Ten Ways Police Can Legally Lie to You

[Charon]

Ten (10) Ways
Police Can Legally
Lie to You
By a San Diego Criminal Defense Lawyer


(Disclaimer: This article is intended for informational purposes only. It is not legal advice, or a substitute for a consulting with an attorney concerning the specific facts of your case. Reading the contents of this article does not create an attorney-client relationship. )



September 14, 2015

Can Police lie to you?

Yes, they can. Here is how you can spot police deception.
As a general proposition, courts permit the police to lie. The lies told by the police to a suspect under questioning do not render the confession involuntary per se. Mere trickery alone does not invalidate a confession. The court must look to see whether the deception is reasonably likely to produce a false confession. People v. Farnam (2002) 28 Cal.4th 107; Hawkins v. Lynaugh (5th Cir. 1988) 844 F.2d 1132


(1) Police Can Lie About Having Physical Evidence

"We have your fingerprints."
"We have your DNA."


Fingerprint and DNA analysis requires time, and county crime labs are notoriously backlogged. If you have been arrested as a suspect for a crime that was recently committed, it is highly unlikely that police have fingerprints from the scene of the crime, at the time of interrogation.



Consider the following true story:

The defendant voluntarily came to the police station and was told he was not under arrest. The officer told the defendant that his fingerprints were found at the scene, a lie. The defendant then confessed to taking the property.  Oregon v. Mathiason (1977) 429 U.S. 492



The 6th Federal District Court described the practice of police lying about having DNA, "a regrettable but frequent practice of law enforcement was not unconstitutional," citing to People v. Jones (1998) 17 Cal.4th 279, 299 - which allow police deception as long as it is not unlikely to produce an untruthful confession.  


(2) Police can trick you into giving up your DNA

"Would you like something to drink?"


If you are arrested for a serious felony (read: violent crime), a DNA swab is now part of the normal booking routine. However, the police may also try and trick you into surrendering your DNA by offering you a soda, cup of water or coffee. A positive DNA match to an active crime scene is usually sufficient for an arrest and a charge. Police are even allowed to go through your garbage to obtain your DNA and other evidence. However, it should be noted that these DNA tests still take time, and are usually performed off-site.  Maryland v. King (2013) 133 S.Ct. 1958; California v. Greenwood (1988) 486 U.S. 35

(3) Police can give fake tests to "prove you're guilty"

"You failed the polygraph."
"You failed a chemical test."


Consider the following true story:

A suspect requested a polygraph test, and the police hooked the suspect up to a fake machine. During the questioning, the suspect denied any involvement in the crime, then the police show the defendant a fake graph from the fake machine, and tell the suspect that they know he is lying. The suspect thereafter admits being present at the scene of the crime - The court ruled the defendant's admission is a voluntary and admissible confession. People v. Mays (2009) 173 Cal App. 4th 1145.



Another true story:

"In the first step of the "test," the detectives sprayed defendant's hands with soap and patted them with a paper towel. In the second step, they used a field test kit used for testing substances suspected of being cocaine, which the detectives knew inevitably would turn color. The detective told defendant that the test had provided proof that defendant had recently fired a gun." People v. Smith (2007) 40 Cal.4th 483; People v. Parrison (1992) 137 Cal.App.3d 529, 537


(4) Police may lie about having eyewitnesses

"An eyewitness identified you leaving the scene."


True Story:

A defendant was brought to a police station and advised of his Miranda rights. Defendant waived his rights, gave a statement, and then asked for an attorney. As the detectives picked up their books to leave the room a detective tells the defendant that the victim identified a picture of the Defendant as the one who stabbed and raped her. At the time, the victim had not seen any photographs. The defendant subsequently confessed. People v. Dominick (1986) 182 Cal. Ap. 3d 1174.


(5) Police can lie about recording your conversation

"I'm turning the recorder off, this is just between you and me."
"This is off the record."

There is nothing requiring a police officer to disclose the presence of an already-activated tape recorder. In fact, there may be more than one recording device in the room, and the police may turn one of those devices off and say, "this is just between us," or "this is off the record." Remember that when speaking with the police, there is no "off the record." People v. Sims (1993) 5 Cal. 4th 405.


