I Turned a Routine Traffic Ticket into a Constitutional Trial

Re:I Turned a Routine Traffic Ticket into a Constitutional T... by tehwalrus on Saturday January 14, 2017 @06:26AM (#13397952)

But the police practice of collecting evidence (e.g. tricking people into giving confessions) seems completely at odds with their neutral investigator role inquisitorial justice.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:I Turned a Routine Traffic Ticket into a Constitutional T... by jakewins on Saturday January 14, 2017 @08:25AM (#13398274)

The judicial branch is meant to be neutral judges - but police and prosecutors are not part of the judicial branch. In the case of prosecutors, their job is explicitly to not be neutral.

However, the 5th amendment applies there as well - they can't force you to self-incriminate, you are free to remain silent in police interrogation. However, there's nothing in the 5th amendment saying the police or courts can't ask clever questions - if you incriminate yourself because a police asked a sneaky question in interrogation, that's on you.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:I Turned a Routine Traffic Ticket into a Constitutional T... by tehwalrus on Saturday January 14, 2017 @08:46AM (#13398322)

But the judge isn't free to make their own investigations, and the police are part of the prosecuting apparatus. So they evidence presented is biased, and the system is adversarial not inquisitorial.

Sneaky questions versus outright lying? From what I've read, that's common practice for US police officers in suspect interviews.

[ Parent | on HN ]