Hacker News Reader

Comment by maxvu | Hacker News Reader

I think a major qualifier for that video is "if you're suspect of a crime". In the post, our main character claims to not have expected to come under suspicion.

View on HN

I am not an expert, but the speaker in the video is very clear that you should avoid speaking to the police under all circumstances. It does not matter if they tell you that you're a suspect or not. He gives an example of a colleague asking if he should speak to the police when he is not a suspect and his advice is, "no!"

I admit, I was inserting personal opinion when using the phrase "a major qualifier". I think it's silly and antagonistic to the problems we already see with our demographic and police to always have an adversarial stance against law enforcement.

Do you disagree? Are there examples where you would talk to the police? For example, if your home was broken into?

No, that is emphatically NOT a qualifier for that video.

The point is that anything you say can be used against you for any of an infinity of possible crimes, while it can never ever help you at all.

So would you say that he's advocating to not depend on police help for anything (for the entirety of one's life), on the basis that it would require talking to police?

He appears to be advocating telling them the absolute minimum possible to achieve your objectives; and, in the case where you have been invited to say something, never to say anything. It is spectacular advice.

Though clearly the situation here is not one where the victim was invited to speak, if he had taken the advice to heart, he would have realized that speaking to the police in any capacity is extremely dangerous, and perhaps averted this disaster.

Always assume you are suspect of a crime while talking to the police.

That is exactly the wrong thing to take away from the video

Reply on news.ycombinator.com