-
Please take a moment and update your account profile. If you have an updated account profile with basic information on why you are on Air Warriors it will help other people respond to your posts. How do you update your profile you ask?
Go here:
Edit Account Details and Profile
another scandal at usna
- Thread starter DSL1990
- Start date
post #47 of this thread.
DangerousDan
I could tell you but I would have to kill you
No I don't have any specific numbers on this. However, in the 4 months I worked in a NLSO in the Defense Shop, I saw very few "contested" cases which actually would go before the Judge for something other than a Non guilty plea. It was when I asked what a "dive" they explained how the whole process works.
Now what about the CRIMINAL part?
DangerousDan
I could tell you but I would have to kill you
From my experience with NCIS, they have come across as a group of people who think there all big and bad because they are a "Special Agent" and have a gun and a badge and can investigate people. Their attitude towards those they investigate/interview is you are guilty until proven innocent. They are allowed to "lie" to someone their interviewing in order to get the truth...something which I think is unethical.
http://bulk.resource.org/courts.gov/c/F3/306/306.F3d.545.01-4005.html
MasterBates
Well-Known Member
Quite honestly, my dealings with NCIS line up with DD's impression.
Guilty until you prove your innocence. Never thought I would have to use "Tactics" on our own people.
Guilty until you prove your innocence. Never thought I would have to use "Tactics" on our own people.
I believe all federal law enforcement can deceive subjects during interrogations... sh!t don't you watch TV? If years of Law & Order are not proof enough, try this:
http://policechiefmagazine.org/maga...tion=display&article_id=1198&issue_id=62007#1
As to your first point, my anecdotal evidence differs from yours. The NCIS agents I have dealt with have been very professional. I am sure you could find FBI agents matching your description of NCIS, would you call the crooks as well?
Actually, once you've been read your rights (31b/miranda) those interrogating can say just about anything to get you to talk (this deception has been upheld by the courts, as HH's article alludes to). It's your absolute right to remain silent and consult an attorney.
I was just curious about DD's experience. I've had good dealings with them thus far, granted I work for the man and have never been charged with anything. Knowing that i'd stick to my own advice above.
You may find it unethical, and/or criminal, however it's permitted under the law.
I was just curious about DD's experience. I've had good dealings with them thus far, granted I work for the man and have never been charged with anything. Knowing that i'd stick to my own advice above.
You may find it unethical, and/or criminal, however it's permitted under the law.
The rest of the story
http://caselaw.lp.findlaw.com/data2/circs/8th/014005p.pdf
As stated by others, it is legal for the police to lie in an investigation. If you find that immoral, fine. Most Americans don't. But it isn't illegal. Here is something that I do find wrong, maybe a bit immoral, using half a story to support your argument. The link above was offered to support the opinion that the NCIS lies and mistreats suspects and that they have been slapped by the court for it. To begin with, the appeal was more about whether the suspect was "in custody" then actual lying by investigators. But there is more. The hearing referenced in the above link was before the 8th Circuit, but was a divided court. For those that don't know, the Federal Appeals Courts are staffed by several Justices in each Circuit. Usually appeals are heard by only three justices chosen more or less at random. The decision made by that panel may be appealed to the full Court. That is called "en banc". The case in question was appealed to the full 8th Circuit and guess what, they overturned the ruling sited by DD and found that the suspect was not "in custody" ( a condition that when met alters law enforcement's further conduct) or manipulated such that his confession had to be suppressed (thrown out). In fact, the suspect was eventually convicted of murder. DD was not tell us the whole story so as to support his opinion that NCIS agents conduct themselves illegally. Now you know the rest of the story.
http://caselaw.lp.findlaw.com/data2/circs/8th/014005p.pdf
DangerousDan
I could tell you but I would have to kill you
Wink, heres the the Case I originally intending to cite but couldn't find. Ill let the facts of this case speak for themselves....