(6) Police can lie about having an accomplice's confession

"Your friend sold you out and told us everything"


The police are permitted to lie and tell you that your accomplice confessed. Often this is used to extract minor details, such as your location at certain times - little things that are used to build a case. Police will say, "just tell us where you met your friend," or "how long were you hanging out?" - While these questions seem innocent, your answers are confessions to those facts.



True Story:

Detectives could place both Frazier and his cousin at a bar where a victim was last seen alive. Both Frazier and the cousin were arrested. Police lied to Frazier during the interview that his cousin confessed and told them everything. Frazier only made statements that he and his cousin were at the bar. Those statements were used to convict him. Frazier v. Cupp (1969) 394 U.S. 731.


(7) The police will try to imply that your refusal to cooperate will be damaging to your case.

"We know what happened, but if you obstruct our investigation the DA will be a lot tougher on you."


The above statement is not a lie- you can be criminally charged for obstructing an investigation (i.e. lying to the police). But the way it is phrased is often interpreted as "you have to talk to us." Refusing to answer questions is not obstruction of justice. Your best defense is always to remain silent and wait for a lawyer. You will not talk yourself out of a jail cell.



What most people don't realize is that the police do not charge you with a crime - only the district attorney can make that decision. The police are just supposed to hold you and get as much information as they can to convict you. That's it... That's their job. It is the DA's job to evaluate the evidence and decide whether to even issue a  case.  Often, a DA does not know anything about the case until the date of arraignment where they first pick up the file and read a police report.  Most DA's don't even get that far, and simply read an interns notes on the file.  When a DA reads the file for the first time one of the key pieces of evidence they are looking for is if you made any statements (that is the one thing that makes their job the easiest). United States v. Santos-Garcia (8th Cir.2002) 313 F.3d 1073, 1079 (noting that raised voices and suggestions on how to gain leniency do not render a confession involuntary).


(8) Police can lie about what will happen to other people.

"Your friend will spend their life in jail if you don't tell us what happened."


The police can lie to you and say that your friend will go to jail for the rest of their life. HOWEVER, they cannot threaten a family member with harm or removal from the home. While the court permits a number of coercive tactics, threatening your family is considered the type of threat that is likely to produce a false confession. “A threat by police to arrest or punish a close relative, or a promise to free the relative in exchange for a confession, may render an admission invalid.” People v. Steger (1976) 16 Cal.3d 539, 550.


(9) They will lie about wanting to help you out.

"We know what happened, best thing for you is to tell us how write it up in your favor and we will help you out."
"We have enough evidence to charge you - this is your only opportunity to tell your story."


Police do not "charge" you with a crime. The hardest cases to prosecute are the ones where the Defendant has said NOTHING. The less you say to the Police, the better off you are at avoiding a charge. Talking to police only makes it more likely that charges will be filed.



True Story:

Defendant and his accomplice were wanted for a murder. Officers already had a full confession from defendant's accomplice, who stated the defendant was the killer. Police lied and told the Defendant they have enough evidence to charge him with murder. The defendant told the police his friend actually did the murder. His statements were used against him to place him at the scene of the crime, and as an accomplice. Defendant was ultimately convicted of murder. When the police tell you they will help you out, they are lying. Their only job is to investigate a case. The police will never help a suspect/person do anything but incriminate themselves. People v. Gurule (2002) 28 Cal.4th 557


(10) Police may ignore your request for a lawyer


There is an evidentiary loophole that allows voluntary statements, given in violation of Miranda, to be useable in court for impeachment purposes (challenging the defendant's credibility).



True story:

Strategically, police officers made an agreement prior to interviewing the defendant, that they would continue questioning Defendant if he invoked his right to an attorney. They knew that anything the Defendant said could not be used to prove his guilt, however anything the defendant said is admissible as "impeachment evidence," - which is evidence that tends to show that the Defendant is falsely testifying.



Defendant requested a lawyer 11 times over the course of a 4 hour interrogation, but each time after requesting a lawyer, the police ignored the request and asked another question to which the Defendant answered - and then resumed questioning. He then later admitted a rape and double homicide to police. He never saw a lawyer. Court found the defendant was not subjected to physical or psychological mistreatments and is mature and has had past criminal experience and that his statements were therefore voluntary and admissible as impeachment evidence. People v. Jablonski (2006) 37 Cal.4th 774





False confessions happen with a surprisingly high degree of frequency.


