• 🇳🇿 🇲🇲 🇯🇵 🇨🇳 🇦🇺 🇦🇶 🇮🇳
    Australian & Asian
    Drug Discussion

    Welcome Guest!
    Posting Rules Bluelight Rules
  • AADD Moderators: swilow | Vagabond696

How to - Deal with LE.

i'm pretty sure if you confess to a crime, you can be done for it. Say if a person has been missing for 20 years, and the corpse was never discovered. You admit that you murdered them, that's enough to land you in jail. They can't have double standards for different crimes, but i maybe completely wrong. Fortehulz is probably your best bet of getting an answer from
 
just the sort of hubris society needs in law enforcement candidates !
is somebody watching too much cop tv shows ?
 
Yeah man, shit if i wanted to incriminate my self, i'd write the novel of the century... lol.

fuck that.. not worth it... don't talk if you smell bacon, dont talk period.
 
Don't talk even if you DON'T smell bacon.

Seriously, I know it's hard, but keep that sort of shit to yourself. Anything that can even possibly get yourself in trouble should be kept on a need-to-know basis.

Has Fortehlulz been around lately - since Ibis exposed him to be a dodgy lawyer ?
 
heythatsmybike said:
i'm pretty sure if you confess to a crime, you can be done for it.
Click to expand...

You can't be charged with a crime just because you confess to it. There has to be evidence. It may land you in jail until the evidence is found, or suspicion raised, however. False-confessions do happen and can be dismissed.

For instance, if I go to a police station to "hand myself in" for killing someone over in Africa - but have no ties to, never been to, don't know anyone in, etc. Africa, I'm not exactly going to be charged with murder am I?
 
once again, the minefield that is bluelight legal 'advice' claims another victim. you can certainly be charged with just a confession. however, if there is evidence to the contrary, they won't charge you.
 
So my example doesn't stand? So no evidence, just me saying I done something is enough for me to be convicted of a crime? What I'm trying to say is that a confession alone isn't (shouldn't :/ ) be enough for a conviction.
 
well, that really depends on the circumstances. it certainly CAN be enough.

whether or not that SHOULD be the case is an entirely different question.
 
Yeah, I understand it depends on the circumstances. :)

Regarding what heythatsmybik was saying though, just because you tell a police officer you do/have done drugs doesn't mean you're going to get charged with consumption of an illegal substance.
 
fair enough, but his question was poorly worded. he asked whether it was possible for you not to get in trouble for confessing to a cop-- the answer to which I suppose would be yes. I think what he meant to ask was whether it was possible for you to get in trouble from confessing to a cop. and yes, that's possible too.
 
Last edited:
smiggle said:
Hi guys just a quick one here.

But if you were dealing drugs a year or two ago and were speaking to a Detective about things these days, could you tell him you use to deal drugs and not get in trouble or would you be charged with conspiracy or something like that???

Just curious because this is something I have been wondering for a while now, also I would like to possibly become a police officer one day and do undercover work and this would probably be to my advantage.....
Click to expand...

To me it sounds like you want this so that you could one day bring us down by becoming an undercover.

If you do so pursue this course, be gentle on us casual users AND more importantly, leave the MDMA out of this lol. Our poor little ecstasy doesn't need another person bringing it down.
 
mrephedrine69 said:
Regardless of what you are on about, show some respect Sameria.

Fortehlulz has given a fair bit to this community.
Click to expand...

I know exactly how you feel. I once saw Fortehlulz as quite an important and helpful law-specific advisor, but due to some other very respected members posts it is obvious he us simply an overcharged, scheming lawyer trying to use the online HR community as a place to find new customers.

Af first I was sceptical of such words, but in recent times thing have started to add up.
 
Yeah in all this conversation, Anything you say you've done, and admit to, must also be proven beyond reasonable doubt to have occured, otherwise it is simply little more than a work of fiction...
 
heard a good drunk driving story
lady gets pulled voer drunk and says "whyd you pull me over"
cop says" you were weaving"
she says "weaving? shit I can even knit! "
 
Can police ask for ID?

for sum reason i cant find the how to deal with LE thread so ad to start a new one.

anyways, iw as watching the world go by yesterday when a guy was walking down the street, walked across the road, a cop called him over and started asking him questions (i was too far away to hear the convo) they then asked for his ID and proceeded to pat him down/get him to turn his pockets inside out etc

i know its in your rights to refuse to be searched and they need to prove they have 'reasonable suspicion' to do a search but i was wondering:

can cops just ask for your ID? What is the law around this?
 
I'm sorry I'd have to look it up but off the top of my head I believe they cannot search you without reasonable grounds or your permission, however you are required to give them your name and address if asked, and hence I'd say asking for ID would be a reasonable request too. It could differ state by state.


Here we go... the section for name and address at least....

From Queensland Police Powers and Responsibilities Act 2000, Reprinted as in force on 1 July 2009
Prescribed circumstances for requiring name and address

The prescribed circumstances for requiring a person to state the person’s name and address are as follows—

(a) a police officer finds the person committing an offence;
(b) a police officer reasonably suspects the person has committed an offence, including an extradition offence;
(c) a police officer is about to take—
(i) the person’s identifying particulars under an identifying particulars notice or an order of a court made under section 471 or 514; or
(ii) a DNA sample from the person under a DNA sample notice or an order made under section 484, 485, 488 or 514;
(d) an authorised examiner is about to perform a non-medical examination under a non-medical examination notice or under section 514;
(e) a police officer is about to give, is giving, or has given someone a noise abatement direction, an initial nuisance direction or a final nuisance direction;
(f) a police officer is attempting to enforce a warrant, forensic procedure order or registered corresponding forensic procedure order or serve on a person—
(i) a forensic procedure order or registered corresponding forensic procedure order; or
(ii) a summons; or
(iii) another court document;
(g) a police officer reasonably believes obtaining the person’s name and address is necessary for the administration or enforcement of an Act prescribed
under a regulation for this section;
(h) a police officer reasonably suspects the person has been
or is about to be involved in an act of domestic violence
or associated domestic violence;
(i) a police officer reasonably suspects the person may be able to help in the investigation of—
(i) an act of domestic violence or associated domestic violence; or
(ii) a relevant vehicle incident;
(j) a police officer reasonably suspects the person may be able to help in the investigation of an alleged indictable offence because the person was near the place where the alleged offence happened before, when, or soon after it
happened;
(k) the person is the person in control of a vehicle that is stationary on a road or has been stopped under section 60;
(l) under chapter 17, a qualified person for performing a forensic procedure is about to perform the forensic procedure on the person.
Click to expand...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top