Florida Police Can Lie to You
Lady Justice is a known symbol and allegorical personification of various components of the justice system. She holds scales to represent the fair weighing of arguments from both sides of a case, she holds a sword to symbolize the power the law has to hand down swift and final judgments, and she wears a blindfold to represent the impartiality of the law as it considers all peoples. In the United States, we trust our judicial system to uphold each of these virtues; but unfortunately, many people do not know that when it comes lying, Lady Justice is partial to police officers and other legal authorities.
Common Lies Told by Florida Police
Officers can lie in a variety of ways, so we will separate the most common lies in different categories.
Lies About Physical Evidence
Physical evidence (or lack thereof) collected at a crime scene can either make or break criminal cases. With this in mind, officers will often tell suspects they found incriminating evidence at the scene of a crime, when in reality, the police are lying. Why do police lie about evidence? They typically lie about evidence in hopes that the suspect will confess or give details about the case. If police claim that your evidence is at the scene of the crime, it’s crucial that you remain silent and ask for a criminal defense attorney.
Police will often say things like:
- “We found your DNA at the scene of the crime.”
- “Your car’s tread tracks match those left at the scene.”
Lies About Test Results & Test Procedures
Police are trained in the arts of interrogation and evidence collection, but sometimes, officers will intentionally skew the facts in an attempt to get a suspect to crack. For example, cops may suggest that a suspect take a real test (like a polygraph test) to prove a suspect’s denial of a crime when in reality, a polygraph test’s results are not conclusive. They will then tell the suspect that he or she “failed” the test, and therefore, they should start telling the truth.
Additionally, officers will sometimes make up tests or theories in an attempt to trick a suspect into forgoing their right to remain silent. For example, a police officer may tell someone accused of a crime that when he looked down at the floor when he answered the officer’s question, he proved he was lying; when in actuality, looking down at the floor when answering a question doesn’t mean anything.
Lies About Witnesses
If cops are really desperate for answers, they may tell the suspect that they have an eyewitness who saw the accused commit the crime; when in reality, no eyewitness actually exists. Unfortunately, many of the accused think the police are telling the truth when they say this, and they will share their side of the story in an attempt to clear their name.
It is important to note that officers can lie and say that a camera in the vicinity captured the suspect at the scene of the crime. This is a variation of the eyewitness lie, and when police tell you they have your face on camera, it’s crucial that you remain silent until you have a chance to talk to experienced criminal defense representation!
Lies About Recording Conversations
Recording conversations and using the transcripts in court are integral to successful convictions. If police officers fail to record a conversation when someone is in police custody, what’s said during the discussion cannot be used in court. Therefore, police officers must record conversations, but they will lie to suspects about recording conversations.
In some circumstances, cops will tell the accused that their conversation is, “off the record,” when in reality the police are recording every word. In other circumstances, officers use a little more cunning.
They will use a prop handheld recorder to trick the suspect into thinking that the handheld device is the only recorder in the room. They will then turn off the recorder in front of the suspect, and tell him that the conversation is now, “off the record.” However, they actually have another recorder that is capturing the conversation. Therefore, the accused is lulled into stating under the guise that the conversation isn’t being recorded.
Deception About Consequences
In some scenarios, the police will attempt to intimidate suspects into giving up information through deceptive false consequences. For example, suppose a cop asks a suspect a question. When the suspect stays silent (as they should), the officer will respond with something like, “You know to interfere with a criminal investigation can result in grave consequences?”
While the cop’s statement is technically true, a suspect’s silence to a question is not the interference of a criminal investigation. Therefore, the cop is trying to scare the suspect into talking by making him think there will be consequences when there are none.
Other examples of false consequences include:
- “Staying silent will only hurt your case.”
- “It’s better to tell your side of the story now so you can clear your name.”
Speak to an Attorney Immediately
You are much more likely to incriminate yourself without representation, so time is of the essence! If you or a loved one are charged with a crime, it’s crucial you contact an experienced criminal defense attorney immediately.
Call (954) 840-8713 now for a free consultation for your case!