At one point during the interrogation, the investigators even threatened to have his pet Labrador Retriever, Margosha, euthanized as a stray, and brought the dog into the room so he could say goodbye. “OK? Your dog’s now gone, forget about it,” said an investigator.
Finally, after curling up with the dog on the floor, Perez broke down and confessed. He said he had stabbed his father multiple times with a pair of scissors during an altercation in which his father hit Perez over the head with a beer bottle.
Perez’s father wasn’t dead — or even missing. Thomas Sr. was at Los Angeles International Airport waiting for a flight to see his daughter in Northern California. But police didn’t immediately tell Perez.
The tax payer pays up almost $1M and these scumbags remain employed. How predictable.
Also, just in case anyone isn’t aware: rule number one if you’re in the US and police ever bring you in and try to interrogate you is to shut down and demand a lawyer. Legally, the interview has to stop immediately until you have one present. If the officers don’t comply, then you know they’re corrupt and there’s no reason to believe anything they say from that point onwards.
Unfortunately, there has been precedent for the argument that the right to remain silent is one that needs to be continuously and positively invoked.
So if they keep interrogating you and you choose to start talking, that can be interpreted as you waiving your right to remain silent.https://www.nolo.com/legal-encyclopedia/questioning-after-claiming-miranda.html
https://www.nolo.com/legal-encyclopedia/when-how-invoke-your-right-silence.html
Remaining silent is not enough, you have to articulate that you want to invoke your right to remain silent, unambiguously request a lawyer (no “I think I should have a lawyer for this”), and request a lawyer generally (no “I want a lawyer before I answer any questions about where I was”).
“I am invoking my right to remain silent and I want a lawyer” is basically all you should say.
The ACLU remains an excellent resource for being aware of your rights.
My father-in-law is a defense attorney for juveniles, he always said that the best thing to say is " I understand you guys are just doing your jobs, and I really would like to cooperate, but to do so I need a lawyer present".
Otherwise they can basically classify you as a combative witness, or claim that you are interfering with an ongoing investigation.
By saying that you really want to help, it puts the imperative of wasting time on their end. If you guys need the information that bad, you should be rushing to get some representation here as fast as possible.
Its kinda bullshit that to get proper treatment people need to know a bunch of little phrases to throw out like a secret password. Fuck cops for real
True, but, that’s kind of something you have to do for anyone in really any position of authority generally.
ACAB
I watched this video a few years ago. You can tell its age, but I found it very enlighting. In it a lawyer explains why you should never talk to the police even if you’re innocent:
I read this guy’s book, “You have the right to remain innocent”. Definitely reinforced my ACAB inclinations.
I was going to link that but you already got it covered!
Yeah, the police should be required to ask if you wish to remain silent and if you’d like a lawyer
It’s fun to mock sovcit whackos, but this is the sort of thing that gives them the idea that there are magic words they can invoke that let them wallhack through the legal system. The judicial system has spent literally hundreds of years working hand-in-glove with police and prosecutors to make it as difficult as possible for the everyday citizen to exercise the legal rights that protect you from them, and only by knowing exactly how to navigate the legal labyrinth set up between you and those rights can you actually use them.
A lot of it’s not intentionally for that purpose, but a side effect of hundreds of years of arguing over wording and what exactly the law means in different situations.
The cases that caused the “disagreeable” (most polite phrases I can think of) changes to Miranda protections happened only in the past few decades.
It’s still preposterous that the system, which is constitutionally pretty obviously slanted against the government, is so eager to find loopholes in protections for people to the advantage of the government.
Also noteworthy for visitors to the U.S.: The police are allowed to lie to you.
The police are allowed to lie to you.
They’re also allowed to just be flat-out wrong about stuff. Like, for example, the law. You’d think as enforcers of the law they would be legally required to actually know the law, but that’s a big nope.
The police are trained to lie to you.
The police are allowed to lie to you.
The pig is allowed to lie to you pretty much everywhere.
They can lie to you here or there.
They can lie to you anywhere.
Not only will they lie to you, they will tell you that lying to them is also a crime. Cops are not your friend.