US v. Daniel M. King
Petty officer Daniel M. King, a Navy cryptanalyst, was arrested in 1999 on suspicion of espionage. The case against him was based on an inconclusive polygraph examination that led to an interrogation over 26 days lasting as long as 19 hours per session. This arduous interrogation culminated in a confession that was subsequently recanted and was uncorroborated by independent evidence. Petty Officer King was released in March 2001 following 520 days in confinement after the presiding military judge found that the evidence was likely to be insufficient to support the charge. The prosecution of this case raises numerous questions, some of which are set forth in the following documents.
The conduct of NCIS agents in this case was nothing short of shocking. Independent reviewers have stated that their techniques were barbaric and hearken back to the unconstitutional abuses of the 1920s and 1930s. That such conduct occurred at the hands of NCIS is not surprising to one regularly involved in military justice practice within the Navy. Indeed, such conduct is predictable based on the training and guidance manual published by the NCIS. According to the NCIS Manual, Chapter 14 - Interrogations, any person who adamantly denies any wrongdoing and points to his clean record is "subconsciously confessing." If a confused suspect asks what is going to happen to him, the NCIS believes this is an indication that he "is beginning a confession." Additionally, agents are to convey the idea that they will "persist as long as required to resolve the issue under investigation" and that they "will not give up the interrogation." With this guidance in hand, the NCIS agents pursued CTR1 King with such unconstitutional vigor that King's only recourse was to confess to a crime he did not commit in the hopes that he would eventually receive a lawyer and the truth would come out.
The practices used by the NCIS can be broken into five distinct categories. First, the agents conducted polygraphs examinations and related interrogations in an unethical and prejudicial manner. Second, the interrogation techniques employed by NCIS agents over the course of almost a month of questioning were an unquestionable violation of CTR1 King's constitutional rights. Third, NCIS agents blatantly disregarded CTR1 King's repeated requests to stop the interrogations and repeated requests to obtain a lawyer. Fourth, the investigators abused their positions and engaged in unethical and illegal behavior during interrogations with CTR1 King's friends, family and coworkers. Finally, the NCIS continued to impede CTR1 King's attempts to prove he did not commit the acts alleged by overclassifying all evidence in the case, permitting its two lead agents to refuse to speak with defense counsel outside the presence of an attorney, and making false statements to the media.
Statement of Lt. Robert A. Bailey, Judge Advocate General's Corps, attorney for the defense
The lesson out of the above, shut up and lawyer up.
And just a note, every law enforcement entity is going to have bad apples and stains on their record. One botched investigation does not make a whole agency screwed up though.
This is a statement of the defense attorney. He is an advocate for his client. THey are not the findings of the court. There is another side to this case. As to the 400+ days this sailor spent in confinement, the Navy-Marine Corps Court of Criminal Appeals ruled that 300 days of that were due to the actions or inactions of the defense. In other words, the sailor spent more time in jail then he had to because of his own attorneys. Yet you are upset about NCIS questioning him for a few days and not playing fair. Look, there are bad cops like there are bad pilots. Don't try so hard to indict the entire NCIS. You are not doing a very good job of it.
Harrier Dude
Living the dream
BUUUUUUULLLLLLLLLLLLSHIT.
As intensive as the NCIS can be, they aren't SERE school instructors.
If you are accused of a crime (guilty or not), and don't want to answer questions, by all means feel free to STFU! Just don't talk until you have a lawyer present. "Only recourse" my ass.
If you happen to be remarkably stupid, like Ron Williamson of Oklahoma, then keep babbling like a monkey if you want to. If you want to hear his story, read this book:
http://http://www.amazon.com/Innocent-Man-Murder-Injustice-Small/dp/0385517238
Look, the police will do a lot of things to ferret out the truth. They'll ask you a million questions. They'll confront you with your inconsistancies. They'll play "good cop/bad cop". And, yes, they will "lie to you" to get you to tip your hand.
If you didn't do anything wrong, and probably more important if you did, STFU and wait for your lawyer.
If you didn't do anything wrong then why don't you talk to us, help us out, cooperate!:icon_smil