Do not talk to the FBI!

@BillRM,

Bill wrote:

There seem to be attempts to move this thread off tropic.

As for freezing it?

0 Replies

@ehBeth,

They were charged with lying, not with talking.
------------------------------------------------------------------
If they had refused to talk they could not be charge with lying now could they?

By talking they exposed themselves to a whole new group of risks and that is true even if they in fact did not lie to the FBI.

0 Replies

@Cycloptichorn,

It's exactly the same thing, and I hope you feel great with your company.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
I feel fine with the company of our founding fathers who gave us the bill of rights!

Second, it hardly the same thing to be willing to give information to the police when they are looking for ways to place you in prison and giving information to them as a witness to a crime that they are not cheerfully trying to pin on you.

Only a fool innocent of guilty would talk to the police if they were a target of a criminal investigation. A fool that had greatly increased his chances of being charge with a crime even if he did nothing wrong.

Note as the security guard Jewell found out they can ask you for your help without telling you that you are a target. The poor man and his family went through hell in large part because he share you thinking and was a trusting man.

1 Reply

@BillRM,

BillRM wrote:

It's exactly the same thing, and I hope you feel great with your company.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
I feel fine with the company of our founding fathers who gave us the bill of rights!

Second it is not the same thing to be willing to give information to the police when they are looking for ways to place you in prison and giving information to them as a witness to a crime that they are not cheerfully trying to pin on you.

How do you know the difference, before they start asking you questions?

Advocating that people don't cooperate with the cops, be they FBI or local, is the same thing.

Cycloptichorn

1 Reply

I've had reason to be interviewed as a witness by FBI agents three times in my life and have never had any regrets. The people I dealt with were forthright, honest and very dedicated to their work.

Can't ask for more then that.

1 Reply

@Cycloptichorn,

How do you know the difference, before they start asking you questions?
Advocating that people don't cooperate with the cops, be they FBI or local, is the same thing.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

So they had just raided you home and seized all kind manner of your property including your computers and you do not have a clue at this point that you are a target to them<LOL>

True as is the Jewell case they did lie to him over him being a target instead of the hero he in fact happen to be so and by so doing they had reduce the trust you can have in them and that is not the citizens fault but law enforcement fault.

It is not also the citizen faults that congress have given a tool to federal law enforcement that can be greatly misused and the citizens need to be awared of that fact.

0 Replies

Bill - you chose the wrong example to make your point.

Gee, I just filled out forms to get medical insurance. The last thing on the paper was an implied threat that if I lied on the application, it could be legally serious.

The worst kind of "lie" is to withhould information, IMHO.

1 Reply

@Butrflynet,

I've had reason to be interviewed as a witness by FBI agents three times in my life and have never had any regrets. The people I dealt with were forthright, honest and very dedicated to their work.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
And was you a possible target of an investigation or just a witness?

0 Replies

You start with factual information (you can get arrested for lying to law enforcement) and arrive at an incorrect conclusion (one should never talk to law enforcement).

Your conclusion is only correct if you will always lie to law enforcement. That says a lot more about you than it does about cops.

Alternate solutions:
1. Only tell the truth when dealing with law enforcement.
2. Get a lawyer to vet your communications with law enforcement.

1 Reply

@sullyfish6,

Sorry some silly form is not the same thing as facing an FBI agent with the power to charge you with a serous Federal crime the moment he feel you may had lie to him!!!!!!!!!

0 Replies

@DrewDad,

You start with factual information (you can get arrested for lying to law enforcement) and arrive at an incorrect conclusion (one should never talk to law enforcement).
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
If they think you might had lie or if they can not prove an underlining crime if they think that had a better chance of getting you for lying.

And no one is talking about being a minor witiness to some crime and giving them a statement we are talking about being the center of the bulleye where they had raided your home just to start with and had made statements to the press concerning you!!!!!!!!!

0 Replies

@BillRM,

Quote:

Come on now it take one strong will for a born American citizen to exercise his rights when facing the full power of the FBI less alone a non-citizen and a naturally citizen that come from countries where you do not have such rights.

Bullshit. It takes no strong will at all, just a knowledge of your 5th Amendment rights. An FBI agents comes to you, identifies him/herself, and says, "May I talk to you about this matter?" Your answer should be, "Are you arresting me?" If the answer is "no", you should bid them a good day and continue walking. You are under no obligation to tell them even the right time of the day. If they arrest you, they have to read you your Miranda rights, which immediately limits the scope of their future investigation.

Lying to a government agent is stupid. Just talking to them is, as a general rule, fairly stupid.

1 Reply

@Merry Andrew,

Bullshit. It takes no strong will at all, just a knowledge of your 5th Amendment rights. An FBI agents comes to you, identifies him/herself, and says, "May I talk to you about this matter?" Your answer should be, "Are you arresting me?" If the answer is "no", you should bid them a good day and continue walking. You are under no obligation to tell them even the right time of the day. If they arrest you, they have to read you your Miranda rights, which immediately limits the scope of their future investigation.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
And we are dealing here with two gentlemen who come from a society where the police can torture you and add to that the government of the US had in fact themselves torture and kidnapped people in the name of the war of terror and you are under the impression it would have been no big deal for them to refused to talk to the FBI?

1 Reply

@BillRM,

I don't know what your point or your argument is, Bill. It's difficult enough to even understand what you're trying to say with your tortured English. All I'm saying is that if there's any reason at all why you might want to lie to a government investigator, then simply refuse to talk to him/her. Make them arrest you. Then you make them talk to your lawyer. They've already told you that anything you say may be held against you, so you don't say anything. They won't arrest you unless they already have the goods on you to make an indictment stick.

2 Replies

@Merry Andrew,

Sorry about my torture English<grin> however they do not have to give you your "rights" statement to interview you only to arrest you.

