one from the guy coming and one because some of my meds were in a pill daily counter thing. i hire a private investigator after arrest and bail and find out he's narced approximately 35 people in town.
cmharding69 3 weeks ago
@cmharding69 they are all saying that they don't sell drugs, they were harassed to the point they just wanted to get rid of him. so my private investigator talks to the rat and he admits that he entrapped these people. every charge gets dismissed except mine. that is a true story. the guy was my ex gf's son.
cmharding69 3 weeks ago
I've actually talked my way out of getting arrested. well they took me to the county and let me go then dropped the charges because i made it look like the defendant was lying, but in general, never let the police search your vehicle or answer any questions. i have buried myself in trouble by talking to the police so i learned this at a young age. if i had never said a work i would of never spent a day in jail, but every circumstance is different, no two crimes are alike.
cmharding69 3 weeks ago
@cmharding69 word*
and no I am not a criminal. the first i mentioned was because i broke my own cell phone, the second was thinking i was helping the police and I knew of the crime and the suspect involved me and they made me take a plea. burglary.
cmharding69 3 weeks ago
It's not only guilty people that benefit from pleading the fifth it would be advised for anyone innocent to do so as well did you not just watch the same thing as me hummm best thing I've ever watched smart s.o.b
KILLERKARMA69 3 weeks ago
The only people that will benefit from this are criminals. Congrats Mr & Mrs Criminal you make the world a better place
Dynamike4ever 3 weeks ago
@Dynamike4ever Or innocent people who are easily influenced or intimidated. It's pretty sad when people who tell us about the rights we're supposed to have are accused of helping criminals.
apatrick0516 3 weeks ago
WOW what an amazing speaker.
thaking51 3 weeks ago
he said ''mentally retarded at 13:00 LOL
Hrko1992 1 month ago
anywhere i can find a version for english law?
mikedmc121 1 month ago
just awesome thanx sooo much passin it on! God help us all
bakersfieldmusicnow 1 month ago
Every part of this is decent except that fat cop that looks more nervous than a blind queer at a weeny roast.
dkhkid777 1 month ago
love this video thanks for posting. Very educational.
koeix2 1 month ago
how is he able to talk so fast?
hacksign20 1 month ago
Excellent advice. I thought i already knew this sht but I learned a few things.
paghat 1 month ago
Fuck the police.
ourglasslake 1 month ago
I'm surprised he said nothing about searches. Never consent to any search! I've never seen anyone on cop reality shows say no to being searched -- even when they're hiding shit. People get in trouble for some random petty things cops find when there was no legal cause to look. Saying no preserves your right to contest any search.
kudosdc 1 month ago
@kudosdc that is 100% true. cops only have the right to "frisk you" for weapons. ONLY if you have something that feels "hard" do they have the right to empty your pockets or open your bags.
almost as useful as i want a lawyer -"im not resisting but i do not consent to any searches"
there is a video called 10 rules for dealing with police on here. its in 4 different parts. its long as hell and has horrendous acting but its one of the most useful videos you will ever see.
wowwzzer1 1 month ago
@Ctmotorcop your question is addressed by the video. And the attitude conveyed by your dismissive tone leads me to believe there would be no benefit in answering your questions.
kudosdc 1 month ago
@kudosdc how is writing a dismissive tone, it seems that you are dismissive in your attitudefrom those that don't agree with you
CTMotorcop 1 month ago
@aceofhearts WTF are you talking about? For any act to be criminal, there has to be a law that defines it so. Legislators define what is illegal. There are no "default crimes" that exist outside written law. Also, breach of contract is rarely a criminal act.
kudosdc 1 month ago
Hmmmm, If this guy was such a great defense attorney, then he would still be praticing law.
Funny if you have done nothing wrong then why would you become so defensive towards a police officer
CTMotorcop 1 month ago
@CTMotorcop: If you have done nothing wrong the why should a police officer become so offensive towards you?
Pafoofnik1 1 month ago
@Pafoofnik1 why would the officer be defensive
CTMotorcop 1 month ago
@CTMotorcop: I don't know. Why would an officer be offensive about someone exercising a right?
Pafoofnik1 1 month ago
@CTMotorcop BECAUSE COPS AND PROSECUTORS CAN'T BE TRUSTED..
JonFrumTheFirst 1 month ago
So it would stand to reason that since we are not obliged to engage in conversation with police PRIOR to arrest, by the same reasoning, there is no obligation to pull over at a traffic stop. You are not yet under arrest. If there is no obligation to talk to police AFTER arrest (sans lawyer), then there certainly is none PRIOR to arrest. This would clearly also include the arbitrary (yes, arbitrary) traffic stop. If possible drive to your house. You'll at least avoid towing and impound charges.
