Mahoney

  • Our Team
    • Column Team
      • Team
      • Kevin J. Mahoney
      • Joan M. LeGraw
      • Georgia Pasqualone
      • Roisin
  • Practice Areas
    • Column One
      • Drug Offenses
      • Crimes of Violence
      • Sex Crimes
      • Motor Vehicle Offenses
      • Theft Crimes
      • Illegal Possession of Firearms
      • Obstructing Justice Offenses
      • White Collar Crimes
      • Federal Defense
      • Probation Violations
      • Restraining Orders
      • Professional Misconduct
      • Custody of Domestic Pets, Dogs & Cats Litigation
    • Column Two
      • Cyber Crimes
      • Hate Crimes
      • Appeals
      • Clerk Magistrate Hearings
      • Immigration
      • Civil Litigation
      • Civil Suits Against Law Enforcement
      • Personal Injury
      • College Crimes
      • Title IX Investigations
      • Juvenile Law
      • Estate Planning & Asset Protection
      • Last Will and Testament
      • Representation Before DCF
      • Dangerous or Nuisance Dog Defense
  • What Should I Do?
    • Cloumn One
      • Selecting a Winning Lawyer
      • Recommended Lawyers
      • Succeeding With Your Lawyer
      • Right to a Telephone Call
      • Miranda Rights
      • Should I Speak with Police?
      • Coping With Stress of Court
      • Bill of Rights
      • Mass Declaration of Rights
      • Street Encounters or Terry Stops
      • Cooperating With DEA or Police
    • Column Two
      • Common Defenses
      • Right to Self-Defense
      • Reasonable Doubt
      • What to Wear to Court
      • How to Behave in Court
      • Overview of the Justice System
      • Massachusetts Criminal Defense Lawyer
      • Cambridge Drug Trafficking Lawyer: Knock and Talk
      • Motor Vehicle Searches
  • Forensics
    • Column One
      • Forensic Experts
      • Preserving the Crime Scene
      • Collecting Evidence
      • Trace Evidence
      • Fingerprint Evidence
      • Autopsy
      • Gunshot Wounds
      • Stab Wounds
      • Drowning
      • Child Homicide
      • Rape Kit
    • Column Two
      • DNA Evidence
      • Forensic Dentistry
      • Forensic Botany
      • Toxicology
  • Mahoney in the Media
    • In the News
    • TV Appearances
  • Testimonials
  • Blog
  • Contact

Should I Speak with Police?

lawsuits-against-law-enforcement-1

I’m not against the police; I’m just afraid of them.

~Alfred Hitchcock

Cambridge Criminal Lawyer Explains the Risks

Why are they Questioning You?

Any encounter with the police can be disconcerting. Police officers can exude power, confidence and impatience. We can feel powerless in the presence of such authority. None of us, after all, want to be arrested or charged with a crime. When they question us, we can feel a nearly irresistible urge to cooperate or at least to appear to cooperate. We fear that by refusing to answer their questions we only confirm our guilt in their minds and, consequently, seal our fate. Our need to explain, justify or deny accusations can overwhelm our better judgment. Consider contacting a licensed Massachusetts criminal defense lawyer before answering any questions.

When seeking to question an individual suspected of a crime, they do so to: 1) test the credibility of the accusation by obtaining the other side of the story; 2) assess the character of the accused or his willingness to make amends to determine whether, in a relatively small matter, the situation can be managed short of an arrest or criminal charge; or, 3) to take a stab at letting the suspect hang himself. Although 1 and 2 favor talking to police, it can be difficult for an individual to discern the objectives of the police who seek to question him. Often times, particularly when investigating domestic assault accusations, the police intend to make an arrest prior to questioning the accused.

Those suspected of crimes often respond to police questioning with partial denials. A person might, for example, admit that: 1) he was present during the incident; 2) the alleged victim did something to provoke him; and, 3) there was a non-physical confrontation between him and the alleged victim; he, however, denies striking the alleged victim. Such a “denial” is more inculpatory than exculpatory, for he concedes not only that he was present, but also that he had a motive for striking the alleged victim. None of these admissions are exactly helpful to his defense. Further, a defendant’s self-serving denials or explanations to the police are not usually admissible at trial – unless, of course, the defendant takes the stand.

The Risks of the Unrecorded Statement

Many individuals fear allowing the police to record their statements. Obviously, a recorded confession is powerful evidence of guilt. Unrecorded statements are, in some ways, fraught with greater risks. Just because a statement is not recorded does not mean it is significantly easier to contest what was said; it does not necessarily devolve into a routine “he said, she said,” a balanced contest of competing versions of what was said during the interrogation. While an unrecorded statement affords a suspect, or more accurately a defendant, the opportunity to challenge the officer or detective on what he said when questioned, few criminal defense lawyers possess the necessary cross-examination skills to discredit a police detective called by the prosecution to recount his client’s confession. Even fewer criminal defendants are up to the task of taking the stand to offer a believable denial to a jury or to survive an experienced prosecutor’s searing cross-examination.

Nearly every day on the television set the hero cop breaks into the bad guy’s house and beats a confession out of him and we cheer on the cop. Propaganda smears our clear vision. It causes us to accept the diminishment of our constitutional protections as something to be lauded—after all, the cop was protecting us.

~Gerry Spence

Worse, an unrecorded interrogation allows a detective immense latitude in “interpreting” what a suspect said and memorializing and recalling those statements. In other words, without an audio recording, a detective is free to recall only those portions of the statement that suggest or confirm the defendant’s guilt and to misrepresent what the defendant said. Moreover, a detective, knowing he isn’t being recorded, may mistreat a suspect, employing coercive, as well as underhanded and unconstitutional stratagems, including threats, deceptions, and misrepresentations, to secure his confession. At a hearing on a motion to suppress the confession or at trial, the detective shrugs his shoulders, blandly denies any wrongdoing and testifies that the defendant appeared eager to unburden himself.