The poor security guard Jewell was told that he should come in to help them set up procedures/video to deal with finding a bomb in a public place not that he was the target for setting off the bomb in the first place! No rights read to him.

As far as lying or not lying you are in danger of being charge with that crime if you are indeed lying or if you are not lying to them if you are stupid enough to talk to them at all.

Please take note they did not have anything they could charge the father and son with except for lying to them and therefore if they had not been helpful and place themselves in harm way for hours on end they would be free men now.

0 Replies

@Merry Andrew,

Merry Andrew wrote:

I don't know what your point or your argument is, Bill. It's difficult enough to even understand what you're trying to say with your tortured English. All I'm saying is that if there's any reason at all why you might want to lie to a government investigator, then simply refuse to talk to him/her. Make them arrest you. Then you make them talk to your lawyer. They've already told you that anything you say may be held against you, so you don't say anything. They won't arrest you unless they already have the goods on you to make an indictment stick.

And it really is that simple.

I doubt there's more than a handful of Americans with an IQ over imbecile who've never heard the Miranda Warning on TV... and that's been required since the sixties. It's been dinged up a little recently with "Terry Stops", which supposedly authorize only the briefest of questioning to determine if probable cause can be established (though in practice; Joe Public generally gets tricked into revealing enough for just that, so it really is an end-around the Fourth and Fifth amendments.)

Nevertheless, the guilty retain the right to not incriminate themselves and the statistical wonder that the vast majority of perps do, doesn't change a thing. Lying to the Law is as idiotic as it is illegal and strongly coerced testimony isn't admissible anyway... so a stated desire to seek counsel, providing its recorded is as good as remaining silent in the hands of competent counsel. Sometimes even better... because any evidence discovered via coerced testimony is equally inadmissible as the fruit of the poisonous tree. A clever crook can indeed profit by outsmarting the investigator, while remaining mindful of the rules of evidence... but I think BillRM would do well to follow his own advice and just shut the hell up.

1 Reply

@OCCOM BILL,

but I think BillRM would do well to follow his own advice and just shut the hell up.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
LOL and more LOL!!!!!

So it is you opinion that only the guilty find themselves on the wrong side of a FBI interview?

That law enforcement/government never act wrongly and the Atlanta bombing case or the case where a poor Canadian citizen was kidnapped and send to a third world country where he was torture for a few months before they found out he was the wrong man never happen?

That law enforcement never trick Jewell a hundred percent innocent man into coming in for a long interview and then used his statements against him that never happen now did it?

You are a fool my friend at least in my opinion.

1 Reply

@BillRM,

BillRM wrote:

but I think BillRM would do well to follow his own advice and just shut the hell up.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
LOL and more LOL!!!!!

So it is you opinion that only the guilty find themselves on the wrong side of a FBI interview?

That law enforcement/government never act wrongly and the Atlanta bombing case or the case where a poor Canadian citizen was kidnapped and send to a third world country where he was torture for a few months before they found out he was the wrong man never happen?

That law enforcement never trick Jewell a hundred percent innocent man into coming in for a long interview and then used his statements against him that never happen now did it?

You are a fool my friend at least in my opinion.

You're certainly entitled to your opinion of me, but I hope you considered none of the above quoted assertions in assessing my degree of foolishness... as I stated none of those positions. For the record, I would always encourage anyone being interviewed by law enforcement to exercise their constitutional right to have an attorney present… but most especially I would encourage that of anyone who's just now stumbled across the Bill of Rights and believes they're sharing some new found wisdom.

1 Reply

@OCCOM BILL,

encourage that of anyone who's just now stumbled across the Bill of Rights and believes they're sharing some new found wisdom.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
New found wisdom it might not be however most people does not used either commonsense or their rights when face with law enforcement and bringing up the subject on a thread when there happen to be a fine example of what happen when you do not do so now in the news seem a good idea.

Another question do you think that the FBI is now acting in good faith over charging the father and son with lying to them?

Here we have a very public serous of raids and open claims that the FBI had broken up a terrorist threat to New York and yet no real evidence of a threat or a crime had come out of those raids!

Without finding some mean to arrest these claim terrorists they would now look like fools would they not?

The whole thing smell......................

2 Replies

@BillRM,

BillRM wrote:

encourage that of anyone who's just now stumbled across the Bill of Rights and believes they're sharing some new found wisdom.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
New found wisdom it might not be however most people does not used either commonsense or their rights when face with law enforcement and bringing up the subject on a thread when there happen to be a fine example of what happen when you do not do so now in the news seem a good idea.

Another question do you think that the FBI is now acting in good faith over charging the father and son with lying to them?

I lack sufficient access to the evidence to form an informed opinion... but it's really not that complicated. A jury of their peers will be happy to decide their relative guilt or innocence. Btw, would you prefer a justice system where citizens could lie to investigators (and thereby thwart investigations) with impunity?

BillRM wrote:

Here we have a very public serous of raids and open claims that the FBI had broken up a terrorist threat to New York and yet no real evidence of a threat or a crime had come out of those raids!

Without finding some mean to arrest these claim terrorists they would now look like fools would they not?

Not sure I understand your position. Are you suggesting that investigating crimes without clear solutions is foolish? Or are you suggesting that no arrests should be made, even where probable cause exists, if available evidence doesn’t already rise to a level sufficient to prove guilt beyond a reasonable doubt?

If your point is that there are bad law enforcement officers, I would of course agree. If your point is that brass-grandstanding is frequently uncalled for or even over the top; again, I would agree. But the perfection you are apparently looking for doesn’t even exist in movies, let alone the real world.

0 Replies

Do not talk to the FBI!

Related Topics

Quick Links

My Account

able2know