AceOfHeart2012 1 month ago
Every American should see this video
macpduff 1 month ago
Yes, I work with mentally challenged adults, and the words "yes" and "no" are blurred in their minds. I never believed it until I began working with this section of the population.
macpduff 1 month ago
Damn thats real... Can and will be used against you but not used for you
omarezekiel 1 month ago
How many lines did he do?
mikefad 1 month ago
Talks too fast!
Livepsalm1 1 month ago
@Livepsalm1 dont you know? everyone in the court systems do cocaine lol seriously tho, in my only time in court for some association with "the wrong people", i discovered one judge was a user, all the while sentencing alot of people with a smaller intake of narcotics
batnguitar 1 month ago
tl;dw Legal system is fucked up
chessonmyshirt 1 month ago 23
EVERY1 who loves some1 make them watch this
KnoxCOPblock 1 month ago
1,603,151 views, 9,118 likes and 174 dislikes (from gay pigs). not bad...
v4rz4 2 months ago
22:30 Shittle of a doubt.
humanvegetable 2 months ago
he's right for the most part, but i would love him to beg like the bitch i'm sure he is when he needs the cops one day
jimmynorton1001 2 months ago
@jimmynorton1001 You're wrong for the most part, but I would love you to beg like the cop-loving bitch you are when you get taken in for questioning for something and need a lawyer. Now that would be really funny.
zolagerminal 2 months ago 12
I hope I never have to use him advice.
ca1cifer 2 months ago
Awesome information
BxVick 2 months ago
Terrific advice, thank you!
mikeydinuzzo 2 months ago
This guy talks way too god damn fast....
ProtagonistNonTheist 2 months ago
Mr. Duane, you are an extremely intelligent man. Your advice is something all citizens should get the opportunity to hear. Our society needs more men and women like you, and less corrupt cops!
SoftcoreCriminal 2 months ago
omg he is talking so quickly i cant hear what he says
33COOLMAN33 2 months ago
Haven't done anything wrong so you're not worried? Look up and read about Tulia, Texas.
tonix100 2 months ago
Great video. It really opened my eyes.
therealsharky1999 2 months ago
legend
gnosiszeal 2 months ago
@rtytry56ryrty5tryh lololol
BeAnBeAn22 2 months ago
o dia que for vc ou um parente seu VITIMA DE UM CRIME --- MOSTRE ESSE VIDEO A ELE.
magalhaesgts 2 months ago
This is the greatest video on YouTube and the best piece of advice I've ever heard.
chicago6584 2 months ago 68
@chicago6584 I So Agree
omarezekiel 1 month ago
@chicago6584 This is the quality of videos that You Tube was filled with, - back in it's Golden years.
Informative, intellectual videos that made you think. Most have been lost because their Channels were taken off YT. When a Channel is deleted by YT, it's treasure of Videos is gone.
macpduff 1 month ago
damn. are people afraid of the cops in the us ?
MrNubjin 2 months ago
@MrNubjin For most of the country, no. We DO fear facing consequences for actions that we did not take, especially when they include spending time in jail, threatening our liberty, and hurting our future ability to find a job, threatening our "pursuit of happiness".
There ARE some that are afraid, and doubtlessly areas that give them good cause for fear. Not all cops follow all of the rules.
SquallLionhart409 2 months ago 18
What most people don't realize is that it is never lawful to incarcerate anyone unless they commit murder, physical injury to another, property damage, or dishonor their contracts. Everything else is legislated (corporate) policy created by grumpy old men who haven't had a decent erection in 30 years without Viagra who profit from the suffering and misery they create. The highest form of evil is the so-called 'public servant'. There is no such thing as 'public'. Just man and woman.
AceOfHeart2012 1 month ago
@MrNubjin - Not just in the US. Everywhere. Cops no longer serve the people. That ended sometime in the 1960's, and has been declining ever since. I'm the most law abiding person imaginable, but when I see a cop, I just make sure to make no eye contact, do nothing to draw attention, and try to have no interaction. That's today's state of affairs. If I was a good cop who really wanted to help people, I'd be very sad about where their profession has gone.
MrLostStar 2 months ago
@MrLostStar Im not afraid of the cops. If you havent done anything wrong, why be so paranoid ?
MrNubjin 2 months ago
@MrNubjin obviously you didn't bother to actually WATCH and LISTEN to the video...
