Good question. There are probably some constellations where the police would be like: We got plenty of matching testimonies for you. We charge you and this could send you to jail for 80 years or you pleat guilty and accept 5 years.
Criminal Code (StGB) § Section 145d Pretending to have committed a criminal offense
(1) Any person who, contrary to his better knowledge, pretends to an authority or to a body competent to receive reports that an unlawful act has been committed […] shall be liable to a custodial sentence not exceeding three years or to a monetary penalty […].
The last words Michael Chad Breinholt heard were, “You’re about to die, my friend.”
[…]
With his hands cuffed behind his back, he briefly wrestled with two officers. One screamed that Breinholt was grabbing his holstered gun. Sgt. Tyler Longman rushed into the room, made his declaration and fired.
This argument states if an exception exists or has to be stated, then this exception proves that there must be some rule to which the case is an exception.
They’d probably search the database for anyone wanted of your name/description. And when it came back blank they’d probably leave you in a room for a few hours to see if anything happens. And then let you go.
They would send you on your way. There’s a show - I think on Apple - called Black Bird about a real life serial killer with a history of false confessions. It’s kind of a significant plot point. Good show.
I live in New Zealand so me rambling about "the fifth" would probably make them call Social Services to come and help me since I would seem to be suffering from a mental health event.
Either that or they would think I was trolling and send me on my way with a stern reminder that wasting police time is a criminal offence.
@Ilovethebomb yeah I met a "Trump supporter" here in NZ once. If we have a lot of them, it's probably an indication that we're underfunding mental health and education.
Thank you for helping to prove my point. When the OP was saying take the fifth he was talking in a genetic way. In other words walking into the police station and taking that countries variation of the fifth. He just didn’t bother typing it fully out like that because it was obvious what his point was. It’s obvious that new Zealand doesn’t have the literal fifth amendment but they have the equivalent of it. Again thank you for helping to prove my point.
When I asked “doesn’t new Zealand have that concept” I new they did. I was trying to get you to understand what the op was trying to say.
I know that. I was trying to get him to understand that the op was talking in a generic sense. Both op and myself realize that new Zealand has an equivalent concept of the fifth. Op wasn’t trying to say walk in and literally say “plead the fifth” but walk in and do the equivalent of that.
People get way to literal when they don’t need to be.
You’re right. I thought everyone here knows “the 5th” and it’s just shorter than “the right to remain silent”. However, most people seem to have got the right idea.
In my state a police sergeant can have you held for a psychiatric examination if they determine that you are a possible threat to yourself or others. You’d be transported under guard to the nearest locked ER and be examined. If you kept playing games you could spend 30 days in a locked ward and be liable for the bill.
If the cops decide to be extra nice to you, they could get you a public defender. They’d be overworked and advise you to stop playing games.
Interesting. Where I’m at any cop can hold you for a psych eval, but they have to have damning evidence that you will hurt yourself or others. I’m pretty sure no cop here, and by extension their department, or the doctor at the hospital, would be willing to risk a lawsuit because you refused to answer questions about a crime. The civil rights violation (because they’re retaliating for you taking the 5th), would be a bonus on top of the unlawful detention.
The situation posited means OP is either crazy or stupid. Either they are a psychiatric patient who has knowledge of a crime, or they are some kind of jerk who is wasting the time of the police and hospital. Depending on how the “patient” presented themselves, I think that most judges and juries would side with holding them. Also, by claiming they have information, the cops would be within their rights to hold the ‘patient’ as a material witness.
“Interfering with government operations” is a crime in most places. I used to work in public health field, and I have absolutely no patience with people who use first responders of any type as playthings. If you feel the need to act out, hire a professional and leave the civil servants alone.
the fifth ? are you sure ? it’s a little old-school, evokes holy music… I would go for the third and the seventh instead, just to shake things up. Cops aren’t used to daring chords like these, you’d totally destabilize them and they wouldn’t be able to jail you
Add comment