https://x.com/ASFleischman/status/1962197687060602964
&
https://x.com/ASFleischman/status/1962197773027025195
{Andrew Fleischman
@ASFleischman | 31 August 2025}
An important note about talking to police:
Let's say you talk to police for two hours, and you provide an immediately, perfectly plausible account of your innocence. It's on tape.
Almost no judge will let you play that tape for the jury without testifying.
If you fuck up, it comes in automatically.
If you're perfect, it stays out nearly automatically.
There is no upside.
https://x.com/IanHuyett/status/1962568657017385251
&
https://x.com/IanHuyett/status/1962654376386076686
{Ian Huyett
@IanHuyett | 01 September 2025}
I got a call from a criminal defendant I believe is innocent. Before calling me, he voluntarily participated in a police interrogation for several hours. He believed that "I have nothing to hide" and that he could explain to the police why they had the wrong guy.
Defense attorneys might call this naïve, but look at the responses to Fleishman's OP. Even high-IQ people really believe this is how law enforcement works.
Here's the problem. When you agree to a police interrogation, you and the police are playing two different games.
As the suspect, you believe you are playing a multiplayer, collaborative game.
But the police aren't even playing a multiplayer game. They're playing a *one-player game,* like Tetris.
As the suspect, you're not a player in the game. You're more like the game environment, producing falling blocks for the player—the police.
The police play this game by collecting your statements like blocks and fitting them into a picture that incriminates you. When enough blocks have fit together, the police have won the game and refer the case to a prosecutor.
You believe that, once you convince the police that you are innocent, you will all win. But that's not a real outcome of the game. "Evidence that I am innocent" is not even a game element. From the cops' perspective, if they fail to assemble the blocks into an incriminating picture, they have lost the game.
Suspects who think "I have nothing to hide" are always surprised when the interrogation lasts several hours. "I've already explained everything - why am I still here?" they think.
That's because the longer the game goes on, the more falling blocks the police have to assemble their case. It's in their interests to keep the game going long past what *your game* required.
All suspects eventually sense this on some gut level and become frustrated. You think: "Wait a minute, - all of their questions are subtly premised on my guilt! But I can prove to them that I'm not guilty. I need to appeal to them to really hear me out."
I.e., "Let's start over with a different game where we can all work together."
But even as you're trying to change the game, you are speaking and therefore generating more blocks.
Here's the only solution. The moment you have any reason to believe you're a suspect, exit the game. Politely ask if you are free to leave. If they say "no," calmly tell them "I invoke my right to remain silent and my right to counsel."
If you're in custody when you say this, the cops will actually physically stand up and leave the room as if you've just uttered a magic incantation.
So far every defense attorney or cop who has interacted with my take agrees with it.
Yet in Fleischman's replies you can see smart people outside those groups—e.g. a journalist followed by Yarvin and Crémieux—who believe some suspects "have nothing to hide."
It's not about common sense, it's a knowledge issue. You either know how this works or you don't.
...