1rmantoo 2 months ago
@1rmantoo I did watch and listen to the video. We dont have this problem in Norway. But thats because of several reasons.
MrNubjin 2 months ago
@MrNubjin You're in the wrong line. FEMA CAMP inductees over there.
PennaPlanum 2 months ago
What a ratty slimy defense lawyer..no wonder these guys have a bad rap
ileet333 2 months ago
@PantsInTheFamily
Bullcrap, bullcrap, bullcrap. Here are some people who successfully got their constitutional rights upheld in court: Oliver L. Brown, Clarence Earl Gideon, Ernesto Arturo Miranda, Dollree Mapp, Estelle Griswold, John Geddes Lawrence, Gathie Barnette.
tifforo1 2 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@Lemonjelllo
I see no contradiction between "police will lower your sentence if you tell on your friends" and anything said in this video.
tifforo1 2 months ago
@heathirving
Requiring that all interviews conducted after a suspect is arrested (aside from in-transit questions), along with any interviews conducted when someone agrees to voluntarily meet with the police for an interview (as opposed to being picked up at a crime scene) be recorded, and the interviewee informed of such recording in advance, would be a more moderate solution. This would reduce the "statements repeated out-of-context" and "misremembering" problems.
tifforo1 2 months ago
@sconradp83
"The right... to have the assistance of counsel is a fundamental right essential to a fair trial..." "...any person...cannot be assured a fair trial unless counsel is provided for him." "...the widespread belief that lawyers in criminal courts are necessities, not luxuries. The right of one charged with crime to counsel may not be deemed fundamental and essential to fair trials in some countries, but it is in ours." - Gideon v. Wainwright
tifforo1 2 months ago
@tifforo1 Note that "assistance of counsel" is NOT the same as "right to an attorney". One is an advisor, the other REPRESENTS YOU in the court.
gintherlover 2 months ago
@gintherlover
So at what point during the criminal law process does an indigent defendant have to receive a state-appointed attorney?
tifforo1 2 months ago
@tifforo1 I have not done sufficient research into that issue. At this point all I can offer is that when a defendant fails to honor the court and even himself, and demonstrates to the court that his intent is to fight, then the court may interpret the actions of the "indigent" defendant as a plea of not guilty. The court presumes you are one of the people, and presumes it is acting constitutionally (lawfully) and therefore presumes it has jurisdiction.
gintherlover 2 months ago
@tifforo1 If the defendant is physically present and has been read the charges (accusation), he is presumed and concluded to be within the personal jurisdiction of the court. He has "appeared." Many people have attempted to "specially appear" to avoid jurisdiction while challenging jurisdiction. In some courts, this fails because they are courts of law. Everyone is presumed subject to the law (not necessarily statutes).
gintherlover 2 months ago
@gintherlover
The MC of 1215 had 60 clauses, and the 1295 version only had 37 articles (with art. 28 corresponding to art. 38 of the original.) Incidentally, much of the Magna Carta (including that part) was repealed in the UK in 1863, long after U.S. independence.
Article 28, 1295: No Bailiff from henceforth shall put any man to his open Law, nor to an Oath, upon his own bare saying, without faithful Witnesses brought in for the same.
I don't understand what that means.
tifforo1 2 months ago
@tifforo1 Just to correct the facts a bit, the MC of 1215 had 63 articles. I was in fact revised in 1216, 1217, and again in 1225. Later the said Great Charter (MC) was "confirmed" as law by King Edward in 1297 in the "Confirming Charter" (Confirmatio Cartarum). Such has been the written "common law" ever since. The fact that the Brits have repealed it is of no consequence to Americans. Any American can claim MC as law.
gintherlover 2 months ago
@tifforo1 The concept here is that no government officer could bring a charge against a free man in the name of the law or king ON HIS TESTIMONY ALONE. Officials must have the support of at least one NON-GOVERNMENT witness. This provision was meant to prevent exactly what is happening today in the U.S. when officers and courts subject you to their tickets and proceedings when the only fact witness the prosecution has is the officer himself. Nice, huh?
gintherlover 2 months ago
@gintherlover
One thing they use is that an offense that cannot carry a jail sentence is (in my state) not, technically, a crime. It's an "infraction," which is less than a "misdemeanor."
Numerically, I read on wikipedia that article 38 of the original MC corresponded to article 28 of the 1295 one.
