Regent University School of Law
13 HN recommenders · recommended in 17 months, 2017–2026
46:39 · 22M views · Mar 20, 2012
Regent Law professor James Duane gives startling reasons why people, even innocent ones, should always exercise their Fifth Amendment rights rather than talk to police. It is based on his article and book on the subject.
HN treats it as the canonical video to link whenever talking to police or interrogations come up.
20 comments from Hacker News
> If you do want to talk to me, I can tell the juvenile court judge or adult court judge and Probation Officer what you tell me. It's missing the explicit warning that "what you say can and will be used against you in the court of law." I think they should add a clause to the end stating "and they can use this information against you to get you in trouble." This video is always relevant when the subject of talking to police comes up: this video
No, not really. Advice for police interrogation is: never talk to the police. If you don't know why, you must watch this: this video Also, I never said this is my advice. In general I like to volunteer information during interview when I am the candidate. I think it lets me control the situation a little bit better and move to ground that I have much more expertise in. I am just saying that I can't fault candidate for not doing this.
> I've been part of the group who got asked to give a DNA sample in the Nicky Verstappen [1] case. This was voluntarily, and I reluctantly did this Great story and thanks for sharing this. I want to answer why I think this is a bad idea however. First, I would talk to a legal defense attorney before doing this. A famous video about this topic is here this video . 1) The police might have told you it was for one case but it was for another, as the police can lie. 2) The DNA test itself might give a false positive on you or your family members, putting your family to a harsher scrutiny by the police that would have otherwise, and with more judicial justification. In the investigatory zeal they might find other lesser crimes they might want to prosecute just to not be empty handed. In the U.S., they might have charged a family member on a false positive with a ridiculously overblown crime. People have killed themselves over that prosecutorial technique ( [LINK] ) 3) The police could fiddle with the samples and plant evidence if they thought you or someone else did it. (Steven Avery case) 4) The lab might fake results if they are in tandem with the DA ( [LINK] ) You are gambling with your life and the life of your family members when you make that choice. And if you were so sure a family member of yours did not do it, then the police could have come to the same conclusion on their alibis and physical state of your family members. Even if you believe non of that is "likely to happen"
> They can use "I don't remember" ? They absolutely can, and will use that in a court of law. Any comment that you make that seems completely fine from your perspective can quickly be turned around to lock you up. I highly recommend checking out this lecture when you get a chance: this video Police are not generally concerned with getting the right person, they're just concerned with getting a person.
> The police are 100% your enemy once they start questioning you about anything. Record, record record. even better, stop talking to them. this video > Catch them in one lie, and you get off scot free. they're not leprechauns, there are no magical rules in effect.