Transcription
Nine Interrogation Mistakes That Can Cost You Freedom
What Not to Say in Russia
Friends, from prison and from poverty, do not boast. And the first thing that classically begins any interaction with law enforcement agencies is an interrogation, which, by the way, can cost you freedom, depending on whether you provided information there or not. In this video, I will tell you what you absolutely cannot do to avoid ruining your life, and be sure to watch this video to the end. At the end, I will tell you the classification of law enforcement officers with whom you may have such an interaction, because you need to communicate with each of them differently. Few people know, and law enforcement agencies often use this. There are two completely different procedures. The first is an interview, the second is an interrogation. An interrogation is conducted only within the framework of an initiated criminal case. And if you are suddenly summoned for an interrogation, then most likely you have heard somewhere, if not against you, that there is some criminal case to which you may somehow be connected. Chocolate is not guilty of anything, boys. An interview is something completely different. An interview is just a collection of information. Most likely, it will form the basis of some operational case, and then the basis of a criminal case. But if you have no right to refuse an interrogation, you can always refuse an interview, say, "Sorry, guys, I don't have time." I understand everything, but sorry. And nothing will happen to you for that. Very often, law enforcement officers, particularly operational officers, call and say, "Please come, we need to talk to you." Yes, we need to talk. Documents were requested. They said, "Sorry, I can't, I don't have time." But even if they serve you a summons to an interview, well, in principle, you are not obligated if you don't want to. But I always advise consulting with a lawyer and perhaps appearing there to at least understand what they will ask you about and have the opportunity to further build a strategy. Somewhere on the horizon, the possibility of initiating a criminal case looms. An interview is usually formalized with an explanatory statement. There is a special form: "Explanatory statement from such-and-such operational officer or precinct officer, in such-and-such premises, apartment or office, the following explanation was received." And then you either write it yourself, answering the questions asked, or the officer types it all up, prints it out, and you write, "Written from my words, correct, I have read it." Very often, especially in not very serious cases, for example, an officer asks you, "Listen, write an explanation, here's the form, and send me a photo on WhatsApp." They make their lives easier, and in principle, they make your life easier. If you consider it necessary, you can answer. No, you are not obligated. Where are you going to call? The police. Hang up the phone. Hang up the phone. A much more serious situation is with an interrogation, because you are obligated to appear for an interrogation. In one of my two videos, I talked about how my clients were brought from Sochi for an interrogation to the Urals by an investigator. Therefore, you must definitely prepare well for this event. By the way, the link to the video about what to do if the police come to you is in the description. So, let's imagine a situation where you are at an interrogation. They can bring you there, or you come voluntarily. You need to understand how it will proceed and what to do during it, and most importantly, what not to do during it. Classic Mistake Number One: I take Article 51 of the Constitution and refuse to testify against myself and my close relatives. This is a good topic, but why do I not recommend applying it to the entire interrogation? Yes, it will end very quickly, you will sign an empty protocol and calmly go home. But you must understand that when an investigator summons you for an interrogation, he already has a version of events, and he wants to confirm or refute it by questioning you. Well, most often confirm. Here you must understand that when you go for an interrogation in a criminal case, the investigator already has some version of why everything happened this way. And if you don't give him any testimony, or, as an option, don't give another version that he will be forced to check, the absence of your testimony will actually confirm his only version because no other versions are presented. You can use Article 51 of the Constitution for specific questions that you do not want to answer, or the answer to which carries a specific risk for you. You can use it there, but in general, I do not recommend doing this for the entire protocol. Mistake Number Two: Many people, when interacting with law enforcement officers, try to befriend them. That is, people think that if I am compliant, if I do everything the law enforcement officer says, if I give him a lot of information, then I will not receive anything negative. I will expose everyone. This is a myth, because you must understand that police officers, investigators have a clear goal. Their task is to send the case materials to the prosecutor, and then to court, accordingly. Whether you are friends with him or not, if you help him or do not hinder him from realizing his version, then be sure he will do it, regardless of your relationship. Moreover, if you are very loyal, so to speak, and very open, then you will most likely give the investigator more information against yourself or in support of his position than if you were restrained, silent, and answered only specific questions. You cannot be friends with these guys. You should be friends, but not within the framework of them carrying out their professional activities when you are the object of their efforts. Mistake Number Three: Under no circumstances should you agree to a lawyer offered to you by the investigator. You must understand that if this is an interrogation, not an interview. In an interview, you can be interviewed without a lawyer. But if you ask for the presence of a lawyer, they must ensure the presence of this lawyer at the interrogation. A lawyer should always be present. Well, you can refuse him, of course, but then they will assign you your own lawyer. You cannot agree to this. Why? Because this lawyer will not strategically build your position, assess all your risks. His task is to quickly process this investigative action and move on to another. After all, having worked for 11 hours, I can barely see, and it's already dark. Therefore, this lawyer's immersion in the process will naturally be minimal, even despite the fact that he may be a very cool specialist. Accordingly, you have the right to tell the investigator at the interrogation that you have a lawyer and you refuse to testify until your lawyer arrives. The investigator may allow you to call or call himself, but you must understand that they are unlikely to wait for several days or weeks for your lawyer to arrive. If your lawyer can arrive within an hour, two, or three, then most likely the investigator will postpone the investigative actions and conduct the interrogation in the presence of your lawyer. By the way, if you have a lawyer whom you can call unexpectedly in such