melonfool wrote:I had a boyfriend who was stopped by police for not wearing a seatbelt, he had a video recorder in his van (and nothing else), it was Christmas Eve, he refused to say why it was there, they arrested him. He wasn't out til Boxing Day. It wasn't stolen or illegally procured in any way.
The prudence of talking to the police versus saying nothing is something we could debate although, as noted above, it's wandering rather far from the topic here. There are probably times when you should answer a question, and other times when you should remain silent. The problem is that you don't always know which is which at the outset. It really depends on the suspicions of the policeman, and how aggressive and tenacious he is about trying to get you for something (regardless of whether you did anything wrong or not).
One thing is clear: the police caution in the UK is somewhat prejudicial in how it affirms the right to silence but then rather unhelpfully tries to give you some advice on what a court might later consider. The advice to "keep your mouth shut", which criminal lawyers invariably advise, is based on the fact that the best thing to say in a given situation is often not the first thing you blurt out. And that cops generally cannot be just talked out of a situation where they believe (rightly or wrongly) that you are guilty of something.
Often the worst case with not answering questions is what happened in your example - you are detained for a few hours, or perhaps a day/night, and then released. I was held overnight once but then released in the morning - never heard about it again. If talking would have led to a worse outcome then a temporary detention might not be so bad - you can talk your way into trouble by talking too much and trying too hard, even if innocent.
Regardless, neither not answering questions nor being in possession of a large amount of cash is a crime in and of itself. There needs to be more for a prosecution, let alone conviction. In practice it may be enough for an arrest, depending on the cop. Many arrests are reversed if a case cannot quickly be made.
Finally it would be my own intent, if serving on a jury, to not interpret the defendant's silence, or election not to testify, as having significance. I suspect other jurors may take a different view and believe that silence is suspicious.