Thanks for the clarification.
tifforo1 2 months ago
@tifforo1 Although I'm not old enough to have first-hand knowledge of the facts, I tend to trust my multi-source research over "Wiki-anything" ! You are hitting the "trifle" button. This is how they try to get away with these shitty proceedings. A crime is a crime. The constitution does not provide the government with authority to subject people to any proceedings other than those that are criminal or civil in nature. This "infraction" crap is just that.
gintherlover 2 months ago
@tifforo1 Felonies, Misdemeanors, Infractions, and Violations are all just categories of CRIMES. They are all criminal in nature. The category is primarily determined by the severity of the penalties or punishment.
gintherlover 2 months ago
@gintherlover
Missouri criminal code, section 556.021.
"1. An offense...constitutes an infraction if it is so designated or if no other sentence than...fine...or other civil penalty is authorized.
2. An infraction does not constitute a crime and conviction of an infraction shall not give rise to any disability or legal disadvantage based on conviction of a crime.
3. ...the procedure for infractions shall be the same as for a misdemeanor."
tifforo1 2 months ago
@tifforo1 First, criminal codes are not law, they are statutory in nature. Second, apparently in your state the legislature has clearly designated "infractions" to mean a civil tort. They have categorized infractions out of criminal into civil. Then they decree in #3 that the proceedings for an infraction are to proceed according to the rules of criminal procedure, which I would presume means the burden of proof is "beyond a reasonable doubt."
gintherlover 2 months ago
@gintherlover Nice sentence structure. I want to develop my englishs skills as good as yours. :-). I am still in college.
runhorun 2 months ago
@tifforo1 Third, it appears to me that in your state, if you have been charged with an "infraction", the state is suing you "civilly" and most likely at common law, believe it or not. The good news is that in a civil case or suit at common law THERE MUST BE EVIDENCE OF AN INJURED PARTY, AND AN INJURED PARTY to proceed. Not only that, but the injury must be palpable and its cause traceable and proximate to the acts of the defendant.
gintherlover 2 months ago
@gintherlover
So you think the "no bringing a case from one officer's testimony" thing applies to both civil and criminal law?
tifforo1 2 months ago
@tifforo1 It applies to the government. It doesn't matter how they want to proceed against you. Whatever "law" they want to use is irrelevant, except to the extent that is it THEIR law. Read article 38 again but in light of that bit of information. "38. No [government officer] from now on shall, upon his own unsupported complaint, put anyone to ***his law***, without credible witnesses brought for this purposes." (Magna Carta 1215, Art. 38, translated to modern English) (emphasis added)
gintherlover 2 months ago
@gintherlover
Yeah, but interpreted narrowly, it looks like it basically says that the officer who BRINGS THE CHARGES cannot be the sole witness. If the DA is bringing the charges, then the cop who arrested the person being the sole witness would not imply that the person bringing the charges was the sole witness.
tifforo1 2 months ago
@tifforo1 The officer is the person who instigated the action and filed the complaint. The DA is simply acting as his attorney, as the officer is the acting for the state. The point is, that the sole witness cannot be an officer.
gintherlover 2 months ago
@tifforo1 Further, for the reasons I just gave, the court does not have to find "criminal agency" in order for you to be found guilty. One essential element of a crime is that you meant to do it, or were so negligent that you might as well have meant to do it. This is why the "I didn't even know I was speeding" defense doesn't work, among other reasons.
gintherlover 2 months ago
@tifforo1 Did that help at all?
gintherlover 2 months ago
@tifforo1 Also, I assumed you were referring to article 38, not 28. While you're at it, check out article 39.
gintherlover 2 months ago
@Domindado
Your attitude is disgusting.
tifforo1 2 months ago
@tifforo1 well to pieces of shit it is but I can see by the likes to dislikes on the video im in the right place for hating hired thugs.
Domindado 2 months ago
@Domindado
Unhired thugs are just as bad as hired ones. Take a chill pill and learn to take some constructive advice.
tifforo1 1 month ago
FRICKEN AWESOME. Mr. Duane, you are appreciated. So often I tell my son, "There is something the police can charge you for" , meaning, there are so many laws that we are unaware of the no matter what, if they want to, they can charge you. With that in mind, NEVER SAY ANYTHING NO MATTER WHAT! Sadly, our system requires the expertise of lawyers, this expensive but can and WILL save your ass. FIRST, make it easy, SAVE YOUR OWN ASS by saying NOTHING. GREAT INFORMATION!
ScantronMind 3 months ago
@Trendkiller87 Your entire career? What is your job title?