cases and he reacts, give this video a like. Mistake Number Four: Friends, do not use the phrase "I don't remember." It is better to use the phrases "I can't say for sure," "I need to remember," "I need to clarify this circumstance." What does this give? It gives your lawyer room for maneuver in the future. If this investigative action and the testimony you gave are interpreted not in your favor, you can always say, "Well, you see, I needed to clarify, and I clarified it, and at an additional interrogation, I changed my position accordingly." Another mistake that people often make is agreeing to write a confession. This is a classic manipulation used by operational investigators. It is aimed at completing these procedures faster. They can promise you anything, a suspended sentence, and that they will definitely show some leniency, and so on. And here you need to understand, friends, that the operative who prepares the materials for the criminal case or carries out the investigator's instructions for conducting this interrogation with you, they do not influence the final result in any way. Well, the investigator prepared the case materials, sent them to the prosecutor, the prosecutor approved them, sent them to court, and it is the judge who will decide whether you get a suspended sentence or a real sentence, how many years you get. Therefore, there is no point in falling for this manipulation. A confession is a step towards prison. I think you have repeatedly seen such a story in movies about a good cop and a bad cop. We work as usual according to the scheme: good cop, bad cop. "Tell me everything honestly, you don't look like a villain, I think you..." This is a classic scheme that allows them to manipulate witnesses, suspects, accused, when someone pressures you, and someone supposedly befriends you, and it's clear that you want to interact more with the good cop and avoid interaction with the bad cop. The good cop saves you from the bad cop, and in gratitude, you give him the information he needs. Well, this is in broad strokes, very theatrical, but the essence is the same. You must never do this. Do not give in to the temptation to find an assistant for yourself in this matter. The next mistake, friends, is your desire to chat, especially if you are trying to appeal to the investigator's humanity, to befriend him. Yes, you want to have some dialogue with him, often even about life. And you pour out a lot of information to him as if you want to be very helpful. You don't know the real version that the investigation is implementing. Accordingly, everything you said can... Answer specifically only the questions that the investigator asks you, neither to the right nor to the left. Whatever the investigator's strategy, the strategy you will implement will be much more useful for you. Moreover, you need to consider that if you chat about something extra, you don't know how the investigator will use this information to confirm his version. Therefore, it is very important not to inform the investigator that besides the interrogation, you have other important events today. For example, you are late for a plane. Be sure that if you do not give the investigator the information he needs or remain quite closed to the investigator, the investigator will do everything to make you psychologically stressed because you are late for the airport, for example, and your interrogation will be prolonged. By law, an interrogation can last 8 hours with a break, i.e., 4 hours each. This must also be taken into account, so do not give extra information. You are at an interrogation today. You are following the strategy developed with your lawyer. You are not giving anything extra, and after the interrogation, you will calmly, hopefully, go home, not to a cell. From the very beginning, I had a tactic, and I stuck to it. And one of the most important mistakes people make is signing the protocol without reading it. Check if the investigator has correctly reflected all the information you provided in it. Check if he correctly recorded the questions to which you provided this information, and only after that you can sign the protocol, and make sure your lawyer also signs it. If any information is reflected incorrectly, you must definitely make a remark in the protocol and indicate that this information was recorded incorrectly. It will also be a mistake to refuse to sign the protocol, because in this case, he will simply make a note that you refused to sign, thereby expanding his ability to use the information he entered there without any opposition from your side. Now, returning to the question of classifying law enforcement officers with whom you may encounter during these events, it is, of course, conditional, just so you understand who to behave with and how. The first level is operatives, officers of operational services, who primarily do a lot of technical, preparatory work. They find out, search for information, in general, they do a whole bunch of things. They are quite contactable, they are closest to the people, so to speak, and they can guarantee you the least. Well, unless it's the process of detention, which they carry out. By the way, for most events initiated by operatives, by law, you can generally not attend. Globally, they cannot force you, and nothing will happen to you for not going. Everything that the operatives collected before the initiation of the criminal case, they transferred to the investigator. If the investigator saw that there were grounds for initiating a criminal case in these materials, he initiates a criminal case, accepts it for his proceedings, and then all interaction with you occurs with him. Investigators are usually either women or young employees, quite intelligent, polite. Often they use the same operatives to somehow influence you or, I don't know, create a corresponding atmosphere for you. Next is the prosecutor. You are unlikely to interact with the prosecutor, unless perhaps your lawyer, if he writes complaints about the actions of operatives and investigators. The prosecutor is a higher level. After him is only the court. Accordingly, the only person who makes decisions regarding your fate in this entire situation is the judge. And you can negotiate with operatives, with investigators, even with the prosecutor, yes, because the prosecutor actually asks for some kind of plea bargain, you admit something, and they will ask for a lesser sentence. The prosecutor can ask for a lesser sentence, but the decision in the end is still made by the judge. Therefore, if at the pre-criminal case stage, operatives or during the investigation, they offer you some mythical possible preferences in the future, I would question whether this will actually be the case, because the judge might wake up on the wrong side of the bed, or he might not like your face, and this will form his opinion on certain situations that may have, for example, an evaluative characteristic. That is, it can be viewed both ways, so it's not worth counting on it. Regardless of whether, friends, you have had such an experience or you are preparing for it, God forbid, you may have questions about how this happens in practice. Go to my Telegram channel, most likely there are already answers to your questions. The link is in the description.