DISCLAIMER:

An individuals criminal case is fact-specific, so nothing in this article should be taken as legal advice. This article is for information and entertainment purposes only, and not a substitute for legal advice from an attorney familiar with the specific facts of your case. If you are concerned the police behaved illegally, talk to your attorney about possible civil remedies.


This article is not legal advice, and does not create an attorney client relationship.


EDIT: WRITTEN BY AN ATTORNEY SEEKING WORK. I was researching LEO's whom lie.

https://www.njmoorelaw.com/10-ways-polic...lie-to-you

[Sudsy]

I was aware of some of these but not all of them WOW.

Sudsy

[Pineapplepen]

Oh my goodness. I had no idea. WOW

[folken]

Not real surprised about the ten lies.

Gotta confess I am not an enforcement cheerleader.

Most of my interactions have been blaah!.

They just want to get their shift over and complete their quota.

jmo as always.....

Folken

[Charon]

and keep in mind that cameras, on Ring front doorbell devices, on ATM machines, on traffic lights. I see entire cases without a clue of the perpetrator, put together by usage of cameras in most grocery stores or at banks, or at traffic lights. and, now many neighbors have cams focused on their neighbors as so many neighbor to neighbor disputes are happening.

and, someone will always have a cell phone to tape whatever u are doing. i remember one bike rider gave the POTus to be the finger, and she was arrested.

and now, as so many confessions are viewed by juries, the police have a few tricks. One, they put the two defendants or a husband and wife in a room to talk for a few minutes. that conversation is both visually recorded and for auditory purposes. it is played in court.

Phone calls made to or from jails are also recorded and used in court. it is amazing how many dont know this.

and for fun, and to get the reaction of attempted criminal, when someone hires a hit man to kill their husband for example, for one, they are always cops. Or the hit man turns LE informant for his own benefit. And they fake pics of the death.

Big hint: Assume a hit man is LEO. just saying. And I would not go to prison to represent anyone on earth, u would know if u saw the signs that greet attorneys at Rikers Island *u are on ur own in here. No protection kinda thing*. But, if u happen to get put in jail overnite, don't talk to a cell mate. Don't talk. Period. Unless and until your attorney arrives.

[Parapluie]

It was interesting to see polygraphy mentioned--might like to look up the decision. My understanding of the law is minimal and not always gathered from the best places (and there are also federal/state differences, etc) but that one interests me because I thought that polygraph results weren't admissible. It just makes me wonder how much weight police give to polygraph results.
Ah, I will be looking that up on my own as this post has now degenerated into rambling--I'm sorry.

Anyway, thank you, Charon, for the information. It was also a good reminder to get myself better acquainted with my rights.

[Charon]

part of consideration of lie detector tests, is to see if alleged defendant will willingly take the test. that shows he is foolish nowadays. invoke ur rites for an attorney.

it also makes the alleged perp feel he will clear his name. and they can move on to the real criminals.

but, anxiety, PTSD, and all sorts of things affect test results. sociopaths can take a valium or not, and train their body to lie. they pass tests.

so, LE looks at a combo of events. They will certainly see how u react to taking a test. The new cold case cops, whom are a god send to the families of those with children and loved ones whom were never recovered, are wonderful. They look at the tests. They have preserved evidence for thirty years in the hopes that a national DNA bank would be available someday.

If part of a couple dies, police will assume it is the partner whom is responsible. or a parent or a child. they get investigated the hardest and first.

And now cold case cops are arresting the killers whom decided they wanted to marry again. and murder is just so damned cheap. They never dreamt that fingerprints and all sorts of forensic evidence remains where the body is found. where the murder occurred.

And, never ever ever state to LE that yeah it is possible that at some time, some friend of yours could have had a MMJ in your vehicle. They will seize it immediately and search it. So, you never ever knew a person whom smoked that horrific MMJ and you would not tolerate that behavior.

