What do I do when the police want me to come in for questioning about something I did?

How to handle the situation where the police want to question you about something you did.

The simple answer I give people is to keep your mouth shut. Generally, if you did something and the police want to ask you questions about it, you should not say anything and talk to your lawyer. You will not be able to explain away what you did. The police are trained and experienced in this game, you are not. Think of Joe Pesci from Goodfellas who gave the police nothing. Another piece of conventional wisdom is that if the police want to talk to you about something, and you have not been arrested yet, the police do not have enough evidence yet to charge you and are looking for that evidence to come from your own mouth. In other words, if you're not already in jail, they don't have a case against you yet. Remember, anything you do say to the police will be used against you, so why help the police convict you?

This post is contributed by a community member. The views expressed in this blog are those of the author and do not necessarily reflect those of Patch Media Corporation. Everyone is welcome to submit a post to Patch. If you'd like to post a blog, go here to get started.

paul peck September 08, 2011 at 10:40 PM
if you pass laws that limit the scope of any investigation, it becomes more difficult to bring charges. the fact that the law enforcement officers bill of rights does not apply to criminal charges is true. Its provisos grant superior rights to the officer before and during the investigation at any time before formal charges are filed. to say this proviso proves I misrepresented is horse feathers. Peerage law is granting a superior rights to a person based on peerage. This is a title of nobility as per the terms used in the Constitution, forbidding the power of any state or the federal government to grant. It is sad that some states and lobbyists disregard this. I did not misrepresent. If an officer is suspected of wrong doing, that officer is investigated in a qualitatively different way than other citizens in a manner the founding fathers of our nation found loathsome. Persons with titles of nobility in the past and even in the present have superior rights when investigated for certain crimes and civil offenses. to say this piece of legislation is not a title of nobility forbidden under the constitution makes no more sense than putting feathers on a horse and claiming it is a bird. yet that is what lobbyists have done and they seem to have convinced you too but I suspect you are so angry with me because you wish to believe the world is one way and I have presented something that claims it is different. I understand and forgive you
John Schrock September 09, 2011 at 02:21 AM
Paul Peck, Abe Lincoln said it is better to remain silent and be thought a fool, than to speak and remove all doubt.
james o'connor September 09, 2011 at 05:03 AM
Ok I realize nothing I say will persuade you so I'm not going to try. But let me just say, that I can assure you that having been a police officer for the last 15 years I won't get any special treatment if I break the law. No 'Title of Nobility' has been bestowed upon me ever. What happens as far as an investigation by my employer to determine an administrative suspension or termination from employment has NOTHING to do with the criminal prosecution of my case by the State's Attorney's Office. That's it in a nutshell. You're simply reading it wrong and confusing the issues. My advice is to stop listening to George Noory, Art Bell and the folks at the Illinois Constitution Militia, try FM radio for a change and maybe switch to decaf. I see John Shrock correctly quoted Abe Lincoln in response to you. We in Law Enforcement refer to that as a 'clue.' Have a good day bud.
paul peck September 09, 2011 at 11:03 AM
If John's advice is a "clue", and given your profession as a law enforcement officer, some on this thread could misconstrue what you said as a veiled innuendo and a threat. I would like to say James that I do not believe that is what you meant. I do not want anything read incorrectly of confused and misconstrued. I still forgive you James for hurling insults at me.
Joseph Hosey September 09, 2011 at 12:41 PM
To James O'Connor, that's completely false. How can you say a police officer won't get preferential treatment in a criminal investigation? Just look at the Kathleen Savio case. Drew Peterson was questioned when he wanted to be, where he wanted to be, and was allowed to sit in on his wife Stacy's interview as well, for the sole reason that he was a police officer. And that is only one high-profile example known to the public.


More »
Got a question? Something on your mind? Talk to your community, directly.
Note Article
Just a short thought to get the word out quickly about anything in your neighborhood.
Share something with your neighbors.What's on your mind?What's on your mind?Make an announcement, speak your mind, or sell somethingPost something
See more »