LOL - I haven't had time to really ramble/spew out meta on the last few episodes really because they are so raw, and I'm not sure how coherently I'd come about it all
( ... )
I mean, I don't know the California standards, but usually the ethical issue is about conflict of interest. When Speedy was just a witness...I don't like it, but his interests weren't really opposed to the police department's, as far as they knew. I wouldn't say the worm turned until Sharon asked him about the doughnut run (ie, once she started doubting Speedy's story). Jackson was right: she was out of line asking a question they hadn't cleared, and she was out of line pursuing that line of questioning
( ... )
Ah, see, I missed all the nuances of that. I had no idea that the donuts path of questioning would be relevant at all, and neither did I realize that list of questions is actually a set thing for defenders to approve (considering that it's not something I've actually ever seen addressed before, so... yes, MC!). :3
So if they agreed to Jackson's suggestion of manslaughter, but can they actually do deals like that outside of the suspect's presence? And would the conflict-of-interest come up then? *is now even more confused* I mean though, now we're dealing all in maybe's and what-if's... So yeah, nevermind. ><"
And what is usually the legal definition of an interrogation? I got the impression that speaking to as long as you're NOT questioning the suspect meant that it was not an interrogation and therefore, not as illegal (though still unethical considering her motivations), or was that more shady business? (><" - That does raise the question then, how many of BLJ's confessions DID lead to an appeals, and did they really have a 90%
( ... )
I had no idea that the donuts path of questioning would be relevant at all, and neither did I realize that list of questions is actually a set thing for defenders to approve
The thing about the doughnuts question was that she had clearly found a hole in his story and was prying further. Now, even if it STILL was only incidental to the murder investigation, if he was just lying just because, or because he went to buy a joint, or whatever, that was going to affect the terms of his deal, and so it was Jackson's job to say something. And yeah, the questions are pre-screened so Jackson would know whether or not Speedy would incriminate himself by answering any of them.
So if they agreed to Jackson's suggestion of manslaughter, but can they actually do deals like that outside of the suspect's presence?
Negotiations like that aren't usually done in the suspect's presence, but of course if they HAD come to terms, it would still be Speedy's decision whether or not to agree.
Comments 6
Reply
Reply
So if they agreed to Jackson's suggestion of manslaughter, but can they actually do deals like that outside of the suspect's presence? And would the conflict-of-interest come up then? *is now even more confused* I mean though, now we're dealing all in maybe's and what-if's... So yeah, nevermind. ><"
And what is usually the legal definition of an interrogation? I got the impression that speaking to as long as you're NOT questioning the suspect meant that it was not an interrogation and therefore, not as illegal (though still unethical considering her motivations), or was that more shady business? (><" - That does raise the question then, how many of BLJ's confessions DID lead to an appeals, and did they really have a 90% ( ... )
Reply
The thing about the doughnuts question was that she had clearly found a hole in his story and was prying further. Now, even if it STILL was only incidental to the murder investigation, if he was just lying just because, or because he went to buy a joint, or whatever, that was going to affect the terms of his deal, and so it was Jackson's job to say something. And yeah, the questions are pre-screened so Jackson would know whether or not Speedy would incriminate himself by answering any of them.
So if they agreed to Jackson's suggestion of manslaughter, but can they actually do deals like that outside of the suspect's presence?
Negotiations like that aren't usually done in the suspect's presence, but of course if they HAD come to terms, it would still be Speedy's decision whether or not to agree.
Basically, interrogation kicks in when the suspect isn't ( ... )
Reply
Leave a comment