I watch how LE/Game Wardens whom wander up so nicely to a person about to fish. And, by golly, just about everytime they do, they make the people step out. Cuz in hunting communities the people carry weaponry. And they always say they smell MMJ or alcohol. And the insist that it is up to you. If you coop with them now, the DA will make it go easier on u.

I don't hunt. But i had no idea that game wardens are higher legally than state police. As nice as they may be, I see them writing citations, and arresting people due to prior bad acts or not having a fish license. And the kid is feeling goofy and acts like a jerk verbablly perhaps and boom he is arrested. I don't think many have any idea how much power a game warden has. So, choose your words carefully.

I admit, when i listen, i start to trust the LE. i want to coop. Dont want a ticket but want to keep the game wardens happy. No idea they find any prior criminal problem. It is in my training to say You want to speak with an attorney.

But. If u r willing to test the test, and dont freak and confess or something silly if they lie to u, u would be fine. And i would also argue that i have such severe PTSD from life and several autoimmunes. The test would register my constant fight or flight feelings as evidencing guilt or knowledge of some kind.

Sorry. Attorneys do speak a great deal.

The best advice? Be polite and cooperative and wait for your attorney to show up. Dont talk on cell phones or court house phones. Dont talk if u see the guy u were driven there with.

Assume the police are lying. They are trained to get confessions. And to have the evidence to back up the confessions.

Apparently the pressure to confess becomes horribly strong for people whom may have mental deficiencies. they begin to believe the LE is telling the truth. They believe they will go home if they just write up what they were told to say. And when they do so, expecting to go home, they are arrested.

So many cases were in groups whom specialize in this work to free wrongly accused. False confessions are possible.

And, in one study i watched them training the questioners. They want them to lie. To talk. Anything. Cuz it will all be used to prove he is a liar. Not a good idea to have three versions of what happened.

I pray that none of us has to find out what happens.

[Parapluie]

<i>part of consideration of lie detector tests, is to see if alleged defendant will willingly take the test.  that shows he is foolish nowadays. invoke ur rites for an attorney.

it also makes the alleged perp feel he will clear his name.  and they can move on to the real criminals.

but, anxiety, PTSD, and all sorts of things affect test results.   sociopaths can take a valium or not, and train their body to lie.  they pass tests.</i>

I find myself worrying about this.  I was already pretty tightly-wound before  I developed any disorders like those you mentioned (I'm sorry f that's saying too much in any way), and have always found authority figures intimidating. I tend to look guilty out of plain old fear. I don't expect to do anythng that would get me attached to a lie detector but anything can happen and if I were, it wouldn't look good for me.
Years ago---do you remember seeing anything like this?--there were articles and some discussion showing up* that debated carrying a card like the one they show here: https://iamerica.org/know-your-rights (towards the bottom). I had thought about it but handing out something like that felt a touch (passive)aggressive. If it comes down to basic interaction, a 'how's your day' from a police officer on the street being courteous and choosing my words carefully seems like a better choice.
And thank you!
[br]
[br]
[br]
*it was showing up in places like Salon, but I haven't been able to find quite the right search terms to find the articles; my apologies for the poor sourcing.

[Charon]

Parapluie: You are a good member and poster. You are not making any errors, silly or elsewise.

Just relax. I shall read this article in a bit. Or, tomorrow.

Thank you for being here, being you, and for contributing part of yourself to our wee family.

Try to allow yourself some peace and joy and freedom this weekend.

We all need some peace from time to time. And I, also, find my symptoms of PTSD and MS and Lupus certainly show up more as i age. And, cuz so many in medical profession now feel we don't need basic PKs or antibiotics or pretty much anything not making big pharma richer.

Have a glorious day.

[barq2]

I'm just astonished polygraphs are even in use! Accuracy is less than 70% with fully compliant participants in lab environments i.e. without the stress of legal problems and people trying to fake it. The idea that the polygraph gives an objective or truthful result is utterly absurd in this day and age.

Anyone who has majored in psychology should know how to cheat a polygraph... When they are trying to establish your baseline they ask very bland questions like day of week, name, etc. You can mess up their baseline by thinking of really distressing events in your life. That will affect the baseline so it becomes harder to separate truth from lies.