Random

[firefly124]

I was amused to see Ethan of Athos listed as an example of literary mpreg in a post I found via metafandom. The Left Hand of Darkness (which also made the list) was the closest I could have come to naming one, and even then, it's not really the same thing when the species in question is ambisexual, though it is hard to argue with the sentence, "The king was

Comments

[saracen77]

Yeah, I definitely remember them changing the caution about, oh, at least 10 years ago, cos The Bill altered it, back when I was still watching that show!

I can see what the two blokes in the video were saying though. Don't say anything, as it can be turned around. But if I read our caution right, I must give my alibi now, if I want to use it in court, and they were saying only give it in court.

I'd like to hear what Shiv has to say! Maybe it's just been worded so the lay people think they have no options, which is a bit sneaky...

[firefly124]

But if I read our caution right, I must give my alibi now, if I want to use it in court, and they were saying only give it in court.Well, I don't think they were necessarily saying only give it in court, but only give it to your lawyer and let your lawyer work out if/when/how to use it. Courtroom drama shows aside, I don't think you're actually allowed to pull a rabit out of your hat in front of the judge. By then, the basics of the evidence and any alibis are supposed to be known, so far as I understand

[saracen77]

Courtroom drama shows aside

I've been watching too many daytime reruns of Perry Mason! I have no clue how this works in the real world! Heaven only knows what would happen to me if I were actually put in that position!

I also noticed the way the copper was using the word "may". Whenever a lay person says the Miranda thingy, we always say "will". "Will be used against you, lawyer will be provided" He very carefully said "may" be provided. So you could sit there for a week in silence waiting for the state appointed lawyer to maybe be appointed.

It was very interesting. Also take your point about state differences. I think that really only works in small ways here, between us and Scotland. But mostly the differences are very minor. Seems odd to think that you can do something in one state, and be punished completely differently, or not at all, in a different part of the same country.

[shiv5468]

The new full caution is The modern form of caution is

[saracen77]

I was wondering about that tape thing. I would have presumed that for the purposes of court, a transcript would have been taken of the interviews, but if I, as the defendant, stood up and said, thats rubbish, I didn't say that, I would expect them to be able to produce the tape to prove it. Especially as one word can completely change the sense of a statement, and all you need is a secretary with a hangover...(no offense to secretary's, legal transcribers, whoever would do that.)

Right. I think I understand that caution a bit better. I still don't know what I would do though. Listening to that cop on the vid, you should only speak if it is 100% accurate, and only about hard provable facts, not about stuff like feelings or thoughts. Say "I was there at 9pm" if you know it for definite, but not that "I felt angry", or "everyone knew I didn't like him."

Is that the basic idea?

[shiv5468]

He's an American cop dealing with the American system. I wouldn't take anything he said as relevant.

The basic point is that you say nothing until you have a lawyer, and you don't lie. The lawyer will be able to tell you whether you should say anything at all. If you have an alibi, he's likely to suggest that you mention that as soon as possible.