Another author needs help :)

[BadGolfer]

apparently they know where to get good and dependable answers


I think cbg has directed them here. I suspect she belongs to a wild and lawless assemblage of authors (that is the proper term for a group of authors isn't it, an assemblage?). You know that if there is an actual name for a group of them, there is a problem. I mean, think about it; a lepe of leopards, a pride of lions, a murder of crows, a superfluity of nuns. Think about the fear large groups of any one of them instill into the public at large. Leopards and lions will eat you. Crows, well, they "tap tap tap" until you go insane and don't even get me started with nuns. Unless you can disarm them (take their rulers away), you are guaranteed damn sore knuckles. I tremble in fear every time I walk past a convent constantly looking over my shoulder as I go by to ensure they are not sneaking up from behind, rulers in hand, just looking for a bare knuckle to assault.

ROFL (And "assemblage" is the proper term. )

 

[cbg]

Read my second post.

 

[quincy]

... But I cannot conceive of a set of circumstances where a 1L would let that interview take place, let alone a fully licensed attorney, no matter what the specialty.

cbg, attorneys cannot prevent their clients from sitting down with the police and answering questions. Attorneys can only advise their clients against speaking with the police.

Clients can do what they want, in other words, despite advice and warnings from their attorneys - but the smart client will listen to his/her attorney and shut up.

 

[cbg]

True enough. I guess the OP's best option is to have his suspect proceed against legal advice to get the result he wants.

 

[quincy]

True enough. I guess the OP's best option is to have his suspect proceed against legal advice to get the result he wants.

There was a prominent attorney from Delaware named Thomas J. Capano who was investigated for his connection to the disappearance of a woman known to be his mistress. He was arrested, charged and convicted of murder, despite the fact there was no murder weapon and no body, in large part because he refused to listen to the advice of the four different attorneys who attempted to represent him and keep him quiet.

When he took the stand in his own defense, this against his fourth attorney's advice, the prosecuting attorney was able to use all of the various and conflicting stories Capano had told to investigators (told against his attorneys' advice) to convince the jury of Capano's guilt. He died in prison a few years ago.

The somewhat amusing part of the story is that Capano filed motions for post-conviction relief, arguing he had had ineffective legal counsel.

Here is a link to the decision on Capano's petition for habeas corpus relief:

https://www.paed.uscourts.gov/documents/opinions/08D0431P.pdf

So even attorneys do not listen to their attorneys.

Criminals tend not to be the smartest group of humans on earth.

 

[cbg]

I remember that case. I was living in Pennsylvania at the time and you could spit and hit Delaware from where I was.

 

[BadGolfer]

How might it play out? Well ... the fellow who feels himself innocent says the wrong thing to the police, implicating himself in the murder, this because his real-estate-attorney friend is way out of his depth in a criminal investigation interrogation and fails to silence his friend.

Thanks quincy. That's just the sort of thing I'm looking for. Now in my story I need to keep this guy (the suspect) free. Now there's no forensic evidence at the scene tying him to the murder and the canvassing has turned up little. So (again I am not a lawyer) the way I see it the police's best chance of getting him is to have him incriminate himself. So he's already survived an initial interview with the detective who came to his door, and now he goes in to the interview with the real-estate-attorney-friend. Now what can go wrong in that interview that can put a shudder of fear into him and make him wonder (because he doesn't know he didn't kill his ex because he was binge drinking when it happened and can't recall much of the night) if perhaps he'd even committed the murder, and yet stop just short of incrimination to the point of being arrested? Something where even the out-of-his depth real estate attorney would jump up and say: 'That's it. This interview is over.'

Yes, it'll stretch credulity but so much fiction does stretch credulity.

Thanks.

 

[BadGolfer]

I hate to say this, because I know from first hand experience it is to know what needs to happen for the story and not be able to find a way to make it happen. Going through that right now, as a matter of fact - got a great idea for a story and it's totally unworkable with my characters. But even a lay person would know not to let the suspect meet with the police; surely someone who went to law school, even in another specialty would know. I will grant you that many times lawyers in one specialty will not know anything more about laws in another area than a lay person; you would not believe some of the mistakes I've heard lawyers from other areas make about employment law (my day job is HR). But I cannot conceive of a set of circumstances where a 1L would let that interview take place, let alone a fully licensed attorney, no matter what the specialty.

