Should it be illegal for cops to interview intoxicated suspects?

[OddBeMe]

Apparently it’s not.

Yes

Yes

No

Other

[goaded]

No, I don't think so, not if they are suspected of committing the crime while intoxicated. If you bring someone in for something they did last week, you should let them sober up first.

"Did you just smash that window?" is different from "...

Hmm. Is it though? Different from what? On the other hand, I was once asked questions by a very polite police officer who had been informed of a nearby burglary by someone described as wearing a jacket that matched mine. I answered the questions and he was satisfied. I was quite drunk, and wouldn't have wanted him to take me in until I was sober to ask the same questions! It would also have wasted time and resources.

So. They should be allowed to use the responses of an intoxicated person to establish probable cause to arrest, but to let them sober up before they're interrogated further.

Unless the interrogation is to stop an ongoing crime like kidnapping.

I think I've just worked out why Law is complicated from first principles!

Final answer: it depends.

[OddBeMe]

There’s a difference in questioning and interrogating. Though in America both can be used against you in court

[msc545]

It should be illegal. Cops you interview intoxicated subjects are likely to take advantage of that state of intoxication and they may actually hear false information as a result and proceed on it to the detriment of others or the detriment of the subject.

[OddBeMe]

I mean they do that anyway with dumb people…smarty’s just ask for a lawyer.

[ArrowheadSW]

Well, the fact that they are intoxicated at the moment, needs to be taken into consideration.

[DryGermanGuy]

The question is… how much, if any, is admissible in court?

[OddBeMe]

90% of cases are bargained. So no way to know.

[OddBeMe]

If each criminal had a right to Clarence Darrow with unlimited funds, Justice would be blind.

[Juxtapose]

You can sign legally binding contracts when you are drunk.

Personally I would never get so trashed that I couldn't handle keeping my mouth shut until I get an attorney 🤷

[boggboss]

Contracts can be made void if u can prove u was not in you right mind or under duress

[OddBeMe]

Uhh you can’t be intoxicated and sign anything. Even hospital drips are questioned

[boggboss]

Yes the same way I feel a lawyer should always be present to ensure everyone is safeguarded

[DarkLegacy]

It is in the UK, if they arrest them they stick them in the cells into they are sober enough

[jjj101010]

Don’t think they do here, they just throw u in a cell till ur sober

[OddBeMe]

If “here” is America it’s apparently ok. Now maybe states have differing laws. And I’m sure a taped confession of someone blind drunk or hallucinating would be thrown out. But gray areas are well.. gray.

[jjj101010]

Here isn’t America, it’s the UK

[OddBeMe]

You guys did steal our Miranda laws. But like Canada you can still ask them questions after jnc they slip up.

[jjj101010]

Not sure what jnc is. The right to remain silent has been part of common law in the UK since the 17th century and was formalised in law in 1912. Miranda v Arizona was in 1966.

The US legal system is based on the English legal system, the right to a trial by a jury of your peers was part of the Magna Carta dating back 1215.

[OddBeMe]

Yes but police didn’t have to read out right to interrogatees. Miranda made them or the case gets tossed.

And jnc means just in case.

[exitseven]

being drunk is no excuse.

[OddBeMe]

Excuse to…flout your 4th amend rights?

[exitseven]

If you are drunk and say something stupid, it is on you.

[OddBeMe]

I guess. Funny how you small govt guys really like rolling over people with big govt ideas. Lol

[exitseven]

@oddbemee Whats so bad about making people take responsibility for their actions?