Ok, so the Police want to talk to me....
Scooby Regular
iTrader: (5)
Joined: Oct 2005
Posts: 14,025
Likes: 0
From: liverpool the capital of culture 08
hes alive
, he may have free wifi from jail though (do they have it in thailand? ) he was active on here today at 12.58, no bloody update on here though
, he may have free wifi from jail though (do they have it in thailand? ) he was active on here today at 12.58, no bloody update on here though
) and is embarrassed to reply with the details.
Scooby Regular
Joined: May 2006
Posts: 2,278
Likes: 0
Scooby Regular
Joined: Mar 2002
Posts: 13,720
Likes: 0
From: Bradford
Just read this thread. Hail has made two fundamental mistakes and that is why he is no longer posting on this thread.
Mistake 1. Is not realising that by refusing to discuss any details over the phone the police are either a) about to tell you someone is dead (and this would be dealt with urgently) or, more than likely, b) they want to question you in relation to a potential crime.
They refuse to speak with you so that you have no time to prepare your thoughts. Upon arriving at the police station Hail was almost certainly immediately detained for questioning. He guessed that it may relate, in some way, to his car...but it may not. Bottom line is he went in unprepared (although there is little he could do about this).
Mistake 2. Hail probably cooperated and answered questions. NEVER EVER EVER EVER EVER EVER EVER EVER EVER EVER EVER, under ANY circumstances answer any question from a police officer other than:
1. Your name
2. Your DOB
3. Where you were born
4. Where you live.
No matter how much they threaten you and tell you that this is your only chance to talk and that it will look bad in court if you dont - you NEVER tell the police anything....even if you are 100% innocent. If they have enough evidence then let it go to court. Believe me on this though, the sole purpose of police questioning is to gather evidence and, ultimately, to get you to say something they can use in court against you. You have the right to remain silent and it will not prejudice a court case if you remain completely silent (obviously being cooperative during interview and then suddenly "remembering" something in court looks dodgy).
So, IMHO, Hail has probably made both these mistakes and has now been charged with something. Hopefully, its nothing more than a relatively minor driving offence. That said, the conviction rate for driving offences is around 98%....so he is screwed
Mistake 1. Is not realising that by refusing to discuss any details over the phone the police are either a) about to tell you someone is dead (and this would be dealt with urgently) or, more than likely, b) they want to question you in relation to a potential crime.
They refuse to speak with you so that you have no time to prepare your thoughts. Upon arriving at the police station Hail was almost certainly immediately detained for questioning. He guessed that it may relate, in some way, to his car...but it may not. Bottom line is he went in unprepared (although there is little he could do about this).
Mistake 2. Hail probably cooperated and answered questions. NEVER EVER EVER EVER EVER EVER EVER EVER EVER EVER EVER, under ANY circumstances answer any question from a police officer other than:
1. Your name
2. Your DOB
3. Where you were born
4. Where you live.
No matter how much they threaten you and tell you that this is your only chance to talk and that it will look bad in court if you dont - you NEVER tell the police anything....even if you are 100% innocent. If they have enough evidence then let it go to court. Believe me on this though, the sole purpose of police questioning is to gather evidence and, ultimately, to get you to say something they can use in court against you. You have the right to remain silent and it will not prejudice a court case if you remain completely silent (obviously being cooperative during interview and then suddenly "remembering" something in court looks dodgy).
So, IMHO, Hail has probably made both these mistakes and has now been charged with something. Hopefully, its nothing more than a relatively minor driving offence. That said, the conviction rate for driving offences is around 98%....so he is screwed
Last edited by LG John; Aug 9, 2010 at 11:16 AM.
Just read this thread. Hail has made two fundamental mistakes and that is why he is no longer posting on this thread.
Mistake 1. Is not realising that by refusing to discuss any details over the phone the police are either a) about to tell you someone is dead (and this would be dealt with urgently) or, more than likely, b) they want to question you in relation to a potential crime.
They refuse to speak with you so that you have no time to prepare your thoughts. Upon arriving at the police station Hail was almost certainly immediately detained for questioning. He guessed that it may relate, in some way, to his car...but it may not. Bottom line is he went in unprepared (although there is little he could do about this).