They are not allowed to lie in court, under oath… but they will anyway. To protect their illegal searches, their planted evidence, their bullying and excessive force, or just to save another cop they don’t even like! It’s called “the Blue Wall” and they will kill you or send you to prison to defend their right to be above the law…
“Anything you say or do can and will be used against you in a court of law,”
Used AGAINST you, not FOR you. No attorney has ever said, “I’m so glad my client spoke to the police.”
Never speak to the cops without an attorney.
Am I under arrest?
No -> goodbye
Yes -> lawyer -> STFU
Full stop. Never ever talk to the police under any circumstances.
So what you’re saying is a simple law proposal of “you cannot ask questions without a lawyer present. Any interview done without legal representation is illegal and inadmissible.” Would do wonders for civil rights?
They’ll just have an in-house “lawyer” present in the room. Boom, law complied with, abuse continues.
See, this is why I’m not writing the full text of the law right here. That would be up to legal experts. I figured “The official legal representation of the person being interviewed” would have been a given, but here we are…
The money should come from police department retirement money
It should come from malpractice insurance police officers should be required to have.
Bad cops will weed themselves out of the system, when they can’t afford the premiums, if they continue having incident after incident where they are responsible for damages.
Good cops won’t have to worry about high premiums or negative sentiment from the public about bad cops. You’d probably see cops clamoring to wear body cams to back their stories up if they were actually held accountable for their transgressions.
I think it should come from the union, and directly from the pensions.
Why?
This is about changing culture. It’s not one bad cop in isolation; this is a system of bad cops in league.
If a 30 year officer is hiring having their ability to retire threatened by a rookie cops behavior, that sr. officer WILL not be accepting any bullshit from the rookie.
If you want to change the culture it has to come from within the institution and their needs to be a forcing function to do so.
There wasn’t even a crime and they got a confession.
This should make every confession they’ve ever received inadmissible.
they generally aren’t. Unless related information is proven, for example the location of the body.
From my understanding these types of cases are usually hit with a plea deal, which would somewhat nullify this factor of it, though it’s still fucked up.
But how can it nullify a plea deal that was met because of all the “proof” they had from a tortured confession? If I knew it was fake but could stop the torture sooner I’d immediately confess and plea for less time if I’m having to serve it anyways.
because a plea deal is literally defined as “admitting to the crime regardless of whether or not you did it, in exchange for lighter sentencing” which is often done in cases where the burden of proof is too difficult and can cause problems.
Still doesn’t make it a just case here, but that’s just how plea deals work. Regardless you could still sue the state to appeal, you have these options, and people have exercised them before, and they will continue to exercise them into the future.
These cops will never testify in a case again without being asked about this.
Anyone who works for that police department should get asked about it when testifying. That kind of behaviour doesn’t come out of thin air. It’ll be a product of organisational culture and will be systemic.
Which cops? Do we have their names?
As @Kalothar@lemmy.ca said below:
Making people read half of an article:
Officers David Janusz, Jeremy Hale, Ronald Koval, Robert Miller and Joanna Piña were the ones involved
Making people read half of an article:
Officers David Janusz, Jeremy Hale, Ronald Koval, Robert Miller and Joanna Piña were the ones involved
They don’t publish the names of the bad officers in this story or any others because of fear of retribution. But it wasnt always this way. Police unions put pressure on media to remove the names because the officers felt threatened. Imagine being a bully and then demanding protection for it? That’s the police. They are cowards and should be exposed to the public as a matter of safety. It will keep the police polite.
Until the police union releases the names of the officers who did this, their community should treat the entire department like they were all collectively responsible, and act accordingly
deleted by creator
And I find it unlikely no one else at the station knew what they were doing for all that time. ACAB.
The attorney is the hero of this story, suing the cops for 40 years 💪❤️
The sad part of this is that the tax payers have been the one funding this without any improvements in police behavior.
When I see this, I don’t only see this man, I see every man, woman, and child who interacted with this police precinct.
How many current prisoners were put in prison by this type of psychological torture?
How many of those prisoners weren’t as lucky as this man to have undeniable evidence of innocence?
How many citizens going about their day pull off the road when they spot a police car in their rear view mirror due to terrifying encounters shared by neighbors?
Fascist morons. Morons seem particularly useful to fascists, they love being the boot and they are too stupid to look up and see an even larger boot ready to crush them when they step out of line.
Pretty much this. Every interrogation or arrest these fucks were a part of SHOULD now be suspect. Every single one.
