Criminals and the No comment answer

gasbanni

gasbanni

Joined
7 Jan 2007
Messages
8,836
Reaction score
1,230
Country
United Kingdom
We've all seen moments on police interviews where the main suspect says 'No comment ", if I were been interviewed by the police for a serious crime and I was innocent I'd be most vociferous !!!! Mainly to prove my innocence.

Year ago I read a book about a South African policeman who from being a baby that could recall a mobile hung above his cot ! The point been that he had a photographic memory and he related how he'd caught a lot of criminals.......they'd tell their story .....he'd ask them to repeat it numerous times and add little insignificant questions time after time until eventually they would trip themselves up and their alibi or relaying of events would prove to be untrue. Without notes he could say well earlier you said this so now your saying that which is true ?

As a parent if my child had dissappeared I'd be answering any question the police asked me .......which leaves me puzzled as to why Kate Mcann refused to answer questions 48 of them....why would she ?

https://www.independent.co.uk/news/...ce-kate-questions-gerry-parents-a8822751.html

This refusal to answer questions I find very puzzling ........why would you not answer any and all questions ?

The dog issue is mystifying dogs don't suspect people or have preconceived ideas

https://www.9news.com.au/2019/03/19...og-search-apartment-rental-car-maddie-podcast

Not for one minute am I suggesting they murdered her ....but there are aspects I do find puzzling.

https://www.pbs.org/wgbh/nova/article/dogs-sense-of-smell/

https://bgr.com/2018/03/07/dogs-sense-of-smell-noses-more-advanced-powerful/

Another amazing thing about dogs if you have fifty people walking along a road they can differentiate one persons footsteps !

Gerry Mcanns dismissal of the dogs abilities in the aspect of following a scent is just plain ignorant.

http://www.cadaverdog.net/gerry-and...ay-apartment-and-rental-car-didnt-make-sense/
 
Last edited:
Sponsored Links
In my opinion if you refuse to comment then, even if you didn't commit the actual offence, you know what/who did and are therefore complicit in the event.
 
Sponsored Links
After your first paragraph I thought you were on about 24 Hours in Police Custody on channel 4 or 5 last night.

The police raided a house because the IP address had downloaded or distributed 54,000 child porn images.

While taking his computers they found class A drugs and £200,000 in cash. They found he had a second house which was the drugs factory. He didn’t work so had no income.

He got 6 years, so out in 3 and said no comment to everything. Seemed a very soft sentence for a paedofile drug dealer and I wondered if the ‘no comment’ helped him in any way?
 
I recall a New Scientist article some years ago, which brought into question the reliability of eyewitness testimony.
Not from the point-of-view of deliberate falsehood, but the way in which memory works.

While this is primarily concerning line-up identification, the following statement is pertinent;

" Many people believe that human memory works like a video recorder: the mind records events and then, on cue, plays back an exact replica of them. On the contrary, psychologists have found that memories are reconstructed rather than played back each time we recall them. The act of remembering, says eminent memory researcher and psychologist Elizabeth F. Loftus of the University of California, Irvine, is “more akin to putting puzzle pieces together than retrieving a video recording.” Even questioning by a lawyer can alter the witness’s testimony because fragments of the memory may unknowingly be combined with information provided by the questioner, leading to inaccurate recall."
 
Brigadier said:
I recall a New Scientist article some years ago, which brought into question the reliability of eyewitness testimony.
Not from the point-of-view of deliberate falsehood, but the way in which memory works.

While this is primarily concerning line-up identification, the following statement is pertinent;

" Many people believe that human memory works like a video recorder: the mind records events and then, on cue, plays back an exact replica of them. On the contrary, psychologists have found that memories are reconstructed rather than played back each time we recall them. The act of remembering, says eminent memory researcher and psychologist Elizabeth F. Loftus of the University of California, Irvine, is “more akin to putting puzzle pieces together than retrieving a video recording.” Even questioning by a lawyer can alter the witness’s testimony because fragments of the memory may unknowingly be combined with information provided by the questioner, leading to inaccurate recall."
Click to expand...

That's correct. Unless you took notes or recording or something explicit at the time, you can recall events incorrectly even if you believe that your recall is correct.
 
Today's police in Britain are totally useless. They have no power or authority and are a laughing stock. In the past, there would have been no such thing as a "no comment" interview. The police knew who the villains were in any town, and had their methods of bringing them to justice. Lots of accidents and falling down the stairs at the police station etc. Bring back the autonomous police and don't examine their methods too closely.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Sponsored Links
Back
Top