Risks of Matching Wits with Detectives Trained in Interrogation

Detectives, particularly those of the State Police and large municipalities, receive extensive training in interrogation methodologies, including 40 hours of classroom schooling in techniques that have proven effective in painstakingly breaking down a suspect’s resistance, the psychology of denial, and circumventing the constitutional protections afforded citizens. These techniques are more than general guidelines – they are comprehensive and detailed, and specifically designed to undermine the intransigence of a variety of personality types. Those teaching these interrogation techniques have considered nearly every factor that might enhance or frustrate a detective’s attempt to elicit a confession, from the way the detective dresses, his manner, his tone of voice, and even the room within which interrogations are to be conducted. They anticipate a suspect’s every evasion, as well as any kind of defiance, and provide a tailored, psychologically based, stratagem for every obstacle. Disciplined, prepared and patient, today’s detectives carefully manipulate a guarded, wary suspect into revealing that which may have seemed unimaginable to him prior to questioning – his admission of complicity in the crime. For those who have spent their careers probing the human mind for susceptibility, obtaining a confession, or at least a statement, has become more science than art.

The interrogation often becomes an exercise in trying to confirm the suspicion that the suspect is guilty, rather than trying to figure out the truth.

~Steven Drizin

If it is a serious crime, such as murder, detectives want to get the suspect talking and to keep him talking. As long as he is talking, even if he is denying he committed the crime, the police are listening for internal inconsistencies and inconsistencies with facts they believe, or know, to be true. If the suspect refuses to admit any knowledge of the crime, trained detectives will calmly offer the suspect some empathy, extenuating circumstances or justifications for the crime. For example, a detective might ask, “Joe, I know this guy was having an affair with your wife. I can understand why you might have reacted the way you did. You’re not a criminal. We all know that. You have a clean record, you work hard, you pay your bills. If you did it, you had plenty of reasons. Anyone would have reacted that way. You’re only human.” Seemingly offered a way out, and eager to unburden himself to the “sympathetic” detective, many a suspect takes the bait. Even if detectives have solid proof of a suspect’s guilt, extracting his confession greases the pole to a tidy conviction. Few criminal defense lawyers are skilled enough to persuade a jury to question the authenticity of a client’s confession.

If you value your liberty, it is often wise to resist the temptation to submit to police questioning. If the police the police are seeking to question you or a loved one, contact a criminal defense lawyer immediately.

Kevin J. Mahoney is a Cambridge Criminal Lawyer who has been defending those accused of crimes for over 20 years. He is the author of Relentless Criminal Cross-Examination. Contact us at 617-492-0055 to schedule a free in-office consultation with Attorney Mahoney.

PRINT THIS PAGE

TOP

Testimonials

  • NS, a DUI client,about 1 month ago

    Attorney Mahoney,

    I just wanted to say thank you for such a wonderful and excellent job you did for me. You were quite impressive up there and you really did your homework catching her in a few lies from previous testimony. You are the best! Even though I never want to be in this situation again, if I know anyone I will give them your name.

    Thank Amy for me too! She is a great asset to have in your office! Very pleasant and understanding.

    Again thank you and go Celtics!
     

    text

  • about 1 month ago

    Kevin Mahoney recently represented me in a case for destruction of property and disorderly conduct. He was extremely thorough and persistent, and despite a great deal of evidence against me, he managed to get the felony charge dropped without having to go to trial.

    I had never been in legal trouble before and had no idea how to proceed, and without his counsel, I am sure that I would have gotten convicted.

    He listened to my specific needs and always acted in my best interest. His knowledge, attention to detail, and general courtroom presence continued to amaze me throughout the entire process.
     

    text

  • M.K.about 1 month ago

    Dear Attorney Mahoney:

    I wish to express my sincere appreciation for your efforts on my behalf. Your defense was truly outstanding. The court room skills that you demonstrated and legal knowledge were truly incomparable. I’m wishing you the very best in your future endeavors.

    In addition, I ‘m looking forward to viewing the Jello Trial on Court T.V. Let me thank you once again.

     

    text

  • about 1 month ago

    Attorney Mahoney,

    Is very knowledgeable and very professional. He has just represented me in a case lasting a year and a half, and he made sure I got a fair trial with a fair jury. He kept me well informed about what would be happening in the court room and always had a well thought out defense for any route of attack the D.A. would be planning on.

    My trial took 2 and a half days and after the jury deliberated for approximately 23 minutes they came back with a “Not guilty” verdict. I would recommend Attorney Mahoney to anyone I know, but I sure hope I dont need him again. : ) .
     

    text

Call 617.492.0055

Available to Respond to Emergencies
24 Hours a Day

Directions

Kevin J. Mahoney’s New Book Coming Soon

The Title IX Sexual Harassment Handbook

"Attorney Mahoney is currently authoring an authoritative and strategy driven compendium on investigating and defending Title IX sexual assault cases for lawyers, students, and universities. The book will be available through James Publishing within months."

  • Our Team
  • Practice Areas
  • What Should I Do?
  • Forensics
  • Mahoney in the Media
  • Testimonials
  • Blog
  • Contact
© 2023 Mahoney Criminal Defense Group.
All Rights reserved. Privacy Policy | Disclaimer
footer-logo

For a Free in-office Consultation Call 617-492-0055

  • Our Team
  • Practice Areas
  • What Should I Do?
  • Forensics
  • Mahoney in the Media
  • Testimonials
  • Blog
  • Contact
  • Practice Areas
  • Areas we serve
  • Mahoney In the Media