ChamberOfAvici 3 months ago
Sittin in boyle's class. Don't talk to the cops kids
coreymcnew 3 months ago
i wanna go to law school and become a lawyer so i can fuck up the police in style <3
itscloudyagain 3 months ago
no wonder this guy is a lawyer...hes talks soooo fast and much....i bet the judges get really flustered....
JavaSpitLava 3 months ago 6
@JavaSpitLava he probably charges by the word!
melodyintrance 2 months ago
@melodyintrance HAHA!....even if it was a dollar a word...donald trump would be....well...trumped by the bill!
JavaSpitLava 2 months ago
Great Video!!!
SpeedingSolicitor 3 months ago
All cops are all out two - faced dicks. What you must understand, is every person, and so every cop, has a good cop / bad cop personality. But underneath they are all bad because they have one agenda... to put your ass in jail, and make money by criminalizing you, imprisoning you, and billing the tax payer for it, and so keeping their fat salary job. They will wear their friendly social chatty face to gather information, but they can switch it off in a NY minute. They are masters of lying.
cobrachoppergirl 3 months ago
The main reason why the police teaches Sunday school classes coach Little League ball teams become Boy Scout leaders. Because children will say anything that goes on in their homes. And a policeman knows how asked questions to get information that the children would not normally give. I do not have anything to hide I don't have small children now but if I had a child they would not be coached or taught by a policeman. Police are armed and retarded and the common enemy of the people.
KYKIN44 3 months ago
A good friend of mine has been a locksmith for upwards of 20 years and I asked him if he ever had to help a cop get back in the car after accidentally locking himself out. He told me that he hasn't done that for years because nowadays, they just break the window and charge taxpayers for the bill. So take from that what you will.
GaryVonGary 3 months ago
Everyone who says they won't talk to police:
Go to aetv's website and and watch the episode of The First 48 (a show about real homicide cases) called "Double Murder on Haskell / Back Alley Revenge." This will show that witnesses, even witnesses who didn't see the crime, are usually what makes the difference between criminals being arrested and getting away with murder.
tifforo1 3 months ago
@tifforo1
Another episode of crime documentary series "The First 48" that does an even better job of demonstrating the importance of the willingness to talk and trust/distrust of police issue and how it affects important investigations is the episode "Killing Spree," which comes right after "Double Murder on Haskell / Back Alley Revenge" on AETV's free online playlist.
tifforo1 3 months ago
I like this video da popo r sum lyers and more people need 2 know about this!
blacksaint34 3 months ago
Please, Mr. Duane, slow down for the record! The court reporter is making the record! Sheesh.
cathrynbauer 3 months ago
Comment removed
cathrynbauer 3 months ago
At about the 6:30 mark he gets into what Gibson guitars were subjected to an armed raid over.
ubermom 3 months ago
lolooooooo
rossjames120 3 months ago
The biggest problem with people's response to this video is:
100% of what this lawyer says is about talking to the police without a lawyer while being interrogated while in police custody as a suspect. Yet people are taking this as advice to never talk to the police.
tifforo1 3 months ago
@tifforo1
Plus, he's advising aspiring DEFENSE LAWYERS to advise their clients to invoke the right to remain silent. That means that the people they're dealing with are people who thought they were in enough of a tight spot that they talked to a defense lawyer. Chances are the average non-suspect witness wouldn't reach that point.
tifforo1 3 months ago
@tifforo1
This is not true. The second part of the lecture involving the cop confirms what was said by the prof and includes examples of how talking to the cops is not a good idea in situations ranging from burglary investigations to minor traffic stops.
zolagerminal 3 months ago
@tifforo1
Furthermore, the quote from the Supreme Court and point no. 8 concerning why you shouldn't talk to the police indicates that even coming forward to help as an innocent witness can backfire, especially if someone unknown to you contradicts what you said.
zolagerminal 3 months ago
@zolagerminal
The hypothetical example in point 8 involved someone who had already been charged. The probability of being charged solely because two witnesses made conflicting statements and you're one of them is pretty small. If people got prosecuted just for that, in his example, the woman who said she had seen the defendant would be prosecuted for disagreeing with the defendant.
tifforo1 3 months ago
@tifforo1
But you don't need to have been charged to get dragged into investigations that really have nothing to do with you. I think the hypothetical is actually broader in scope and encompasses a wider variety of situations than you seem to think. People like Eddie Joe Lloyd, mentioned in the first few minutes, is another example of someone attempting to help the police "with suggestions on ho to solve various crimes", only to find himself the target of said investigations.
zolagerminal 3 months ago
@zolagerminal
Jeffrey Deskjovic also hadn't been "charged" for the homicide of a classmate, but his attempts to "help" the police merely gave them a wealth of material and statements to use against him.
