Legal counsel right does not extend to interrogation room: Supreme Court of Canada

[DemolitionCat]

What's the absolute best way to neuter an interrogation?

Have the suspects' attorney present.

[transplant99]

Originally Posted by DemolitionCat

What's the absolute best way to neuter an interrogation?

Have the suspects' attorney present.

not sure what this means...other than....yeah no kidding.

[jolinar of malkshor]

Originally Posted by Iowa_Flames_Fan

Prior to that it was Stockwell Day who insisted that the drop in crime just meant that the new policy problem was unreported crime. That was truly brilliant.

The statistics, published in Statistics Canada's 2009 General Social Survey on Victimization, suggest Canadians reported 31 per cent of the crimes they experienced to police in 2009 — down from 34 per cent in the previous survey in 2004

Read more: http://www.cbc.ca/canada/manitoba/st...#ixzz126ZISCL7

[jolinar of malkshor]

Originally Posted by Iowa_Flames_Fan

It is bizarre that the Harper government seems to think more jails is an urgent policy objective, in spite of the clear decline in crime over the past few years.

Of course, it goes without saying that we need jails to deal with the rise in unreported crime.

Without these new tough on crime bills do you not think our prison system is already overcrowded thus requiring more space to hold our current population of inmates?

[Nage Waza]

Originally Posted by transplant99

No it really isnt as simple as that.

As some one who went through this exact thing many years ago, I can assure you that whether or not you are innocent has no bearing on anything. It always comes down to what the police/investigators believe. Your believing innocence will prevail, just because you are, is both naive and dangerous. The world isn't black and white like that and its even more murky when it comes to the "justice" system.

Am I supposed to respond to this post? There is nothing in your post but a lack of anything concrete. You went through what thing? So you are going to assure me that innocence has no bearing on anything? Bearing on what? What are you talking about? What always comes down to the police and investigators? Why should innocence prevail and how could that be dangerous or naive? The world is black and white and many other shades, including the "justice" system, what does color have to do with this debate?

I can respond to your posts, but please put something in them! I am having trouble following...

[transplant99]

If you cant determine what i was saying...then so be it.

[Coys1882]

Originally Posted by transplant99

If you cant determine what i was saying...then so be it.

If you had to sit in an interrogation room for five hours while cops blasted questions at you about a crime you didn't commit and then they let you go - so be it. Because if they can get a couple idiot criminals to roll over and admit what they did before a lawyer comes and swoops them away - that's the price you and I SHOULD pay for the safety we feel at night. I'm glad for this law and since everyone is throwing out links, pie charts and quotes; I'll jump in too:


“We sleep safe in our beds because rough men stand ready in the night to visit violence on those who would do us harm.” - George Orwell



And I know the response will be 'what about David Milgard? Wrongfully convicted because of interrogations' - it happens sometimes and it sucks. It's the same as crying vaccinations cause autism, sometimes maybe it does but the risk is worth it in the long run.

[flylock shox]

Originally Posted by Coys1882

And I know the response will be 'what about David Milgard? Wrongfully convicted because of interrogations' - it happens sometimes and it sucks.

I don't think the evidence from the police interrogation of David Milgaard played a substantial role in his conviction. The evidence from his own acquaintances, his criminal background, and his decision not to testify in his own defence, were probably the main factors in his initial conviction.

[Bobblehead]

Originally Posted by Coys1882

If you had to sit in an interrogation room for five hours while cops blasted questions at you about a crime you didn't commit and then they let you go - so be it. Because if they can get a couple idiot criminals to roll over and admit what they did before a lawyer comes and swoops them away - that's the price you and I SHOULD pay for the safety we feel at night. I'm glad for this law and since everyone is throwing out links, pie charts and quotes; I'll jump in too:


“We sleep safe in our beds because rough men stand ready in the night to visit violence on those who would do us harm.” - George Orwell



And I know the response will be 'what about David Milgard? Wrongfully convicted because of interrogations' - it happens sometimes and it sucks. It's the same as crying vaccinations cause autism, sometimes maybe it does but the risk is worth it in the long run.

Well I would hope that the state should be attempting to prevent wrongful convictions, no facilitate them. I'm guessing that there are lots of innocent people who would cave under incessant questioning. I'm not sure that the ability to tolerate that sort of ordeal should be a measure of guilt.

