The Explant decoder is strong tonight. 
Guy
I don’t see how it could be otherwise. The police’s job is literally to identify criminal behavior, with potentially life changing consequences for people. They aren’t social workers. And they aren’t computers–they can make mistakes, have bad days, be scumbags, not like you, etc. etc.
Unless we’re saying the police shouldn’t have that kind of power. But, we’ve chosen to give them such powers for obvious reasons.
True, to a point. 2 big points on that though:
They are, theoretically, paid to be professional and not be like those assholes
Even if some are like that, they shouldn’t be commonplace and should be exceptionally rare. If that behaviour comes up, firing is in order. In Taiwan, many are moved to a different station as punishment, which isnt solving any problems.
Again, I am not arguing this is reality, just saying it is sad that it isnt reality.
YES!
The police cannot know every single person in a city of hundreds of thousands or millions! There is no personal connection because it’s literally impossible. It’s beyond the human limit. Policing is inherently impersonal because you’re dealing with the general public. They don’t know who I am and I don’t know what kind of person they are. So when they’re investigating a crime or investigating you, talking to them is a big no no because it is literally physically beyond our abilities as people. Don’t talk to the police. They have a job to do. They don’t need anyone they don’t know personally introducing new variables and new scepticism into their work.
I view this as a positive. It is positive. I’m not jaded, I LIKE our system of governance and rules and checks and balances. I’m happy with our democracy. This is not a problem and it’s not one to be solved because the ideal world of unicorns and fairylands don’t exist. This goes beyond human behaviour because it’s literally beyond the physical limits of homo sapiens.
None of what my post said has anything to do with whistleblowing.
1 Like
OK I’ll bite here. How can one potentially blow a whistle if one never talks to a cop?
Is it OK to talk to prosecutors?
Guy
Is this a thing in Taiwan? Honest question; I really don’t know.
Guy
They have various hotlines set up.
Currently I know of two, the anti-fraud hotline and the domestic violence hotline.
You can also make a 110-report. These are anonymous non-emergency lines and not necessarily staffed by police. The National Police Agency is a bureaucracy.
Wanna be super anonymous? use a payphone.
http://www.avs.org.tw/home_en.aspx
Also the association for victims
1 Like
Talk to your lawyer! The lawyer will negotiate on your behalf and make far less mistakes than you.
My uncle who is married to a lawyer had to tell me to shut up multiple times when I was in front of the prosecutor for a traffic violation.
Thank god I have relatives who have my back.
The justice systems in Taiwan, China and Japan are all black and white, and once accused and charged of a crime, you stand a 99% chance of being convicted. (Google the stats) there’s no “innocent until proven guilty”, it’s “guilty till proven innocent” …
Ordinary citizens in all Asian countries abhor criminals and don’t complain or question the oddly skewed rates of conviction. But the reality is that the justice systems in Asia are conservative to an extreme degree. It’s total absurdity. You cannot argue with the criminal code book. If something is deemed “a crime”, judges are required to follow the letter of the law with little or no room for unique or subjective considerations particular to each case.
This fact is further underscored by the annual performance review to which all judges in all courts of Taiwan are subject: for example, if judge A is on the record as delivering any dismissals, or reduced sentence lengths from the rigorous prescription of the legal code – and he or she does this one too many times in a year – he or she will face grilling, humiliation and demotion… That’s why they’re all such mean cunts! (God, it reminds me of one little bastard in a bushiban class back in 1994, in San Chong, the little kid was so mean, superior and pompous, and only 8 years old – so I asked him what he wants to be when he grows up? The little snot said, “A judge, so I can make a lot of money!” Really.)
Let’s say you are in front of the judge, accused of possession of marijuana, and your defense lawyer is trying to explain to the judge that you needed the stuff for medical reasons, to alleviate your glaucoma or ulcerative colitis… The judge will usually get annoyed, and the prosecutor will burst out, “How ridiculous!” and you will get the same sentence as the next guy …
Justice doesn’t prevail in Taiwan as it is conceived in the West. There are no gray areas, no room for taking a plea. No leniency for a first offense, no mercy for small quantities…
It’s a bullshit justice system for tight ass square little patriarchal fascists. Same thing in Japan, China and Taiwan. That’s ALL!
Take it or leave it.
1 Like
Ummmm…That it’s not a POs job to “prove” anything at the scene of a crime, as you said he/she must do.
It was a figure of speech. What’s your point? Pedantry?
I didn’t say right there right now.
I never implied the PO prove it “Right there, right now.”
I’m done here.
Will leave the last comment to you.
