Share on Facebook 
The Dungeon ("Did You Know...?")
One Sure Way to Go to Jail
Talking to the Police
One of the easiest ways to send yourself to jail is to talk.
If you are arrested and charged with a criminal offence, you have an absolute right to remain silent. If you choose to exercise that right, the fact that you did so cannot be used against you in any subsequent trial, and no unfavourable inference can be drawn from it.
If you do decide to say something, it is only admissible at your trial if it hurts you. Any claim of innocence will be ignored by the police (who would not have arrested you if they were not already convinced of your guilt, and will not be interested in assertions to the contrary), and cannot be led in evidence by the defence anyway. Admissions of guilt, on the other hand, will be carefully recorded and presented later to a judge or jury.
Even remarks that seem innocuous or neutral can be damaging. depending on the circumstances of the case, and those protestations of innocence that we've just said are not admissible at trial suddenly become admissible if they can be used by the prosecution to contradict you at trial if you testify and give a slightly different version of events.
In short, it is virtually impossible to help yourself by saying anything at all in police custody, and virtually inevitable that you will harm yourself. The police themselves know about the absolute right to silence, and know how it important it is (if arrested and charged with something themselves, they would certainly refuse to speak). So why do so many detainees chatter on so willingly?
Police officers, particularly senior, experienced ones, are trained and practised specifically to get you to do this. The tricks and traps are innumerable, but they typically include these basic gambits:
- the gentle start (innocuous interpersonal chit-chat), and the gradual transition into talking about the actual allegations—once you start a conversation, it's so hard to cut it off ("So you have kids, Billy, yeah, I've got two boys myself...");
- the pretense at impartiality (I don't take sides, Billy; my job is just to gather the facts and find out what actually happened");
- the offer of an opportunity to explain ("You see, Billy, I'm hearing some nasty stuff from these people, and this is your chance to tell your side of the story—otherwise, I'm just left with what they're saying...");
- the profession of belief in the detainee's innocence, or at least good character ("You don't look like the kind to do something like that, Billy, not unless you were drunk, maybe ... is that what it was, Billy, it was just that you were drunk..?");
- the straight-out lies ("If you weren't there, Billy, how is it that we've found your fingerprints on the knife, and how is it that sixteen people have already picked you out of a photo line-up?);
- the offer of the opportunity to clear the air ("I know you've lived with this for years now, Billy, and maybe it's time to get a load off your shoulders...");
- the encouragement to make amends, as if that will somehow make it all go away, which is what the detainee fervently hopes for ("These people need to hear you apologize, Billy, they just need to know you understand their pain, that's all they need—can you give them that, at least...?");
- and any of the many, many other techniques, simply too numerous to set out—but perhaps you get the idea.
It's highly unlikely that any Canadian police officer would ever resort to violence or even threats, the way it's routinely portrayed in Hollwood cop movies, but they don't need to. Their skills are usually enough, unless their intended victim simply hunkers down and plays a role from another kind of Hollywood movie—the one about the brave soldier captured by an implacable enemy: "name, rank and serial number".
Everyone is entitled to call a lawyer and get some sort of legal advice before they can be questioned usefully by the police after arrest, but very often the advice is simply "don't talk to the police". Well, yes, that is the bottom line here, but an extended explanation of why you shouldn't would be more effective. So often, an individual under arrest is given a two-minute call to a legal aid duty lawyer—typically a contractor sitting at home with a cell phone and pager, and who may not even have criminal law experience—and is then fair game for interrogation.
It's always possible for a person to be in very special circumstances ("I didn't do it, but I know who did, and I know where he'll be for the next half hour, together with the gun and the loot") that might justify quickly passing on some specific information to the police upon arrest. In general though, and in the vast majority of cases, the ideal approach is that taken by one particular individual who, taken to a police station interview room after arrest, totally ignored the detective attempting to question him, quietly lay down on the floor and went to sleep.
Take a completely firm, silent stance for long enough, and you'l eventually be escorted to a cell and left alone.
Cell Plants
In serious cases, though, the danger may not end there. It is common police practice in such cases to introduce the detainee into the company of an undercover officer pretending to be another prisoner. This person will be chosen and briefed to present as someone essentially compatible with the subject, and certainly in a way that would seem totally inconsistent with being a police officer.
Imagine some hairy biker type, shouting insults at the jailers through the bars, then sitting there in the cell complaining about their treatment of him, and the unfairness of being accused, etc., etc.
Before long, the detainee is drawn into conversation with a sympathetic listener, and incriminates himself.
The ruse may even continue, if the detainee is granted bail. It is not uncommon for the police plant to 'bump into' him subsequently, on the street, at the probation office, or wherever, and renew the acquaintanceship. This is commonly how one type of full-blown undercover 'Mr. Big' scenario begins: the subject is introduced through his new friend into a completely fake 'criminal organization', and will be told that, in order to be accepted and trusted, he must be completely open about past crimes and so on.
It's an oldie-but-goodie: the police operatives typically have a great time, dining out at expensive restaurants at taxpayer expense, staging bogus crimes, passing around large quantities of money or contraband, and almost invariably score some kind of admission or confession from the hapless and gullible target.
Summary
Pretty much anything said by an accused person, either directly to the police, or overheard by or reported to them, is admissible at trial if it can be used by the prosecution, unless it was said in response to direct questioning by an officer before the detainee had been given a reasonable opportunity to get legal advice.
This includes unsolicited remarks, and can even include non-verbal responses to things said or done.
It's always the personal choice of the individual him- or herself, but any criminal defence lawyer will tell you, from long and bitter experience: not a word, about anything, any time, except maybe "I'm hungry" or "Take me back to my cell".
 |
 |
 |
|---|---|---|
Custom Search
|
 |
|
FIRST LINE CRIMINAL LAW INFORMATION