And that Orwell quote was mis-attributed; there is no record of him ever actually saying that. And I'm not sure how that quote even applies here, but here is another quote that does apply:

They who can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety, deserve neither liberty nor safety. - Benjamin Franklin

[Coys1882]

Originally Posted by Bobblehead

Well I would hope that the state should be attempting to prevent wrongful convictions, no facilitate them. I'm guessing that there are lots of innocent people who would cave under incessant questioning. I'm not sure that the ability to tolerate that sort of ordeal should be a measure of guilt.

And that Orwell quote was mis-attributed; there is no record of him ever actually saying that. And I'm not sure how that quote even applies here, but here is another quote that does apply:

They who can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety, deserve neither liberty nor safety. - Benjamin Franklin

That quote whether it was Orwell or my nan who said it means something to me here because I'm willing to sacrifice a few rights so the police can get the criminals off the streets. I'll sacrifice those rights so scumbags can't hide behind them. I sleep better knowing the police have the ability to keep people in line. People who are good people contributing to society will probably never need worry - just the heads.

[valo403]

Originally Posted by Coys1882

That quote whether it was Orwell or my nan who said it means something to me here because I'm willing to sacrifice a few rights so the police can get the criminals off the streets. I'll sacrifice those rights so scumbags can't hide behind them. I sleep better knowing the police have the ability to keep people in line. People who are good people contributing to society will probably never need worry - just the heads.

So you'll sacrifice those rights when it's you who winds up wrongfully convicted? I guess it's always good to have somebody volunteering to be a martyr.

[Coys1882]

Originally Posted by valo403

So you'll sacrifice those rights when it's you who winds up wrongfully convicted? I guess it's always good to have somebody volunteering to be a martyr.

Sure - because the odds of that actually happening is what?

[HeartsOfFire]

Odds are irrelevant. The fact that it HAS happened alone proves that the sacrifice of any personal freedoms or liberties is not worth the added security.

People have been wrongly executed in the past for capital crimes they did not commit. Granted, in the above examples, nearly all of them had shady pasts to begin with, so they make poor examples. The only case I could find where a completely innocent man was tried, convicted, sentenced to death and subsequently killed for a crime he did not commit was Timothy Evans.

Originally Posted by Coys1882

And I know the response will be 'what about David Milgard? Wrongfully convicted because of interrogations' - it happens sometimes and it sucks. It's the same as crying vaccinations cause autism, sometimes maybe it does but the risk is worth it in the long run.

Yes, yes, it's easy to be on the outside looking in and say the risk is worth it. But what happens when it's you in the interrogation room, hmm? I would enjoy watching you eat those words, because I have my doubts that you'd be man enough to keep that mindset while you're the one being actively investigated.

I have another passage of wisdom for you, by Pastor Martin Niemöller:

They came first for the Communists,
and I didn't speak up because I wasn't a Communist.

Then they came for the trade unionists,
and I didn't speak up because I wasn't a trade unionist.

Then they came for the Jews,
and I didn't speak up because I wasn't a Jew.

Then they came for me
and by that time no one was left to speak up.

When you're sitting in an interrogation room for an ongoing investigations into a serious, violent crime, and you are actually innocent, I can guarantee you the thought going through your head will not be 'I have nothing to fear, for I am innocent,' but rather, 'Oh God... why do they suspect me? What if somehow the evidence they have points to me?'

[Coys1882]

Originally Posted by HeartsOfFire

Yes, yes, it's easy to be on the outside looking in and say the risk is worth it. But what happens when it's you in the interrogation room, hmm? I would enjoy watching you eat those words, because I have my doubts that you'd be man enough to keep that mindset while you're the one being actively investigated.

That's the problem with internet forums is you don't know me. Maybe - just maybe - I used to be a kid that was often on the wrong end of the table with the heat giving me the hairdryer treatment. Maybe - just maybe - I got talked to about things that happened around town because it's possible I did them when in reality I had done nothing . Maybe - just maybe - I've known what it's like to be guilty and innocent sitting at that table.

So maybe - just maybe - in all of this I have a perspective you can't have - experience. You have theory, ideology and quotes. That doesn't mean I'm right or wrong - it just means my opinion is formed on what I've been through.

[HeartsOfFire]

Originally Posted by Coys1882

Maybe - just maybe - I used to be a kid that was often on the wrong end of the table with the heat giving me the hairdryer treatment. Maybe - just maybe - I got talked to about things that happened around town because it's possible I did them when in reality I had done nothing . Maybe - just maybe - I've known what it's like to be guilty and innocent sitting at that table.

