• ImplyingImplications
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    1
    arrow-down
    4
    ·
    9 hours ago

    This site says:

    One of the most critical measures in the preliminary proceedings is questioning the alleged crime participants and witnesses to what happened. No statement should be made without legal counsel at this stage (especially when the police open up to the suspect to interrogate them as an “accused”). Investigators are trained to ask questions that could put the suspect in a bind and are increasingly success-oriented. This often results in hasty, ill-considered and incriminating statements, which can be used against the accused in the main proceedings.

    Which sounds an awful lot like German police can and will use your words against you in court.

    • NeoNachtwaechter@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      4
      ·
      edit-2
      8 hours ago

      This site

      Some random lawyer.

      like German police can and will use your words against you in court.

      Again: police records and collects stuff. They do not argue in court.

      What the accused has told the police will be usable by all sides equally in court.

      • ImplyingImplications
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        arrow-down
        5
        ·
        8 hours ago

        What the accused has told the police will be usable by all sides equally in court.

        And the side arguing against you will use your words to assist you?

        German courts aren’t special. All courts work the same. You are innocent until proven guilty. You do not need evidence of innocence. All evidence is to prove guilt. The prosecution is attempting to prove guilt. Police collect evidence to prove guilt because proving innocence is not required. Both sides can use evidence collected, yes, that’s the same everywhere, but it’s not collected to prove innocence. You are assumed innocent. No evidence required. If evidence is being collected it’s specifically to be used against you to prove guilt.

        It makes zero sense for police to collect evidence of your innocence, the state to charge you with a crime, and then argue you are innocent of that charge. You are assumed innocent. Arguments that you are innocent are not required. Evidence that you are innocent are not required. Statements that you make can’t be used to prove you are innocent. You are innocent by default. Statements that you make can therefore only be used prove guilt.

        • marcos@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          2 hours ago

          All courts work the same.

          They don’t. And the way the US courts work is almost exclusive to them.