Mistake 2. Hail probably cooperated and answered questions. NEVER EVER EVER EVER EVER EVER EVER EVER EVER EVER EVER, under ANY circumstances answer any question from a police officer other than:
1. Your name
2. Your DOB
3. Where you were born
4. Where you live.
No matter how much they threaten you and tell you that this is your only chance to talk and that it will look bad in court if you dont - you NEVER tell the police anything....even if you are 100% innocent. If they have enough evidence then let it go to court. Believe me on this though, the sole purpose of police questioning is to gather evidence and, ultimately, to get you to say something they can use in court against you. You have the right to remain silent and it will not prejudice a court case if you remain completely silent (obviously being cooperative during interview and then suddenly "remembering" something in court looks dodgy).
So, IMHO, Hail has probably made both these mistakes and has now been charged with something. Hopefully, its nothing more than a relatively minor driving offence. That said, the conviction rate for driving offences is around 98%....so he is screwed
Mistake 1. Is not realising that by refusing to discuss any details over the phone the police are either a) about to tell you someone is dead (and this would be dealt with urgently) or, more than likely, b) they want to question you in relation to a potential crime.
They refuse to speak with you so that you have no time to prepare your thoughts. Upon arriving at the police station Hail was almost certainly immediately detained for questioning. He guessed that it may relate, in some way, to his car...but it may not. Bottom line is he went in unprepared (although there is little he could do about this).
Mistake 2. Hail probably cooperated and answered questions. NEVER EVER EVER EVER EVER EVER EVER EVER EVER EVER EVER, under ANY circumstances answer any question from a police officer other than:
1. Your name
2. Your DOB
3. Where you were born
4. Where you live.
No matter how much they threaten you and tell you that this is your only chance to talk and that it will look bad in court if you dont - you NEVER tell the police anything....even if you are 100% innocent. If they have enough evidence then let it go to court. Believe me on this though, the sole purpose of police questioning is to gather evidence and, ultimately, to get you to say something they can use in court against you. You have the right to remain silent and it will not prejudice a court case if you remain completely silent (obviously being cooperative during interview and then suddenly "remembering" something in court looks dodgy).
So, IMHO, Hail has probably made both these mistakes and has now been charged with something. Hopefully, its nothing more than a relatively minor driving offence. That said, the conviction rate for driving offences is around 98%....so he is screwed
If he'd taken your advice and refused to answer any questions, he'd have ended up having to go to court, which would have been a waste of everyones time.
Scooby Regular
Joined: Mar 2010
Posts: 10,329
Likes: 0
He'd be on here moaning if it was just a straight driving offense. Most likely it is something he doesn't want people to know about, which leaves minds free to wonder.
Scooby Regular
Joined: Mar 2002
Posts: 13,720
Likes: 0
From: Bradford
Don't quite agree with all that. I recently dealt with someone in relation to a burglary, after his blood had been found at the scene. In interview he said that he'd previously done some work at the house, which was later verified.
If he'd taken your advice and refused to answer any questions, he'd have ended up having to go to court, which would have been a waste of everyones time.
If he'd taken your advice and refused to answer any questions, he'd have ended up having to go to court, which would have been a waste of everyones time.
I would happily go to court in those circumstances - I just do not take my chances with the police.
I don't disagree with all of it, indeed going "no comment" is often the best option. But if there is a reasonable explanation for something you have been accused of it is worth giving it IMHO.
I would, personally, always get a solicitor for the interview though.
Scooby Regular
Joined: Jan 2004
Posts: 1,300
Likes: 0
Is hail hail from Glasgow? (His username is a Celtic saying)
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotlan...-west-10816751
I'm sure he would know why the cops were after him though if he had just gunned a man down.
I'm with the others, complete wind up.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotlan...-west-10816751
I'm sure he would know why the cops were after him though if he had just gunned a man down.
I'm with the others, complete wind up.
Scooby Regular
Joined: Dec 2007
Posts: 6,284
Likes: 4
From: Scotland
Likewise, I couldn't agree more with what you've written in your first post.