Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submitlogin

> I have seen stuff like "defendant had TOR installed - a popular program for criminals" in court filings. ...and judges and juries accept that as fact because they just don't understand the technology. For example, having a bookmark for "Hacker News" would absolutely show up in court.

Both of those are really good examples of how a statement of fact that is literally true can still be a lie. Politicians do this kind of stuff all the time especially in their attack ads that make TV unwatchable around this time of year in every even numbered year. Amazingly what gets a politician called out by the other party's press as a "liar" is the opposite of this kind of statement: something that is fundamentally true but where the politician got one minor irrelevant detail wrong. That's also a major reason why it isn't a good idea to represent yourself in court or to explain yourself to the police when you get arrested because people are prone to accidentally getting minor details wrong or misspeaking even when they're telling the truth to the best of their ability.



For anyone that isn't convinced, here is a talk by a lawyer and a police officer discussing the idea of never talking to the police [0]. It's interesting that they largely agree that talking to the police is not a good idea.

[0] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=d-7o9xYp7eE


Don't forget the followup...

"Don't Talk to the Police Part 2" - https://youtu.be/tIt-l2YmH8M


I was just about to post this. It's long, but so good.


> explain yourself to the police when you get arrested

Cannot emphasise this enough.

Unless you live a criminal lifestyle (if so, you can learn nothing from me) you may encounter cops once. They do it every day.

Often police job advancement is helped by making your life hell. Say nothing you are not legally obliged to.


> ... prone to accidentally getting minor details wrong

I know a prosecutor who had to investigate the statements made by the husband of a person who (presumably) had drowned themself in their pool (she used workout weights to keep herself at the bottom). The statement to be investigated: "Those were her weights. I never touched those weights!"

Now all of a sudden maybe his fingerprints are on the weights and that statement is untrue...

I also got to learn that they scoop the weights into a bucket because I guess they need to keep them submerged in water, otherwise the prints will wash off.


Ah, too bad he could not use the Slick Willie defense and make the claim that it depends on what the definition of "touch" is.




Consider applying for YC's Winter 2026 batch! Applications are open till Nov 10

Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: