Andrew Branca on One Drawback to the "Say NOTHING to the Police!" Approach

If you've been around here long enough, you've probably seen this video at some point on why you should never say anything to the police without a lawyer present - even if you're 100% innocent:

But here Andrew Branca talks about one situation where saying nothing can hurt your case.

Many people advocate that in the aftermath of a defensive use-of-force event you say literally nothing to the police except that you want to speak with your lawyer. And that "Say NOTHING" approach is one way to go.

At Law of Self Defense, however, we suggest you consider an alternative, the "Say LITTLE" approach -- meaning, saying a few very specific things, then asserting your rights to silence and counsel. Among the things we suggest saying, even before having your attorney present, is that your use of force was an act of self-defense.

One reason we suggest this is that most claims of self-defense are simply BS claims by bad guys, and these are often fabricated after the fact while they're sitting in their holding cell. If you defer claiming self-defense until hours after your first interaction with the police, you begin to look a lot like one of those fabricators. And if you DO, you can rest assured that this fact will be brought up in trial.

Since in a justified shooting (OK I'm assuming here) it's nearly 100% certain that you will eventually assert that it was in self-defense during later testimony, you're not really giving the police anything to use against you here by stating this fact up front and then clamming up. Plus it has the benefit of making your story a consistent one of self-defense from the very beginning.

posted by Maetenloch at 04:44 PM

| Access Comments