Fourth graders told: don’t “spill” to the cops

Kwitcher snitchin’, and your confessin’ too: The Southwest Juvenile Defender Center runs a visit-the-schools program called “Why a Lawyer” which is “one of several such programs taught in schools and detention facilities throughout the country by groups worried that children don’t know their basic rights — including the right to remain silent.” At the private […]

Kwitcher snitchin’, and your confessin’ too: The Southwest Juvenile Defender Center runs a visit-the-schools program called “Why a Lawyer” which is “one of several such programs taught in schools and detention facilities throughout the country by groups worried that children don’t know their basic rights — including the right to remain silent.” At the private Shlenker School in Houston, fourth graders were asked to answer questions from a “police officer” (played by a University of Houston law student) about a prank call to a neighbor’s house. The student who said least was then singled out for praise for not “spill[ing] her guts”. When questioned by cops who are responding to reports of mischief, it seems, the recommended approach for preteens is “Give your name, your age and then ask for an attorney and ask for your parent.” Malikah Marrus, a researcher for the U-of-H-based Defender Center, complains that it’s an uphill battle getting kids to clam up when questioned by the authorities: “Their impulsive behavior gets them to spill their guts right away.” (Sarah Viren, “Programs teach legal rights to elementary school pupils”, Houston Chronicle, Feb. 14).

18 Comments

  • This is exactly the advice that I gave to friends and their children when I was a prosecutor, and exactly the advice I still give now that I am a defense lawyer, unless it is clear beyond all possible/existential/remote doubt that the kid in question is only a witness. The cops arguably have the best interests of society, or kids as a whole, or kids in the abstract, in mind, but do not by any stretch of the imagination have the best interests of the kids they are talking to in mind, and will cheerfully trick, lie, bluff, or bully kids into admissions that will come back to bite them later. So, unless our position is that kids should immediately confess to any wrongdoing they are suspected of as a moral imperative, I’ve got to say this is the right advice.

  • This is pretty cynical advice, but…

    as a parent, I’d want my kids to do the same. I don’t want my kids (all under 6 yrs old) talking to a policeman without my wife or I with them.

    Young kids have such a shaky grasp on reality and the state has such great authority to harass you (Perhaps even with the best intentions!) that I don’t want the two to mix.

    On the other hand, I don’t want some random lawyers telling my kids what to do, either.

  • But there’s a HUGE difference between knowing your rights and a healthy liberty and what seems to be happening here: fostering a spirit of lawlessness, disrespect for authority, and celebration of the “gangsta”, ah, “culture.” I think it’s reasonable, too, to make the distinction between what adults should know and what children should know. Adults are able to balance the concepts of law and order and individual rights. To kids, it just sounds like “the cops are bad.”

    It amazes me, the extent to which left-wing poison is fed to American children under the guise of cutesy, school-approved programs.

  • Is there not some prohibition already to questioning kids outside the presence of their parents?

  • You can blame the “left-wing” for this if it makes you feel any better (and doesn’t it always?) but I did not read anything in there concerning “gangsta culture”. I would follow the same advice myself no matter what the circumstances and no matter what my level of involvement. So why would it not be good for children as well?

    We now live in a country where claiming you are innocent of a crime is in itself a crime (which, I am sure is somehow the liberals’ fault) and where you can be prosecuted for said crime while never being charged for the core crime.

    Bottom line is: you can not turn over the criminal justice system to a political party to use as a weapon and expect people to maintain the level of respect you want.

    The only sane response is never, ever talk to the police or the feds about anything. Not even the weather. It is sad, but we did not make it that way.

  • Jeff:
    “I would follow the same advice myself no matter what the circumstances and no matter what my level of involvement. So why would it not be good for children as well?”

    So if the police asked you if you saw who egged the neighbors house, you would ask for counsel?

    I found it rather odd that the way they presented the program: “If kids know this ahead of time, then maybe we won’t have as many problems,” seemed to suggest that the problem wasn’t the delinquent behavior, but that they didn’t know how not to get caught.

    I may be a throwback, but I think we should all cooperate with the police and take our lumps when we do something wrong. But then I haven’t had to worry about this personally.

  • I agree with teaching kids not to speak to the police. Unless you are a victim of a crime or a clearly faultless witness, there is the potential for you to be coercively questioned by the police, and the sooner you know your rights to remain silent and to obtain counsel, the better protected you are from being railroaded.

    And I say this having worked for a police department defending 1983 suits.

  • We could not agree more. The worst thing a kid in trouble can do is talk to a cop. In our seminars, we remind them of the Miranda warning, “…can and WILL be used against you.” Will is the operative word. Always Remember…STFU.
    Michael Lee

  • Damn, what wimps / uninformed kids must be these days.