Thanks cbg. I think the only way to make it fly is to stress that the suspect really loved his ex-wife and is determined to help the police find the killer. The kind of thing where the attorney says, 'bad idea, don't go' but the suspect insists.

 

[BadGolfer]

There was a prominent attorney from Delaware named Thomas J. Capano who was investigated for his connection to the disappearance of a woman known to be his mistress. He was arrested, charged and convicted of murder, despite the fact there was no murder weapon and no body, in large part because he refused to listen to the advice of the four different attorneys who attempted to represent him and keep him quiet.

When he took the stand in his own defense, this against his fourth attorney's advice, the prosecuting attorney was able to use all of the various and conflicting stories Capano had told to investigators (told against his attorneys' advice) to convince the jury of Capano's guilt. He died in prison a few years ago.

The somewhat amusing part of the story is that Capano filed motions for post-conviction relief, arguing he had had ineffective legal counsel.

Here is a link to the decision on Capano's petition for habeas corpus relief:

https://www.paed.uscourts.gov/documents/opinions/08D0431P.pdf

So even attorneys do not listen to their attorneys.

Criminals tend not to be the smartest group of humans on earth.

Fascinating.

 

[Shadowbunny]

Thanks cbg. I think the only way to make it fly is to stress that the suspect really loved his ex-wife and is determined to help the police find the killer. The kind of thing where the attorney says, 'bad idea, don't go' but the suspect insists.

I think we've all been accused of something we're innocent of (although usually not murder!), however, the compulsion to clear our names can be much stronger than our common sense.

 

[quincy]

I think we've all been accused of something we're innocent of (although usually not murder!), however, the compulsion to clear our names can be much stronger than our common sense.

Last year, Drake Bennett, a staff writer for Bloomberg BusinessWeek, wrote a good article on "The Dark Science of Interrogation." Here is a link:

http://www.bloomberg.com/graphics/2015-dark-science-of-interrogation/

It covers the problems with current interrogation techniques and outlines some reasons why people confess to crimes they did not commit.

What I found interesting, and of interest to the Philadelphia Police Department apparently as well, is a study that showed simply redecorating an interrogation room - "opening" the room up with open windows, open books, open drawers - makes those being questioned more open to divulging information.

 

[BadGolfer]

I think we've all been accused of something we're innocent of (although usually not murder!), however, the compulsion to clear our names can be much stronger than our common sense.

Make sense, Shadowbunny. Thanks.

 

[BadGolfer]

Last year, Drake Bennett, a staff writer for Bloomberg BusinessWeek, wrote a good article on "The Dark Science of Interrogation." Here is a link:

http://www.bloomberg.com/graphics/2015-dark-science-of-interrogation/

It covers the problems with current interrogation techniques and outlines some reasons why people confess to crimes they did not commit.

What I found interesting, and of interest to the Philadelphia Police Department apparently as well, is a study that showed simply redecorating an interrogation room - "opening" the room up with open windows, open books, open drawers - makes those being questioned more open to divulging information.

Great article. Thanks.

 

[Shadowbunny]

Fascinating article, Quincy. I'm horrified by this: "Of the 325 people exonerated in the U.S. by DNA evidence, more than a quarter had confessed under interrogation, falsely admitting to violent, often unspeakable acts." That's a frightening statistic.

I wonder if the "warmer temps = more generous" theory would work in an interrogation room, too?

 

[quincy]

Fascinating article, Quincy. I'm horrified by this: "Of the 325 people exonerated in the U.S. by DNA evidence, more than a quarter had confessed under interrogation, falsely admitting to violent, often unspeakable acts." That's a frightening statistic.

I wonder if the "warmer temps = more generous" theory would work in an interrogation room, too?

I think just as much a problem as those who falsely confess to crimes they did not commit are those who falsely accuse others of crimes they did not commit.

Maybe if you removed humans from investigations entirely, you would get a more reliable truth.