So maybe - just maybe - in all of this I have a perspective you can't have - experience. You have theory, ideology and quotes. That doesn't mean I'm right or wrong - it just means my opinion is formed on what I've been through.

But have you ever been innocent, yet still find yourself in the doghouse?

Being a kid also affords you a great deal of leniency. You didn't elaborate on the nature of your experiences so I can't refer to them. Instead, I'll use hypotheticals:

It's one thing to be a kid and make your sister cry and suffer a time-out in the corner.
It's one thing to come home from school and be accused of breaking mom's kitchen window playing baseball when you know you had nothing to do with it, even though she's holding your baseball in her hand.
It's one thing to get in a fight at school and be suspended for a few days.
It's one thing to get called into the principal's office and explain the nasty note left on your English teacher's desk with your name forged on it.

It is entirely different to be an adult on the wrong end of a murder conviction, and suffer years of unjustified incarceration.

[Coys1882]

Originally Posted by HeartsOfFire

But have you ever been innocent, yet still find yourself in the doghouse?

Being a kid also affords you a great deal of leniency. You didn't elaborate on the nature of your experiences so I can't refer to them. Instead, I'll use hypotheticals:

It's one thing to be a kid and make your sister cry and suffer a time-out in the corner.
It's one thing to come home from school and be accused of breaking mom's kitchen window playing baseball when you know you had nothing to do with it, even though she's holding your baseball in her hand.
It's one thing to get in a fight at school and be suspended for a few days.
It's one thing to get called into the principal's office and explain the nasty note left on your English teacher's desk with your name forged on it.

It is entirely different to be on the wrong end of a murder conviction, and suffer years of unjustified incarceration.

Why are you comparing a murder investigation to a broken window?

To me, in my opinion, the risk of sending an innocent man to prison is so slim; that not allowing a suspected criminal access to his lawyer during initial questioning is an acceptable risk.

[CaptainCrunch]

With the advances in DNA evidence its getting tougher and tougher to convict an innocent man of a violent crime.

David Milgaard was convicted in a time when there was no scene matching unless seman or blood could be compared to blood type, which was still shaky at the best of times.

I wonder if there are stats showing wrongful conviction/overturned on new evidence stats for any time after say the year 2000.

[HeartsOfFire]

Originally Posted by Coys1882

Why are you comparing a murder investigation to a broken window?

My assumption was that you talking about 'the heat' giving you the 'hairdryer treatment' were for scenarios akin to regular growing up where lesser authority figures (parents, schoolteachers) would be the ones in charge of punishment. Baseball's through windows, little sisters crying, fights at school, nasty notes for teachers, all things one ought not be surprised take place in childhood.

Perhaps I was being too gentle in my assumption. Perhaps your reference to 'the heat' and 'hairdryer treatment' is in fact reference to running into trouble with the law as a youth. Maybe my initial assumption of you was misplaced. Maybe you weren't the average kid that got along with most people and grew up to be the fine, upstanding member of society I thought you were, as I imagine everyone on CP is until proven otherwise. Maybe you were a little hooligan that bullied and beat up kids for their lunch money and thought spraypainting the sides of buildings was cool.

It's true, I don't know you from someone sitting beside me on the C-train in the morning commute. I've never been in an interrogation room and I've never been suspected of mischievous or criminal activity in my short 27 years. I'm starting to think now that you have, on the other hand. You have experience with our justice system already, that makes you better versed than I in terms of what they can do and what you should and should not say.

I acknowledge that detectives and investigators need to talk to people, to ask them questions concerning ongoing investigations. Even if not a suspect, I would be willing to answer questions to help the investigation along, though I would choose my answers as carefully as possible. And if I ever found myself in the unfortunate position of being handcuffed and having my rights read to me, I would not say another damned word, because nothing I say after that point can help me.

[valo403]

Originally Posted by CaptainCrunch

With the advances in DNA evidence its getting tougher and tougher to convict an innocent man of a violent crime.

David Milgaard was convicted in a time when there was no scene matching unless seman or blood could be compared to blood type, which was still shaky at the best of times.

I wonder if there are stats showing wrongful conviction/overturned on new evidence stats for any time after say the year 2000.

I think you watch too much CSI

DNA evidence isn't a factor in the majority of crimes. We're not just talking about rapes and murders here, we're tlaking about all kinds of crimes where definitive proof often doesn't exist.

[Shazam]

Once the mind-reading machine is invented this will all be moot.

In the meantime, don't talk to cops! This is why everybody needs to have a course taught by a lawyer.