[QUOTE=OnMissed;2379491]
Originally Posted by
JohnBurke
The Miranda warning applies to police, in criminal cases, but not to inspectors in administrative cases. /QUOTE]
NOT ENTIRELY CORRECT
Statements gained in administrative cases, like tax, ATF Inspections and Immigration cases, can and will be used in a criminal proceeding.
There's a 1968 case that held that evidence(statements) gaining in administrative questioning can be used in a criminal proceeding, (see
https://supreme.justia.com/cases/fed...91/1/case.html).
In most cases an FAR violation is handled administratively, BUT SOME FAR VIOLATIONS HAVE PARALLEL CRIMINAL VIOLATIONS.
Here's an example of evidence gain during an administrative action used in a subsequent criminal action.
The Threat of Parallel Investigations: When Civil Isn?t Civil
Always consult AOPA or your legal counsel before dealing with the FAA.
Valid point, but I would argue that ANY tax matter has criminal potential. Even if you didn't MEAN to screw up your taxes, it could still be a crime.
But in aviation if you say missed a crossing restriction, the potential for a criminal investigation is pretty much zero (in the US). So it might work out for you to come clean and rely on the new enforcement philosophy.
But if there's any complications like alcohol, lying to the FAA or any other fed, or any sort of ancillary criminal activity you'd better keep your trap shut and get a lawyer. Same for any sort of intentional FAR violations, or bent metal (in the later case, to protect you from civil lawsuits from other parties, not the FAA).