    I was about 11-12 years old when two cops came on my mother’s property. At the entrance to the garage, they told me ‘we have knowledge of a lot of stolen bicycles on this property (full disclosure – there was indeed). I asked the cops if they had a warrant, they answered ‘no’. I politey asked them to leave, and they did. High fives from my three older brothers when I told them what happened.

  • I remember when kids were taught that honesty was the best policy. Now we are teaching our kids not to be responsible for their actions.

  • I remember when kids were taught that honesty was the best policy. Now we are teaching our kids not to be responsible for their actions.

    Dishonesty and not talking to the police are two different things.

  • Aaron, if it was only that simple. You seem to assume that “law enforcement’s” motives will always be pure and righteous and that is naive at best in this modern world. I learned my lesson many years ago at age 17 when I came across some “police activity.” I sought out a cop to volunteer some information and promptly was arrested for my trouble, though the information was only hearsay. The fact that I was a bystander trying to help didn’t matter, they had their “perp.” Despite my protestations of innocence to my father, he decided to make the economically driven settlement of paying a fine for a charge of trespassing, even though I never set foot on the property. A police officer he knew told him I would have never been arrested if I hadn’t done anything wrong. Several times over the years, I made sure my father knew I never forgave him for not taking my word. It is not about avoiding responsibility, it is about avoiding unecessary problems. Sad, but true.

  • Law enforcement, from beat cops to the quasi-military feds who handle “homeland security,” are no longer in the truth and justice business. They’re burecrats with guns and arrest powers, interested in enforcing, as unreasoningly as possible, an ever increasing number of rules, regulations, directives, and laws that have no reasonable relation to the goals they are supposedly enacted to further.

    QED, teaching hoi poli (at least that’s how they view us civilians/citizens) to avoid interacting with law enforcement unless absolutly necessary and then only with an attorney present… is the only sane thing to do.

  • Aaron,

    I think that the key point here is not so much that kids who are guilty should be taught to try to get away with it, but that children from a young age are made to be at least aware of the fact that there are times when catching someone is far more important to police than catching the right person. Things that children say can be used against them or other people regardless of where genuine blame actually lies.

    Putting blind faith in police to responsibly use what’s said and not be vindictive, inaccurate or coercive with it later is simply and unfortunately a recipe for disaster. Kids need to know the world is imperfect.

  • I think many of you are missing the actual purpose of this program. A number of the posters said it is to make the children wary of the police because they are not looking out for your best interest. Any child from the inner cities already knows this to be true and responds accordingly. It is only the middle and upper class children who don’t have any interaction with the police who need this advice. If you read the article you would see that the Southwest Juvenile Center was visiting a Jewish Day School! Now all those children coming from affluent homes will also know that they should tell the fuzz to bug off. Each child learns to say: “I ain’t gonna tell you nothin copper until I sees my lawyer.” Think of this as an affirmative action program for the affluent.

  • A number of the posters said it is to make the children wary of the police because they are not looking out for your best interest. Any child from the inner cities already knows this to be true and responds accordingly.

    Some interesting arguments on both sides of this question but the above comment from Richard N. is disturbing.

    Children from the inner cities are maimed and murdered by other inner city “children” in epidemic numbers.

    A big part of this (aside from innumerable social and moral problems) is the “don’t snitch” mentality.

    If you snitch to the cops, you could be arrested (or killed by the gangs).

    No wonder these areas are awash in criminality and cruelty. And it’s no wonder that the cops assume a “what’s the point?” view of their jobs.

  • Robert, I do believe you missed my sarcasm. I would have thought that my comment that it was an affirmative action program for the affluent should have given you a clue. The article amused me because I do not think that giving their program to a Jewish Day School is the best use of their time. I can assure you that those children get all the legal advice they need from their lawyer parents, aunts and uncles.

  • I first became aware that kids shouldn’t talk when I read about two kids in my own city who were in the wrong place at the wrong time (with another kid in a car who decided to commit a crime). When the cops stopped them, one of the kids, following the “the policeman is your friend” model, tried to talk to the police and tell them everything he knew, although he was just riding along in the car and had no foreknowledge of his friend’s plan. He was arrested, along with the perp. The third kid said nothing at all and was released at the scene. The police had no evidence other than misconstruing what he might himself say, and he wasn’t willing to help them. It is not, unfortunately, true that the purpose of the police is to find out the truth. It’s the purpose of the police to gather evidence of guilt so that the DA can convict you, regardless of whether or not you’re guilty. I agree, and I tell my kids. Shut up, because well-meaning though you might be, anything you say “can be used against you”, even if that means twisting it out of context.