Didnt see one thing about cops being charged or the chief being fired. FUCK THE POLICE!
Soo fucked up, and not alone. In 2006 they interrogated a man that they suspected for murder of his girlfriend while he was visibly SHOT IN THE HEAD, and denied him medical care even tho he has a victim. He died 10y later from brain damage. Ryan Waller.
You wanna know how to make me a murderer? Make me believe you’ve killed my dog and make me say goodbye.
Its cunts like this that make me want to bring back public punishment’s, let’s see how fun it is yo be a psychotic prick when you gotta face actual public repercussions.
I hope some shred of humanity sparks in the person’s mind who had that idea, of bringing in this poor guy’s dog… Maybe on his deathbed, maybe in the middle of the night ten years from now for no reason, just the full fucking impact of realization that they’re the bad guy of the story, that they’re evil, that they did evil things that hurt people very badly and they cannot undo the harm they caused unfairly.
I don’t think I’ll hold my breath that humans are particularly inclined to self-reflect nowadays or especially as time goes, but I can dream.
I don’t even have a dog and I’m already planning my revenge / last stand.
Absolutely horrifying. I’m sure this has already been said here, but it bears repeating over and over and over again: If the police bring you into an interrogation room and read you your Miranda rights IMMEDIATELY REQUEST A LAWYER. This is true even if (ESPECIALLY IF) you have done nothing wrong. Don’t give them any of this “should I have a lawyer?” or “I think I might need a lawyer” bullshit… they have and will twist that; continue to question/manipulate you. You need to state it EMPHATICALLY “I will not talk without a lawyer present, I want my lawyer present.” Legally, the police are allowed to lie to you, deceive you, and a limited amount of bashing you around verbally. There are no police badges that say “this is a good cop who is not trying to manipulate you” and never for a moment think you’re smarter than an investigator… you might be smarter than some people at some things, but these folks whole job is to manipulate people. You need a legal expert on your side.
Yeah, they aren’t going to cut you a deal or show lenience that they can’t show later. Lawyer up immediately. Fuck that “we’re on your side” stuff. They are not on your side as long as they see you as a potential criminal
Watch the “Pot Brothers” video clips that deal with traffic stops. Not exactly the same situation, but the rules are similar. Don’t talk to the cops. Cooperate, but stick to your rights, and shut the fuck up.
None of those cops received any punishment and the taxpayers covered the bill. God bless America.
humans need to go
When shit like this happens, we need an armed mob outside the department the next day.
armed mob
dare I ask why they should be armed? what good do you think will come from that?
For legitimate self defence
So taxpayers are paying this right?
The cops responsible should be forced to give every penny they have to their name. Cash, property, investments, 401k, the clothes on their fucking back. Then they can go work in those prison chain gangs for 8 dollars a day picking up trash on the streets to pay off the remaining debt. Unironically.
How are these cops not under arrest by the FBI and why aren’t they on trial??
Watch “Power” on Netflix and one get the gist. Society needs the police, but there are plenty of sick sadistic mofos in their ranks.
Society needs the police
So why the fuck aren’t they held to a higher standard than the rest of us?
This is what I don’t get. I’m a nurse, and since I (ostensibly) have people’s lives in my hand, we are checked and double-checked, have to do continual education, and literally everything we do needs to be documented and audited.
And our goal is always to prevent harm to the patient. Why do people who can legally end someone’s life not have the same, or much more strict, standards (I’m asking this rhetorically, I don’t really want an answer).
It seems like adapting medical licensing and reporting requirements would help get us on the right track, or at the very least help hold police accountable.
Society needs the police
Says who?
If there are bad people in the police, there would be bad people without the police.
Some people are bad. Why give any of us more power and less oversight than the rest?
Centralized, overwhelming military power makes the formation of alternate military power structures impossible.
The idea of a police force is to prevent the formation of a gang with enough violent power to control others.
a gang with enough violent power to control others.
Sooo… the police exists to prevent the existence of police?
I think you mean the formation of a different violent gang. One that doesn’t extrajudiciously represent the owner classes interests.
It’s funny - I live in a neighborhood where I routinely need to call the police. They don’t show up.
If you need to call the police and they don’t show up, but somehow you made it out of that situation, it sounds like you didn’t need the police.
Have you tried donating a few hundred thousand dollars to your local police union?
