How far do you think a person's right to silence at the police station/witness box go?

Question

I am studying this at the moment for university(I live in England, so its college to anyone who is American) and i was just wondering what lay ppl with good common sense will come up with to inspire me to critically analyse better what i learn

i dont expect ppl to know the law!! that the point i want to know what you think WITHOUT knowing the law i want to know what your BASIC COMMON SENSE INSTINCT tells u... that why i said common sense lay ppl

Answer 1

We don't know American law, let alone British law.

Answer 2

In America, as soon as you ask for a Lawyer, the questioning MUST stop at the Police Station. As to Court, our Fifth Amendment allows some rights, (not incriminating yourself), plus other Amendments allow for more protections. You may be held in contempt of court. They will put you in custody, threating that you won't get out until you talk. That is a ploy by the government to break you until you do talk. If it gets to that, you'll need a REALLY GOOD lawyer!!!!!!!

Answer 3

The law in UK has changed recently as I am sure you must know. Silence now can now be construed as an admittance of guilt. Another interesting point this week that a deaf and dumb mute, and imigrant, was discharged this week after being charged with multiple rape. Apparently he court not defend himself properly because he could not understand the questions asked him in court. A miscarriage of justice? I think so.

Answer 4

analise this:we used to have the right to silence, but i think it was abolished years ago, now you are presumed guilty.However there is the real and the unreal, the real is the gov, and law are in a state of treason, and should not be judging anybody from such an illegal position, the unreal is pretending they are not treasonable.lawyers police judgespoliticians, all cover each outhers back, as regards this treasonous state, everything official is under european occupation,I have been to court many times declairing myself non european english, just get egnored and the police are europs occupying forces, trained not to recognise ones tru rights.If you are going in to law you are going to learn the art of deciete. and become your own enemy.

Answer 5

I once tested this assumption. I was in a car that was pulled over, and the officer wanted to search the vehicle. the driver refused the search, but the officer searched anyway, after pretending to hear the driver give permission. he found a bag of marijuana, and wanted to know who it belonged to. he then proceeded to read each of us our rights, and asked who the bag belonged to. I stated that I wanted to have the advice of an attorney before answering.

The officer went berzerk, and he began pacing back and forth yelling at me how stupid I was, yelling at me that I had better give him something better than that, yelling all kinds of threats at me and the driver.

Finally, he offered to let us both go, on the condition that 1) somebody admitted to owning the bag and 2) that we pay $700 in 'bail money'.

He drove us to a western union where I had my family wire me the $700. Neither of us admitted to owning the bag, but we were released as soon as the officer had his money.

My conclusion: You do not have the right to an attorney nor to remain silent. On paper maybe, but not in actual practice.

Answer 6

...i think it depends on the crime and the evidence...the American Judaical system is so complicated...look how many innocents spend years on death row appealing and walk or have their sentence commuted to imprisonment instead...the UK system is almost as bad..we just do not kill people...no 'eye for an eye'...but i have stood in the dock of crown court and said nothing but 'not guilty' when i was and walked outta court (no nasty crimes...just wayward 20's) and i have also seen a man with suburb defence and an excellent case for acquittal be sentenced to life when he is, i know, innocent....so you find the rights and wrongs...i have been trying for years and have now concluded that...THE LAW SUCKS...it does not protect the innocent and condemn the guilty...happy hols...xxxx

Answer 7

Sometimes it's best to say nothing if your a terrible speaker. If there were signs of corruption and I was in a bad situation silence would be grand and fair. I think that the phrase "you have the right to remain silent" was made with that in mind.

Answer 8

personally i dont say anything without one of them free laywers there... the cops can do whatever they want with what you say... i got the time to waste, and it dosnt cost me anything... i dont speak a word until i get my free lawyer...guilty or not

and if you are guilty, everyday your in jail before being sentanced counts as 2 days... take the break and enjoy the 3 meals a day and excercise equipment

Answer 9

A persons right to remain silent, so as to not incriminate themselves, is imperative. No crime is perfect, and so an interview with a suspect, while useful, is not always necessary.

If you are accused of a crime, and choose to speak to law enforcement/testify at your trial, you are setting yourself up for failure. If your defense attorney were to let you talk, you might want to replace him/her.

Answer 10

It is pretty absolute. If a person is brought in for questioning and they take the Fifth (Amendment) or ask for a lawyer questioning must cease at the point.