Originally posted by Cow Poke
View Post
Announcement
Collapse
Civics 101 Guidelines
Want to argue about politics? Healthcare reform? Taxes? Governments? You've come to the right place!
Try to keep it civil though. The rules still apply here.
Try to keep it civil though. The rules still apply here.
See more
See less
DOJ drops all charges against Michael Flynn!
Collapse
X
-
Some may call me foolish, and some may call me odd
But I'd rather be a fool in the eyes of man
Than a fool in the eyes of God
From "Fools Gold" by Petra
-
Originally posted by Cow Poke View PostI think what a lot of people don't understand is the extent to which police can legally go to extract a confession....
- DNA trickery – there is no need to ask you nicely to submit to a DNA test if they can get a sufficient sample to test off the glass of water or can of soda they offered you.
- False evidence claims – they may claim your fingerprints were found at the scene or a paper trail was uncovered proving your involvement in the crime.
- Co-defendant confession claims – this is a classic ploy – pitting two potential suspects against each other. They tell each one that the other has already confessed, making it pointless to remain silent. One, if not both, usually fall for it.
- Non-existent eyewitness – they may tell you that they have an eyewitness who puts you at the scene of the crime or who saw you commit the crime.
- Failing tests – telling a suspect they failed a polygraph is a favorite police tactic.
- Implicit threats – this one is tricky. They can say things like “your buddy will go to jail if you don’t tell us the truth.” They cannot threaten family members with harm nor can they threaten to remove them from your home. (they can, however, threaten to expand the investigation into friends and family)
- Explicit promises of help – they frequently offer to help you if you confess or provide them with useful information. Keep in mind, however, that only a prosecuting attorney can actually agree to a plea deal. A law enforcement officer doesn’t have the authority to do that.
I'm always still in trouble again
"You're by far the worst poster on TWeb" and "TWeb's biggest liar" --starlight (the guy who says Stalin was a right-winger)
"Overall I would rate the withdrawal from Afghanistan as by far the best thing Biden's done" --Starlight
"Of course, human life begins at fertilization that’s not the argument." --Tassman
Comment
-
Originally posted by Mountain Man View PostIt's one thing to trick someone into confessing when there was an actual crime committed, and you have good reason to believe they may have done it. It's quite another to falsify evidence of a crime in order to coerce a "confession" from an innocent man.The first to state his case seems right until another comes and cross-examines him.
Comment
-
Originally posted by rogue06 View PostI personally know of a case where the husband was arrested for growing around a half dozen pot plants in the woods behind his house (they owned several acres including a couple in the woods). That he had some pot in the house was undeniable but that he was the one growing those plants was next to impossible to establish. The DA told him that if he didn't confess they would also charge his wife as a co-conspirator and when they both went to prison they were going to place their children in foster care.The first to state his case seems right until another comes and cross-examines him.
Comment
-
Originally posted by Cow Poke View PostI was much more creative in my bluffing.
I'm always still in trouble again
"You're by far the worst poster on TWeb" and "TWeb's biggest liar" --starlight (the guy who says Stalin was a right-winger)
"Overall I would rate the withdrawal from Afghanistan as by far the best thing Biden's done" --Starlight
"Of course, human life begins at fertilization that’s not the argument." --Tassman
Comment
-
Originally posted by rogue06 View PostThey weren't bluffing. The wife was charged although the charges were later dropped after the husband spent almost $20K on lawyers.
My favorite example:
We had an outstanding warrant for a guy we could never seem to catch at home. From the PD one day, I just called him on the phone.
Poke: Mr Wilson, this is officer Poke at the police department, and I have something I need to discuss with you.
Wilson: Oh, yeah? What's it about?
Poke: Well, it's rather personal, and I'd much rather discuss it in person.
Wilson: Can you give me a clue what it's about?
Poke: Well, like I said, it's personal, and I really can't discuss it over the phone.
About an hour later, Wilson shows up at the PD asking for officer Poke.
I come out,
Poke: "are you [proper name Wilson]?"
Wilson: Yeah, what's this all about.
Poke: Please turn around and put your hands behind your back....
Wilson: EXPLETIVE!!!!!! I KNEW that's what this was!!!!The first to state his case seems right until another comes and cross-examines him.
Comment
-
If justice is done, Barr will do time for this:
The Justice Department now argues that because the law was unlikely to be enforced in a criminal prosecution, there was essentially no legal basis to investigate Flynn.
