All very well in the "land of the free" :proud: but here in Blighty there's not that choice. If you don't talk to the police and they decide to prosecute you, that alone can be used as evidence of your guilt.
Yeah, I remember when they brought that in. Police are not so clever to solve crime on their own so they needed a bit of help in getting their paperwork done more quickly and easily. Quite a fundamental right removed that was.
David Guyatt Wrote:All very well in the "land of the free" :proud: but here in Blighty there's not that choice. If you don't talk to the police and they decide to prosecute you, that alone can be used as evidence of your guilt.
I didn't know that....and that is quite insane and horrible. Why would one want to self-incriminate themselves or help to be set-up? Silence is not guilt. Proof of guilt is guilt. And what if one can't speak.....let alone just doesn't want to! So, if the police have come in to set you up as a terrorrist and while one bloke is asking questions of you, the others are searching your flat for the best place to hide the bomb making equiptment they brought with them, you have to be talkin?! Do you have to be answering their questions or can you just be reciting poetry and Shakespeare from memory......?! In some ways the UK is one step ahead of the US on the yellow brick road to a police state!
How completely British logic...let me guess...the thinking was just as one of your statesmen once said, 'Gentlemen don't read other gentlemen's man [wrong!], they figured innocent people LOVE their local police and SIS and would just LOVE to chat them up over tea and scones [wrong!]
Well for the Americans and others allowed not to talk to the Police or other Agents - and for the UK citizens to know what you lost - here is a great booklet on exactly what you should and should not do; should and should not say, if and when an Agent knocks on your door:
If An Agent Knocks (the booklet)
What to do if you or your organization are targeted by federal law enforcement
Federal law enforcement agencies like the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) have a dark history of targeting radical and progressive movements. Some of the dirty tricks they use against these movements include: the infiltration of organizations to discredit and disrupt their operations; campaigns of misinformation and false stories in the media; forgery of correspondence; fabrication of evidence; and the use of grand jury subpoenas to intimidate activists. Today's activist must know and understand the threat posed by federal law enforcement agents and their tactics as well as several key security practices that offer the best protection.
Federal agents have many tools at their disposal to target activists. While it is important to know and understand these tools and tactics, it is of critical importance that you resist any paranoia of government surveillance or fear of infiltration, which will only serve to paralyze you or your organization in your quest for social change. If fear of government repression prevents you from organizing, the agents of repression will have won without even trying.
The Center for Constitutional Rights created If an Agent Knocks to provide advice to activists likely to be targeted by FBI agents or other federal investigators. Since its original release in 1989, If an Agent Knocks has been widely circulated in progressive activist communities across the country. This guide includes both the timeless advice included in the original version and extensive updates to reflect the current state of the law and law enforcement tools. This updated edition also includes a comprehensive discussion of today's technology, including cell phones, e-mail and web browsing. This guide should be seen as a resource for the information needed to protect yourself and other activists from government investigation and to empower you to continue the struggle.
We have attempted to provide answers to a broad range of questions for the many scenarios that one can encounter as an activist. We hope individuals and groups use this pamphlet to develop and prepare practical responses if an agent knocks at your door.
These are the 37 words of the UK police caution.
Quote:You do not have to say anything. But it may harm your defence if you do not mention when questioned something which you later rely on in court. Anything you do say may be given in evidence.
For the caution to be considered in effect - ie for the police to claim in court that you were questioned under caution - it must be followed by the question
"Do you understand?" to which you must have replied in the affirmative.
The best and only response to the question in the absence of a non-police witness, preferably your own solicitor, being present and taking notes is
"No"
Then say absolutely nothing else except, "I repeat, I do not understand the caution" and to stay totally silent, except for occasionally repeating the above, in reponse to any and every other question.
Here is a reasonable exposition of the pitfalls from April 2006 Times
Peter Presland Wrote:These are the 37 words of the UK police caution.
For the caution to be considered in effect - ie for the police to claim in court that you were questioned under caution - it must be followed by the question "Do you understand?" to which you must have replied in the affirmative.
The best and only response to the question in the absence of a non-police witness, preferably your own solicitor, being present and taking notes is "No"
Then say absolutely nothing else except, "I repeat, I do not understand the caution" and to stay totally silent, except for occasionally repeating the above, in reponse to any and every other question.
Here is a reasonable exposition of the pitfalls from April 2006 Times
Sounds like a great Monty Python Skit....but I realize it is deadly serious. I hope the US authorities don't follow in UK footsteps [mis-steps] in this case.....
So, if the Police or MI5/6 were to enter the office or home of Prof. Dr. Stephen Hawking and he didn't have his voice computer set up....anything he didn't 'say' could and would be held against him?!?!
....fucking insane neo-fascist and police state thinking!
I'm really less and less sure 'we' won the Second World War on anything but technical military grounds.....on all others I think 'they' won.:loco:
Repeat after me:
I do not understand..... :monkeypiss:
Jan Klimkowski Wrote:Repeat after me:
I do not understand..... :monkeypiss:
But 'wa if the coppers told the Judge those words were repeated in a 'cheeky' manner as if to mock the Realm?!....................and 'Her Majesty' :moon: and her Majesty's perfect [by definition!] Government? :wirlitzer:
Technical point: would a hand-held sign saying "no, I do not understand the caution" be sufficient?! Seems more dignified, to me...but who am I.....
:hippy:
Some devious bureaucrat in the Home Office will now be beavering away day and night to amend the law to imply that the caution is understood and this question need not be asked.
You will understand!
Your rights will be trampled.
You will be found guilty.