Perhaps you arent getting my point. I will use an example, because I am not speaking of Democracies and federal governments and the other points you were making, more so of cops overstepping their bounds and the lack of trust society has towards them.
Car hits family, swerves hits other cars. Cameras dont exist or are not working. On looking traffic drive away because of not wanting to talk to police and possibly having issues. Pedestrians are more willing to help usually because they have zero possibility of guilt.
Police also overstepping their bounds to play popularity contest judges, thus people are reluctant to speak up. They do this a lot, and they are there to collect evidence. they are not judges. Their job is to recordtthe scene and.clect evidence. This normally should involve talking to witnesses. If witnesses are worried abouttalking to cops because the cops are playing judge rather than cop, this is a bad thing and many situations go unresolved. which is also bad.
Police should be held to a higher standard, and be professional. Many are not, at least enough arent, and society tends to have a rather cynical/jaded view of them because of this.
I see this as a negative, and I dont feel trying to solve this issueis akin to finding unicorns…
I am, and always agreeing with you that one should not talk to cops. My point is about why people shouldn’t is the sad bit. If there was no corruption, who or other bullshit than people should talk to the cops because they are usually the ones on scene in charge of recording the problem for future battles in court. This is not reality. And this is sad.
But that’s not the point I was making… So how can one say I agree and then reply with something that is completely the opposite?
Witnesses are for court, not for talking to the police. What if you say something that gives other people reason to believe you caused the collision?
Zero possibility of guilt? That is impossible. It’s your word against law enforcement.
The US Justice Department has a step by step on witness conduct.
You want to be a witness and help? Call your lawyer so you are protected.
I didn’t say this. This wasn’t my point.
I definitely didn’t say this.
Police are professional. There’s a time and place to be a witness.
Yes this is a unicorn. It’s a fantasy to think everything is perfect.
The fact that we have a standard operating procedure for investigations that addresses the physical limitations of homo sapiens and to reduce bias is a positive thing.
I did not mention corruption. None of what I said had anything to do with corruption. I tell people don’t talk to the police because it’s a GOOD thing to not talk to the police. It is a protection measure for you, for police, for society, for everyone. This has nothing to do with cynicism, or bullshitting or anything. Witnesses have unreliable memories. Shock can do weird things. My post was not about protecting you from imaginary corrupt officers in a bad system, it protects you from yourself when you inevitably change your story because of our limits as human beings. Even in clean countries like Norway.
Words from Justice Robert Jackson
Even perfectly innocent citizens may get themselves into trouble even when the police are trying to do their jobs properly, because police malfeasance is entirely unnecessary for the innocent to convict themselves by mistake;
talking to police may bring up erroneous but believable evidence against even innocent witnesses; and,
individuals convinced of their own innocence may have unknowingly committed a crime which they inadvertently confess to during questioning.
You might even, while talking to the police, go on and on about the thing and then inadvertently reveal an offence you committed! Then the police has to charge you too!
Watch the video.
This is not sad. This is quite literally the best way to protect everyone in great societies like Taiwan, Canada, Norway, Italy, USA, and every other democracy. This is to protect innocent people from ambiguous circumstances. No person can account for every single circumstance that an arise from thousands of laws and unlimited number of situations.
These rights are for the fairness and equity of everyone. We enforce these rights to protect you. That is not sad. That is happy.
Democracy works because we all pull the rope together leading to no side with a disproportionate amount of rope.
Because you said this and I agree with that. No matter how hard you want to push, I will still agree with you on this point. And no matter how hard you push, I will still think that reality is sad.
The bold words are to highlight the sad bit 
The entire thing I am in agreement with. As has been mentioned many times.
I would say a witness on the side of the street telling the record keeper (police) what they saw have zero chance of being found guilty of the crime. If they were, that is even MORE sad lol.
For the record. I am saying these things, and have been explaining them more than need be when you have issues with posts.
I am agreeing with you: dont talk to cops.
I am adding my opinion: it is sad this reality exists.
It isnt as complicated as you keep wanting to make it. In fact, it’s pretty fuckings simple. If you dont agree it is sad, that’s fine. move on?
I mean, really lol!
I still cannot fathom how a society works out the most fair way of doing things and it’s seen as ‘sad’.
I really suggest watching the video.
Yes, I agree with that and the sentiments in the video. How else would you want me to word it? Agreed is agreed…!
It is still sad , or bad, that innocent people can get in trouble for trying to help… no one is disagreeing on the logic about why that is possible. It means our evolution of justice is still evolving, and it’s got more work to do. This also doesnt, by, proxy say they are entire shit either. Just that…well, whatever. I have repeated the same thing many times. simple It is fine if you think it isnt bad that these realities exist.