Hey I could do your job, one of the kids said after I put down the phone recently at home.

You just tell people to make "no comment". Hmm, I kind of do, though I wish "they" (the people, not the kids) would listen more often.

Nowadays, with, it seems anyway, so many people who have never been in trouble before being caught up in the law - including domestics, football crimes and the huge growth in road traffic prosecutions - the usual response to no comment advice for the police interview is: "What! Doesn't that just make me sound guilty?" Er nope. It's usually followed by: "But I'm innocent!" Maybe you are, but have you seen the latest ruling on what constitutes that particular crime?

And do you seriously think the police are questioning you because they decide who is innocent or guilty? Could it be because they don't have enough evidence to charge you unless that evidence flops, even accidentally - from your very own mouth? We're not even talking confessions here. Simply putting yourself there as a peacemaker, a victim, acting in self defence is often enough to corroborate, get you charged and en route to court.

Two sides to the story? A court not the police will decide then. With you in the dock, matey.

Of course, there are circumstances even where you are a suspect when you have to answer the police. Who was driving the car? for example.

Bottom line: Always ask a lawyer.

But for some interesting entertainment stick the words: Professor James Duane at Regent University into YouTube to hear an American account of the dangers of commenting during a police interview. It's for a completely different legal system, but it's good. I wish there was a Scottish version.

Why? He's right. It's really hard for people brought up to respect the police, as people rightly should, to then sit in front of them and make no comment. Most everybody wants to give their side of the story.

And let's not forget an interview is a hugely stressful situation. Conducted by trained interrogators. I sit in plain, dull, police interview rooms beside clients as the tape is started, the bit about the light coming on is explained, the long bit about whether they want a lawyer there with them (despite one sitting right beside them) is gone through again, and I wonder how they will ever remember the key thing.

Stop talking after the caution. They often don't. That's because the caution comes and goes in an absolute flash. It's not like in the movies. Nobody mentions rights, or silence, or even Article 5. The words: "You're not bound to say anything" floating by amid a river of other words is all there usually is in Scotland to alert someone they can now make no comment. Bound to? I don't know if there's research on this in Scotland, but as warnings go "not bound to" seems mild.

Do the police then say: You did it didn't you! thereby waking the client up to looming danger. Course not. After caution slips by they usually move smoothly on to innocent, easy-to-answer, safe and general questions, designed to get people talking. Because once people get talking. Crikey, it's hard for them to stop.