Frightening, sir.
In Indiana only one person needs to know that the conversation is being recorded. Thus you should always speak with this fact in mind.
Frightening, sir.
In Indiana only one person needs to know that the conversation is being recorded. Thus you should always speak with this fact in mind.
Or they are inadmissible in court. They are touting this as a great victory for cops and prosecutors. I see an upside for the arrestees, myself. Those who just exercise their 5th amendment rights and remain silent till a lawyer is present will come out on top. It could well cut down on instances of intimidation and the like. It will alos make it harder to force confessions.
From the Star
Certainly not worth the risk! My point was that the cost to the department (and hence taxpayer) per-officer was very low especially considering the cost of the rest of each officer's equipment, not that cops should buy their own video equipment against department policy.Sadly, my Dept IMPD strictly forbids personally owned video equipment. We have a general order spelling out that if the department does not issue it, we are not allowed to have it. We can be suspended for up to 90 days I think without pay...not worth the risk IMO.
Frightening, sir.
The notion that law enforcement should - or does - record all conversations....
it makes me want to hug my rifle.
Why? Do you change your story of what happened when you know you are being recorded? I am not sure why this would be "frightening?"
Why? Don't you want the interaction recorded for record keeping purposes? Recording keeps everyone honest for the most part. Given technology we have available today, you should assume you are constantly being recorded whenever you are dealing with police, someone selling you something, etc..
No, but if I know I'm being recorded, I would be much less likely to even try to explain what happened, for fear of being crucified in court. Omission, skips, mis-interpretation of what was said... there's far too much that could go wrong. If it's just me politely explaining things to an officer, I have no problem with that. But, if through no fault of the officer's, the audio doesn't catch some key words like "didn't, wasn't..." or pretty much any exculpatory contraction, I'd be way more than hesitant to say even a single damned word. If it's my word versus someone else's, I could probably fight it and say, 'Hey, wait a minute, that's not what I said, not at all...' With a recording, no matter how bad the quality... a jury will eat that up. And you folks know it. And right or wrong, whether I committed the crime of which I was being accused - or not (and believe me, I probably did not) - I'm sure as hell not going to give anyone the rope to hang me. What I say can be used against me, but it can never be used to help me. Ever. Anything I say can and will be used against me, and when words are ammunition, I'm going to do my best to keep the clips of belt-fed machineguns of the State as empty as possible.
Devious? Underhanded? Nope. Not a chance. I simply love our Constitution, gentlemen, and am glad for the rights which it explicitly enumerates for me. If that piece of parchment makes your jobs more difficult, well, for that I do apologize (and sympathize, in my own way), but as law enforcement officers in this, the freest country in the world, you must realize you have pretty much the toughest job there is in the world already. But I won't apologize for my not making it easier. It's what I am supposed to do as a Citizen, one who both understands and enjoys the rights upon which this nation was made and made great.
Innocent until proven guilty. And if the accused never says anything, odds are pretty good that proving them guilty will be impossible. God bless this country.
These are good points. Do note that you are perfectly within your rights to record things said to and around you as well. I carry a small recorder when I'm on duty as well, and (when I remember to turn the bloody thing on), I record every word, every sound while I'm interviewing my patient, loading them, transporting them. I make verbal note of procedures I perform and at what time I did them, e.g. "O2, 3 liters, 1640"..."IV, 18 gauge, left wrist at 1642". This is invaluable when I'm writing my report and once that's written, I delete the recording. Nothing would stop me from clicking it on at a traffic stop, though, if I was pulled over... That way, I don't have to rely on my memory or whatever insurmountable evidence I'd need to overcome an officer's word against mine. Basically, it ensures that the truth of what was said is what is told later by and about both sides, and knowing it's definitely being recorded by one would keep you on your toes to say only what you must.
