|
Main Menu
> Just say 'no'...
> BUSTED DVD Info > Our Next Film > About Flex Your Rights > Police Stop Stats > Case Law and You Frequently Asked Questions Flex Success Stories Donate to Flex Your Rights Contact Us Disclaimer FYR Google Search
Sign up for FyR Emails
Receive FREE email updates: BUSTED Endorsements
"I used BUSTED in my criminal procedure class. It was a big hit! The students felt it was a great way to review the course materials and several asked if they could have a video. Ill be teaching this class again next year and plan to show your video on the first day of class -- which my students felt would be a real attention-getter. Thanks for the video!" Kay Levine, J.D., Ph.D., Emory University, Assistant Professor of Law Advertisement
|
|
Advertisements
|
How can I exercise my Right to Remain Silent even when innocent?
Brett "pushed the officer's buttons" when he initially refused to state what he was doing in the parking lot.
I agree with what he did. I even agree with how he did it, but it's quite obvious what Sgt. Kuehnlein thought about that.
My question is this: If I have a right to remain silent and choose to exercise it even when I'm innocent, how can I tactfully do so?
Choosing not to answer questions is not an admission of guilt. It's not refusing to comply with a *lawful* order. It's a constitutionally-protected civil right.
I choose to not answer questions due to teh simple fact that I do not trust an officer who is searching for guilt to correctly interpret any answer I give him. I'd far rather he act on the strength of any evidence than because we had communications issues and I thought I said one thing and he thought I meant another.
If I'm innocent of any crime and suddenly I'm harassed by a police officer out of the blue, interrogating me about what I'm doing when I know damned well I'm not committing a crime, I do not see where I should be bullied and bagdered and threatened into explaining my innocence. In fact, I'm especially wary of answering questions from such a person. I'm convinced he'll find some fault in anything I say.
I'm innocent until proven guilty.
What the police officer is doing in these situations is responding to a curious situation, satisfying his curiosity by fishing for clues he can use to justify action.
If the crime doesn't exists, the clues don't exist. All the officer is doing is violating the innocent suspect's privacy. This is not something the officer has the right or authority to do.
If the suspect were guilty, the incriminating evidence would exist whether or not the suspect chose to explain himself, and the officer should have been *acting on that evidence*
Whenever possible, do not consent to searches and do not answer questions *especially* if you're innocent. If officers truly have sufficient reason to act, they'll have enough for a warrant. If they don't, then they have no business harassing you in the first place.
And since I believe as much, what I'd like to hear about is a polite, respectful way of stating that I chose not to comply with unlawful searches or to be forced to make statements the officer may misinterpret.