Also, how on earth are you supposed to even know what charges, if any, the authorities are going to bring against you? It's not like they're going to tell you, or give you an accurate idea of what they really think of you. They'll just let you talk and talk, to no real benefit to you.
zolagerminal 3 months ago
Police only serve and protect rich people and their friends. If you fall into certain categories then they're only there to put you in jail. If you tell them more than your name you've said too much. Never talk to cops and stay out of jail. Also don't commit crimes and stay away from low life criminals as well cause they're only good for robbing, killing, and snitching on their criminal associates.
steviesbackbitch 3 months ago
Hey there mr policeman, bet i can run faster than you can. With your big potbelly and your cowboy boots, 10 bucks says you won't shoot.
CriticalCriticOfStuf 3 months ago
Fabulous advice, wondefully delivered. You have to follow very closely and pay great attention BECAUSE he speaks so fast.
AVMamfortas 3 months ago
...how the hell does this guy talk so fast?
sonrouge 3 months ago
This is the third time I watch this. Love it every single time.
fuckedupcupcake 3 months ago
Oh, here... /feeds the pigs doughnuts. Eat up, fat-shits.
ChamberOfAvici 3 months ago
Is that pig-lover still talking? Is his dumb daddy a dirty pig or something? Probably... Pitiful.
ChamberOfAvici 3 months ago
That dude, would be one amazing lawyer. Bet he charges a fortune
Endostatic 3 months ago in playlist COMMON LAW
What a piece of shit. He forgets why police were created
n41883 3 months ago
@Trendkiller87 Hey, PIG, stop foaming from your dirty mouth. What a piece off worthless garbage. Go suck on some more pig dick, trash.
Don't reply. I am not going to waste my
time any further by reading/responding to your piggy fanboy rants, piece of shit.
ChamberOfAvici 3 months ago
@ChamberOfAvici haha you're pathetic..
Trendkiller87 3 months ago
Drive-by shooting happens. Innocent bystander gets killed. So cops find these 4 guys who they're think were responsible. No chargeable evidence yet, though. Just enough for an interview.
So 3 of the 4 don't talk, but the 4th does. Tells the whole story. He wasn't the shooter, wasn't driving, was in the backseat.
And so, because he admitted his role, he went to prison for being an accessory, and because he can't testify against his co-defendants, the other 3 walked.
NEVER talk to police.
afterapplepicking 3 months ago
@afterapplepicking
I'm not aware of any rule that says that people "can't" testify against co-defendants. They definitely can in California - two of the six people involved in the armed robbery case in which O.J. Simpson was a defendant agreed to testify against co-defendants. That probably wouldn't be enough for a conviction if there was no other chargeable evidence, though.
tifforo1 2 months ago
@stewartx5 Shut up, pig.
ChamberOfAvici 3 months ago
@ChamberOfAvici You shut up you obnoxious little douchebag. Kids like you are the reason why cops turn into dicks- that constant berating for someone doing their job. "Pig"... how original.
Trendkiller87 3 months ago
@Trendkiller87
Shut up you obnoxious little cop-lover. Cops who turn into dicks do so because they had ego problems to begin with, and don't really understand the effects of their own foul, obnoxious behavior.
zolagerminal 3 months ago
@zolagerminal haha nice comeback, you do not know a thing about police officers it would seem. Go pick up a book- or better yet, go talk to some local cops- You have no clue what you are talking about- You're a sheep- You're buying into an opinion about officers that is hip. But I guess ignorance is bliss, right?
Trendkiller87 3 months ago
@Trendkiller87
You are on a completely different planet from the rest of us. Every realistic, honest piece of journalism about cops, including David Simon's "Homicide", illustrates that talking to the cops is a bad idea and that much so-called "policework" is just tricking poeple into saying incriminating things rather than objective analysis of the facts. Go suck a cop's baton if it makes you feel better.
zolagerminal 3 months ago
@zolagerminal Ok cool guy... let's see this "honest piece of journalism"... in fact, let's see any of them. If you trust the media, you're dumber than you claim the people who talk to cops are.
Trendkiller87 3 months ago
@Trendkiller87
OK, I'm beginning to think you can't read English because I just listed a major work of non-fiction for you. You can go to the library can't you? Or better yet, go buy it on Amazon since even knuckledraggers like you seem to know of the existence of the internet.
zolagerminal 3 months ago