Quote:
Originally Posted by obert
Very weird sitting! Why wouldn’t they have him in cuffs?
|
Because they want him to talk. Simple. Once you put the cuffs on, someone figures they are going to jail and they aren't going to spill all the beans on themselves. Not hard to get someone to talk and incriminate when they are drunk and in this case, the person most certainly deserves it. One thing that people may not realize is how fragile "evidence" can be. If something happened, you often need 5 or 6 ways or showing that was in fact the case and that it did happen. If the defense tears apart one of these on a technicality, you need a fall-back to show what actually happened. This is also addressing the "beyond a reasonable doubt". If you have 5 or 6 pieces of evidence showing something and one of those gets thrown out on a technicality, you likely still have enough evidence to still maintain "beyond a reasonable doubt". Otherwise, if you put all your hope in one piece and it gets thrown out, you've just wasted a ton of time and resources for nothing.
If you read about Miranda Rights, you'll see they don't go exactly hand in hand with arrests and if the Police are in the "trying to figure out what happened"-phase, it's unlikely they are going to "read someone their rights". If the guy didn't comply or offer information, then they'd probably arrest him and read him those rights in the car on the way to the station, but if he wants to talk...
The police see it as a fairly straightforward matter, guy drunk, hit cars, they want to gather as much information and evidence as possible to prove this. If the guy is cooperative, it will cut him *some* slack...but it will also cause the DA to "throw the book" at him, and the plea deal will be that "slack". That may or may not be beneficial if he just shut his mouth and saved everything for court, but being cooperative should count for *something*.