Depends on the conviction. If it was something that was settled in front of a judge with police as the primary witnesses, I probably wouldn’t care. If it was a serious crime decided by a jury, I’d give that a lot more weight.
Meh, I don’t have much more faith in juries as the trials I’ve seen are more performance acts than accounting of events. Think about how salespeople can convince so many people to buy X product even if it’s total garbage and now imagine that sales person becomes a prosecutor.
One famous example of this showmanship was the prosecutor from Making a Murderer who convinced two separate juries to convict two separate people of a single murder claiming two completely different sets of facts in each trial. That woman definitely wasn’t murdered twice but she would have had to have been based on his arguments.
I’ve also witnessed this personally with a cop lying on the stand, the prosecutor misrepresenting things, and ‘expert witnesses’ telling the jury whatever the prosecution paid them to say and they typically eat this shit up. How much effort do you expect them to put in when they’re pulled from their life to sit in some uncomfortable room listening to terrible stuff for $12 a day? Most people default to whatever the authority figure tells them to do/think.
Jurys are just people who aren’t firmiliar with the court system. I’m not firmiliar with the court system, but one thing I do know is that it’s NOT legal for the prosecution to claim a defendant confessed to police interigation, unless he actually did confess. HOWEVER what they don’t tell you is that it IS legal to police to interigate you until you confess to anything. Some interigations, in one room, can go on for 70 hours. Imagine being in one room, being asked over and over if you did the crime. You know you didn’t, but you’ve been in this same interigation chamber for almost a week. No windows. No clocks. No toilet. No food. No water. Just waiting for a confession.
I know thats legal, but most other people don’t. So I give zero credibility to “he confessed”. The first question I’d ask is “how long was he held in custody?”
Because another thing they do, is they might interigate you for 8-12 hours. Then put you in a holding cell. Then interigate you again for 8-12 hours the next day. Then back to the holding cell. With no limits in place on how long you’re held.
Most people just hear “he confessed”, and thats it. Case closed. I’ve even heard of times that a crime happened in the 70s, guy was interigated, claimed innocence, then confessed, served decades in jail, and then DNA testing technologies improved. Then they find out the DNA wasn’t a match. He didn’t do it.
Another thing they do is say “You can confess and serve 2 years, OR we can stack the deck, and you’ll get a lifetime sentence.” And now people confess to things they didn’t do just to get the lighter sentence.
So, just for people reading this, it’s actually not legal to interrogate people that long. Cops rely on you not knowing your rights. The best thing you can do is demand a lawyer and shut the fuck up
Generally, they must get a warrant to arrest you; or put you in front of a judge for a probable cause hearing (ostensibly within 48 hours of arrest.).
Once you ask for a lawyer, the interrogation is supposed to end until one is provided. If they keep asking questions, keep asking for a lawyer and say nothing else. And remember, cops are allowed to lie about things.
Depends on the conviction. If it was something that was settled in front of a judge with police as the primary witnesses, I probably wouldn’t care. If it was a serious crime decided by a jury, I’d give that a lot more weight.
Meh, I don’t have much more faith in juries as the trials I’ve seen are more performance acts than accounting of events. Think about how salespeople can convince so many people to buy X product even if it’s total garbage and now imagine that sales person becomes a prosecutor.
One famous example of this showmanship was the prosecutor from Making a Murderer who convinced two separate juries to convict two separate people of a single murder claiming two completely different sets of facts in each trial. That woman definitely wasn’t murdered twice but she would have had to have been based on his arguments.
I’ve also witnessed this personally with a cop lying on the stand, the prosecutor misrepresenting things, and ‘expert witnesses’ telling the jury whatever the prosecution paid them to say and they typically eat this shit up. How much effort do you expect them to put in when they’re pulled from their life to sit in some uncomfortable room listening to terrible stuff for $12 a day? Most people default to whatever the authority figure tells them to do/think.
Jurys are just people who aren’t firmiliar with the court system. I’m not firmiliar with the court system, but one thing I do know is that it’s NOT legal for the prosecution to claim a defendant confessed to police interigation, unless he actually did confess. HOWEVER what they don’t tell you is that it IS legal to police to interigate you until you confess to anything. Some interigations, in one room, can go on for 70 hours. Imagine being in one room, being asked over and over if you did the crime. You know you didn’t, but you’ve been in this same interigation chamber for almost a week. No windows. No clocks. No toilet. No food. No water. Just waiting for a confession.
I know thats legal, but most other people don’t. So I give zero credibility to “he confessed”. The first question I’d ask is “how long was he held in custody?”
Because another thing they do, is they might interigate you for 8-12 hours. Then put you in a holding cell. Then interigate you again for 8-12 hours the next day. Then back to the holding cell. With no limits in place on how long you’re held.
Most people just hear “he confessed”, and thats it. Case closed. I’ve even heard of times that a crime happened in the 70s, guy was interigated, claimed innocence, then confessed, served decades in jail, and then DNA testing technologies improved. Then they find out the DNA wasn’t a match. He didn’t do it.
Another thing they do is say “You can confess and serve 2 years, OR we can stack the deck, and you’ll get a lifetime sentence.” And now people confess to things they didn’t do just to get the lighter sentence.
So, just for people reading this, it’s actually not legal to interrogate people that long. Cops rely on you not knowing your rights. The best thing you can do is demand a lawyer and shut the fuck up
Generally, they must get a warrant to arrest you; or put you in front of a judge for a probable cause hearing (ostensibly within 48 hours of arrest.).
Once you ask for a lawyer, the interrogation is supposed to end until one is provided. If they keep asking questions, keep asking for a lawyer and say nothing else. And remember, cops are allowed to lie about things.
So ask for a lawyer and shut the fuck up.
Japanese Legal System have joined the chat
(Also South Korea and China… 👀)