Your level of ignorance of police procedure is almost as staggering as your social class bigotry.

If a detective, or any other police officer (the police powers are exactly the same) asks questions of someone, and is told they have retained counsel, the questions can go right on. Whether counsel is retained or not, the person being questioned is free not to answer, beyond special circumstantial requirements to truthfully state your name, provide a driver's license if driving. etc. Now, if the person being questioned says anything similar to "I want a/my lawyer," then questioning must cease. The detective might explain that the person is not a suspect and that he is simply gathering information form the investigation, but there's no obligation to answer any of the questions, lawyer or no lawyer. And the prominence of the lawyer has no bearing at all. As long as I know I'm operating within the limits of my police powers, I don't care much if you bring in Gerry Spence. It's your money. Actually, I'd enjoy meeting him. The worst that can happen to me is that your attorney will say "My client will answer no more questions," which the client could have told me himself.

Far more often than not, a detective will be asking questions to develop or follow up investigative leads. This is what I suspect was happening in the office theft described previously. Everyone can refuse to answer questions, and the most likely outcome will be that the person responsible for the theft will get away with it. If you think that's a good outcome for you and your employer, so be it. I wouldn't mention that attitude in your next performance review.

As for your wardrobe comment (and it.s J,C. Penney, by the way), this infers to me that you regard anyone with clothing you view as inferior to your own to be as inferior to you. One of the brightest and most capable people I know is a neighbor who is a retired Navy master chief petty officer. He was responsible for the nuclear reactor compartments on a number of submarines and on the aircraft carrier Enterprise. I rarely see him wearing anything other than a khaki shirt and bib overalls. Is he your inferior, too?

By the way, I only buy socks and underwear at J.C. Penney. My suits and jackets come from Men's Wearhouse, but I used to be partial to Sears.

That wouldn't be a new experience. The laughs usually stop when I unsnap my handcuff pouch or hand them the clipboard with the admonition, "Please press firmly; you are making four copies."

First, the "vast majority" of cops that make it to detective are working an assignment that will end when they are rotated back to patrol or promoted to sergeant, which also sends them back to patrol. The assignment are usually from two to five years, depending on a variety of circumstances. Only very large agencies, like LAPD or NYPD, have more or less permanent detective slots, and even then, a promotion will put them back in uniform until they can get back to detectives. Many detectives in the permanent slots like their jobs, and never take promotional exams.

Most cops are "career seekers," at least when they start out. Some decide they would rather do something else, and move on, like with any other line of work. Many work in uniformed assignments until retirement because they choose to. I had several opportunities to go to a detective assignment, and I always turned it down. I liked patrol. There are many reasons that officers tried to get into or stay in detectives, but being smarter than a patrol grunt was not part of the equation.

If you know of detectives, or anyone else, that has built a case against someone they knew to be innocent, I suggest that you give your local FBI office a call. I wouldn't tolerate that, and I don't know of any other law enforcement professional that would. I think your view here is based mainly on TV and movie plots. Those are entertainment, and bear little resemblance to real life.


The only intimidation factor working here is that you know you had better have your ducks in a row when you go up against certain defense attorneys, because they won't miss much and will exploit any weakness in a case. That just means you have to be careful and do good journeyman work. My area of expertise was DUI enforcement, and I was told by more than one defense attorney that they regarded me in the same way on those cases. I had done a lot of them and knew what bases to cover, and how to bring out the facts in my reports and testimony. Had I been the primary case officer on say, a child molest case, they probably wouldn't have been so concerned, because I didn't have the expertise and experience that a more seasoned sex crimes investigator would have.

And you need to remember that when the case is under investigation, the investigator usually doesn't know who they might be going up against at trial. The intimidation factor, if any, just doesn't apply.

I think I said that.

Actually, the training is more targeted at knowing the constraints placed on the police by the constitution and case law. It's like having your tax return prepared by a knowledgeable accountant. The accountant may see perfectly lawful ways of allocating income and reporting deductions that would escape someone less experienced, and reduce your tax bill in so doing. That's tax avoidance as opposed to tax evasion, and the IRS will tell you that you should take every lawful deduction to which you're entitled. Similarly, the police are investigating violations of the laws that protect everyone, and if the police did not take advantage of every lawful investigative opportunity available, they would not be doing the job entrusted to them. If the police ask a question they are not permitted to ask, the response and any evidence that stems from it can be suppressed at trial (the "fruits of the poisonous tree" doctrine).

Rather than me being a "puppet and cannon fodder," I think you are an uninformed grandstander, spouting rhetoric on topics you learned about while watching TV.

Certainly, there are episodes of police misconduct, just as there are with every other line of work I can think of. When public authority figures mess up, it's big news. But fewer than 1% of law enforcement officers are ever accused of serious misconduct, and a fraction of those have those accusations substantiated.

So, the next time a cop asks you a question, feel free to laugh in his face and tell him you don't have to answer. He'll set you straight as to whether you have to answer or not. Either way, you will have positively identified your personality type, which he will file away for future reference. On that note, it is generally good practice not to taunt the alligator until after one has negotiated the swamp.