"In short, Mr. Flynn's calls with the Russian ambassador—the only new information to arise since the FBI's decision to close out his investigation—did not constitute an articulable factual basis to open any counterintelligence investigation or criminal investigation," the Justice Department wrote last week.
But McCord and several former officials who handled the case say there were strong national security reasons to get to the bottom of Flynn's conduct. Primarily, Flynn's lies to senior Trump officials, including Pence, made him vulnerable to Russian blackmail.
Indeed, the labeling of the Flynn investigation is a bit fuzzy -- it began as a counterintelligence probe but expanded over time after Flynn's potentially criminal conduct was uncovered. This includes the phone call, his lies during the FBI interview and eventually undisclosed foreign lobbying for Turkey that he admitted to in his plea but was ignored by the DOJ last week.
The Justice Department cited McCord's testimony to Mueller and said the rationale for the investigation was "vacillating" between counterintelligence and criminal. But McCord pushed back in her op-ed, saying, "that 'vacillation' has no bearing on whether the FBI was justified in engaging in a voluntary interview."
Yates, too, never said she objected to an investigation of Flynn. His lies to other members of the administration, according to Yates, were serious and deserved the White House's attention, at very least, and raised questions that investigators should have pursued.
"There was a real problem with his underlying conduct," Yates explained to the House Intelligence Committee, according to a November 2017 interview transcript released last week.“I think God, in creating man, somewhat overestimated his ability.” ― Oscar Wilde
“And if there were a God, I think it very unlikely that He would have such an uneasy vanity as to be offended by those who doubt His existence” ― Bertrand Russell
“not all there” - you know who you are
Comment
-
I love the title of this article:
"Nevertheless, Sidney Powell persisted"
In an honest universe, Ms. Powell, the courageous attorney who engineered a miraculous defense of Lt. Gen. Michael Flynn that led to the Justice Department withdrawing criminal charges against President Trump's former National Security Adviser, would be hailed as a political and cultural hero. This solitary woman just faced down the epitome of the "old boys network" and emerged victorious.
https://townhall.com/columnists/larr...isted-n2568654
Some may call me foolish, and some may call me odd
But I'd rather be a fool in the eyes of man
Than a fool in the eyes of God
From "Fools Gold" by Petra
Comment
-
Originally posted by firstfloor View PostIf justice is done, Barr will do time for this:The first to state his case seems right until another comes and cross-examines him.
Comment
-
Originally posted by dirtfloor View PostIf justice is done, Barr will do time for this:
https://edition.cnn.com/2020/05/11/p...tes/index.html
As the saying goes, that doesn't pass the smell test.Some may call me foolish, and some may call me odd
But I'd rather be a fool in the eyes of man
Than a fool in the eyes of God
From "Fools Gold" by Petra
Comment
-
Originally posted by Mountain Man View PostIt's one thing to trick someone into confessing when there was an actual crime committed, and you have good reason to believe they may have done it. It's quite another to falsify evidence of a crime in order to coerce a "confession" from an innocent man.
Comment
-
Originally posted by Cow Poke View PostHave you ever consulted with someone for interpretation of your dreams?“I think God, in creating man, somewhat overestimated his ability.” ― Oscar Wilde
“And if there were a God, I think it very unlikely that He would have such an uneasy vanity as to be offended by those who doubt His existence” ― Bertrand Russell
“not all there” - you know who you are
Comment
-
Originally posted by Mountain Man View PostSo let me get this straight: the FBI supposedly had the goods on Flynn for serious crimes that potentially compromised national security, and yet they felt the need to falsify evidence and threaten his son in order to coerce him into pleading guilty to a mere process crime?
As the saying goes, that doesn't pass the smell test.
Comment
Related Threads
Collapse
Topics | Statistics | Last Post | ||
---|---|---|---|---|
Started by VonTastrophe, Today, 08:53 AM
|
0 responses
21 views
0 likes
|
Last Post
by oxmixmudd
Today, 10:08 AM
|
||
Started by seer, Yesterday, 01:12 PM
|
28 responses
147 views
0 likes
|
Last Post
by oxmixmudd
Today, 11:00 AM
|
||
Started by rogue06, 04-17-2024, 09:33 AM
|
65 responses
444 views
1 like
|
Last Post
by Sparko
Today, 10:40 AM
|
||
Started by whag, 04-16-2024, 10:43 PM
|
66 responses
408 views
0 likes
|
Last Post
by whag
Today, 11:03 AM
|
||
Started by rogue06, 04-16-2024, 09:38 AM
|
0 responses
27 views
1 like
|
Last Post
by rogue06
04-16-2024, 09:38 AM
|
Comment