The lawyer also serves an additional function: to be a witness to the interrogation process. Are you seriously so pro-police that you are blinded to the abuses that can happen in a non-recorded police interview?
Furthermore, you may have information which may be helpful to police but how can you use it if you're not sure it won't be manipulated to mean your guilt?
There are so many variables involved, all of which can be figured out with a lawyer present.
I'm beginning to think it's you who doesn't understand the way police interrogations work.
Im a police officer, and have conducted them.... Uhhhh............... Wait. Maybe its YOU who doesn't know jack about the interrogation process outside of what your stoner buddies told you while high or what you've seen in old Clint Eastwood movies.
Oh I see... going for personal attacks now are we?
Every time you use very very very isolated situations of a police officer abusing his power to mean we are all stupid crooked bastards... thats a personal attack on ME. So deal with it.
Police interrogators are experts at getting you to talk. They are usually trained psychologists.
Wrong. They are not trained psychologists.... :roll:
They have all sorts of techniques. While in an interrogation room, you don't have the right to use the bathroom, have food or water, sleep, medication, or any comforts. Those in of themselves can be used against you to demand that you talk. Desperate people talk.
Wrong. Again. Wait.... Maybe in OHHHH CAAAAANAADAAAAAA they can treat you like a prisoner of war but not here.
I think you are arrogant in presuming you know the boundaries of police power and abilities.
Im a police officer. Im very aware of the boundaries we deal with, which are much more limiting than you presume.
The point of having a lawyer is so that the boundaries are defined for you, and you know your rights and proper procedures.
The right to remain silent means the right to remain silent. Period. If you get tricked into talking. Too.... ****ing... bad.
You're not getting it. That's not the point. The point is that it gives the police the power to decide if you get counsel or not; and not YOU. You don't get the inherent right to ask for counsel.
And this is why you let them know that they won't be getting any answers to any of their questions until you have a lawyer present. Then... stick.. to.. your... guns.
That's not all it means. It also means that they can decide that you don't get legal counsel AT ALL, period, regardless if the situation may warrant it or not. Legal counsel may be the difference between you getting booked for a crime you didn't commit and going free.
No, they cannot prevent you from having legal counsel when you go to court...... Just during an interview. If one does not want to incriminate themselves, then they get a lawyer, who pretty much acts like an angel on their shoulder reminding them to keep their mouth shut. Yes, that angel on your shoulder is so important because people don't have any willpower to keep their own mouths shut.
Or they will break you with the numerous techniques at their disposal, such as deprivation, intimidation, harassment, degradation, etc. You think all people have the mental grit to withstand that? You are arrogant.
WHOAAAH DUUUDE... Duh cops be after me maaaaaan. :roll: This bull**** doesn't deserve a intelligent response. Paranoid much? This isn't the 1950s and its not a ****ing Dirty Harry Movie.
See above.
If police are just doing their job then there should be no problem having a lawyer present. This law is about protecting police and giving them more power. Legal representation is about ensuring the rights of SUSPECTS (note: not criminals), and any free society that defends the innocent from undue incursions of power knows this.
If you really think the cops are going all rogue and beating info out of people.... what makes you think the request for a lawyer is going to stop them from violating the already put in place restriction on beating people?
DuH!