Talk to the police? Try this on for size.

[03trubluGT]

The problem I see with you is that you cannot convey your point without trying to talk down to someone. You don't know me, nor do I know you. I haven't swallowed anything.

So an investigator should not think someone is guilty for envoking their rights but a patrolman should?

And please don't tell me how to investigate. I won't tell you how to be a patrolman.

Ok, Eric, I won't keep you waiting any longer....


I can't help how you process my posts. Were you not given a class on verbal vs. non-verbal communication? How much of a conversation is perceived depends on the delivery?

An investigator (read: responding officer, until or unless relieved by a detective)should not think ANYONE guilty just because they don't want to talk to the police. The investigator/responding officer should consider the totality of the circumstances and come to a logical conclusion without regard to outside influences or personal bias.

How long have you been a commissioned officer?

[talisman]

oh shit, Matt is going to try and throw out rank again! Years on job equals everything in his world, regardless of valid point to be had!

[03trubluGT]

It's refreshing to hear an officer say "If you exercise your rights, you're doing the right thing and I support that. No You're innocent till proven guilty."

I should buy this man a beer

So some guy sexually assaults your wife, the evidence points to the guy, and the guy tells the officer/detective that he will not talk to the police and wants a lawyer.

The officer then says "If you exercise your rights, you're doing the right thing and I support that" and you want to buy that officer a beer?

I'm really LMAO on that one!

[03trubluGT]

oh shit, Matt is going to try and throw out rank again! Years on job equals everything in his world, regardless of valid point to be had!

Oh shit, Eric is at home alone again with the liquor and has nothing to do but cast hate and discontent on the interwebz! You're such a pathetic waste for trying to shift the point to me again instead of the facts.

I'm currently dividing time between the board and putting guns back in the safe from yesterday's trip:

http://www.dfwmustangs.net/forums/showthread.php?t=31756

[bcoop]

So some guy sexually assaults your wife, the evidence points to the guy, and the guy tells the officer/detective that he will not talk to the police and wants a lawyer.

The officer then says "If you exercise your rights, you're doing the right thing and I support that" and you want to buy that officer a beer?

I'm really LMAO on that one!

I'm really LMAO too, because you automatically assume guilt, and throw out wild scenarios to defend your stance. But to answer your question, the suspect is innocent until proven guilty, just like anyone else should be.

[03trubluGT]

I'm really LMAO too, because you automatically assume guilt, and throw out wild scenarios to defend your stance. But to answer your question, the suspect is innocent until proven guilty, just like anyone else should be.

If the evidence points to guilt, WTF is anyone with a brain supposed to think?

Yea, he's innocent, but he will still be sent through the process. That's the way it works, unless you are an idiot.

[talisman]

Oh shit, Eric is at home alone again with the liquor and has nothing to do but cast hate and discontent on the interwebz!

I'm currently dividing time between the board and putting guns back in the safe from yesterday's trip:

http://www.dfwmustangs.net/forums/sh...ad.php?t=31756

You bring it all on yourself. This thread is HILARIOUS.

[bcoop]

If the evidence points to guilt, WTF is anyone with a brain supposed to think?

Evidence can point to guilt all it wants, it still has to be proven in a court of law. Would I be happy about it? Not really. But the suspect is still guaranteed his day in court, and the burden of proof lies with the LEOs and DA. You're getting away from your original argument that lawyering up automatically means guilty. You said it, not me.

[Broncojohnny]

So some guy sexually assaults your wife, the evidence points to the guy, and the guy tells the officer/detective that he will not talk to the police and wants a lawyer.

The officer then says "If you exercise your rights, you're doing the right thing and I support that" and you want to buy that officer a beer?

I'm really LMAO on that one!

Thanks for the science fiction story Ray Bradbury, I thought you died last month...

[03trubluGT]

You bring it all on yourself. This thread is HILARIOUS.

It is hilarious because you don't see how miserable you are and sit at home just waiting on someone to make a comment so you can DeSTroY them on the web and make yourself look cool.

Fucking grow up.

Go ahead and twist my words to make them fit your own distorted view of reality.

[03trubluGT]

Evidence can point to guilt all it wants, it still has to be proven in a court of law. Would I be happy about it? Not really. But the suspect is still guaranteed his day in court, and the burden of proof lies with the LEOs and DA. You're getting away from your original argument that lawyering up automatically means guilty. You said it, not me.

Go re-read the posts and come back when you have some grasp of what I posted.

[03trubluGT]

Thanks for the science fiction story Ray Bradbury, I though you died last month...

Oh, Brent and now Alan!

Yay! Nutswingers #1 and #2.

When should I expect the others????

[03trubluGT]

Eric must be busy making a witty comeback for my white text....

[Forever_frost]

So some guy sexually assaults your wife, the evidence points to the guy, and the guy tells the officer/detective that he will not talk to the police and wants a lawyer.

The officer then says "If you exercise your rights, you're doing the right thing and I support that" and you want to buy that officer a beer?

I'm really LMAO on that one!

If the guy tells the cop that he wants a lawyer, he's within his rights. Do you really have to try these emotional pleas that you want to use to justify the unconstitutional actions of some officers? Really? If he rapes my wife, I'll kill him before the cop gets there or after the cop leaves. I'll deal with that myself. I don't need a cop to handle my issues.

And yes, I want to buy the man a beer for acknowledging the constitution protects EVERYONE.

Now you tell me Matt, if one of your fellow officers beats a suspect into the ground and then wants an attorney, should I defend his right to an attorney or just demand he be curb stomped?

[Broncojohnny]

Oh, Brent and now Alan!

Yay! Nutswingers #1 and #2.

When should I expect the others????

I just stopped in to get my nightly laugh at your expense.

Entertain me, fool, I command it.