Blessings,
Bill
No, but if I know I'm being recorded, I would be much less likely to even try to explain what happened, for fear of being crucified in court. Omission, skips, mis-interpretation of what was said... there's far too much that could go wrong. If it's just me politely explaining things to an officer, I have no problem with that. But, if through no fault of the officer's, the audio doesn't catch some key words like "didn't, wasn't..." or pretty much any exculpatory contraction, I'd be way more than hesitant to say even a single damned word. If it's my word versus someone else's, I could probably fight it and say, 'Hey, wait a minute, that's not what I said, not at all...' With a recording, no matter how bad the quality... a jury will eat that up. And you folks know it. And right or wrong, whether I committed the crime of which I was being accused - or not (and believe me, I probably did not) - I'm sure as hell not going to give anyone the rope to hang me. What I say can be used against me, but it can never be used to help me. Ever. Anything I say can and will be used against me, and when words are ammunition, I'm going to do my best to keep the clips of belt-fed machineguns of the State as empty as possible.
Devious? Underhanded? Nope. Not a chance. I simply love our Constitution, gentlemen, and am glad for the rights which it explicitly enumerates for me. If that piece of parchment makes your jobs more difficult, well, for that I do apologize (and sympathize, in my own way), but as law enforcement officers in this, the freest country in the world, you must realize you have pretty much the toughest job there is in the world already. But I won't apologize for my not making it easier. It's what I am supposed to do as a Citizen, one who both understands and enjoys the rights upon which this nation was made and made great.
Innocent until proven guilty. And if the accused never says anything, odds are pretty good that proving them guilty will be impossible. God bless this country.
These are good points. Do note that you are perfectly within your rights to record things said to and around you as well. I carry a small recorder when I'm on duty as well, and (when I remember to turn the bloody thing on), I record every word, every sound while I'm interviewing my patient, loading them, transporting them. I make verbal note of procedures I perform and at what time I did them, e.g. "O2, 3 liters, 1640"..."IV, 18 gauge, left wrist at 1642". This is invaluable when I'm writing my report and once that's written, I delete the recording. Nothing would stop me from clicking it on at a traffic stop, though, if I was pulled over... That way, I don't have to rely on my memory or whatever insurmountable evidence I'd need to overcome an officer's word against mine. Basically, it ensures that the truth of what was said is what is told later by and about both sides, and knowing it's definitely being recorded by one would keep you on your toes to say only what you must.
Blessings,
Bill
Bill, you just made me realize how sensible it is to have my own.
To whom should I send the invoice?
Hadn't thought of pre-empting being recorded by recording myself, but you make complete sense.
For the two cents? Meh. Keep it.
I bought my recorder at Meijer for like $35. I think MaoMart has them, too. Digital jobbie, so no tapes to mess with, and it will record up to 200 hrs, though the quality will suffer. Of note, I do have an external mike that I had at home plugged into mine. It makes the recording better and lets me keep the recorder itself out of sight.
Blessings,
Bill
its usually broken loose by a moron than gets their mouth in gear without their mind following and when the officer is just standing there silent. Criminals seldom resist an opportunity to fill a gap in conversation with their own voice.
Also a good idea.
I don't find digital solutions to be the best, but in a pinch, I'd settle for that.
Innocent until proven guilty. And if the accused never says anything, odds are pretty good that proving them guilty will be impossible. God bless this country.
90% of the people I had as suspects were guilty.
Ah, good, then 617 will only capture the guilty and, despite IPAC's whining, the prosecution and police have absolutely nothing to worry about.
If only we had this same rule for OWI stops.
Get an Olympus recorder that separates and plus directly into a USB jack. Mine is digital and I don't have any issues with it. It records perfectly while inside a pocket from a customary distance when speaking with someone. Obviously loud trucks and such going by don't help. I have thought about getting an external mic, might do that soon.
I hate to burst your bubble, but I would aim that 90% of the people I had as suspects were guilty. When you god bless them getting off, don't come here upset and complain about the cops "doing nothing" when the same person ends up stealing from you, or somehow causing a loss to you. It could be anything from someone striking your vehicle in a parking lot causing damage, to stealing something from your home or vehicle. If there isn't no evidence visible when I stop the person, and they don't let me look in their bag or answer my questions, you are right...they will get off and your stuff will be gone for good.
If only we had this same rule for OWI stops.
..I do sympathize if that makes your job somewhat difficult.