Monday, July 31, 2006
McHenry County State’s Attorney Advised County Officials They Don’t Have to Talk to Chicago Crime Commission Investigators
I’m pretty amazed that the continuing investigation of the Chicago Crime Commission has been reported no place but McHenry County Blog May 4th. (Or, did I miss another article somewhere?)
Now I find that Lou Bianchi has written a May 24th letter to
One does not even have to talk to a Federal investigator, if one does not want to.
There is that Fifth Amendment which allows people to remain silent, just in case they might incriminate themselves.
It is interesting that the letter was sent, though, isn’t it?
Now I find that Lou Bianchi has written a May 24th letter to
zoning board of appeal members,stating what seems obvious to me:
county board members,
county elected officials and
the county administrator
They don’t have to talk to the Chicago Crime Commission’s investigators.While one is a ex-FBI man, the other is a private investigator, so, of course, one would not have to talk to them, if one did not want to.
One does not even have to talk to a Federal investigator, if one does not want to.
There is that Fifth Amendment which allows people to remain silent, just in case they might incriminate themselves.
It is interesting that the letter was sent, though, isn’t it?
Comments:
<< Home
I'm confused, very respectfulof law enforcement, repeat very respectful, but confused on this.
I recall the State's Attorney's office quoted as saying (on more than one occasion) the equivalent of - prove a crime was committed - then we'll consider an investigation. (My interpretation.)
I thought this was a bit backward because my belief had been that if residents or others give "you" (law enforcement folks) a giant hint, "you" take the ball and run with it. "You" investigate like crazy on the state's time and expense. My friend says I watch too many TV forensic, lawyer and detective shows
While it is reasonable to remind people every so often that they don't HAVE to talk to certain people, I think, that given the circumstances and the people, it might have been a good idea to encourage (not require) people to talk - if the pursuit of crime is a goal equal in importance to Fifth Amendment rights.
I have this crazy idea about liking it when the "good guys/gals" fight for the little people and win.
My head hurts just thinking about this.
Post a Comment
I recall the State's Attorney's office quoted as saying (on more than one occasion) the equivalent of - prove a crime was committed - then we'll consider an investigation. (My interpretation.)
I thought this was a bit backward because my belief had been that if residents or others give "you" (law enforcement folks) a giant hint, "you" take the ball and run with it. "You" investigate like crazy on the state's time and expense. My friend says I watch too many TV forensic, lawyer and detective shows
While it is reasonable to remind people every so often that they don't HAVE to talk to certain people, I think, that given the circumstances and the people, it might have been a good idea to encourage (not require) people to talk - if the pursuit of crime is a goal equal in importance to Fifth Amendment rights.
I have this crazy idea about liking it when the "good guys/gals" fight for the little people and win.
My head hurts just thinking about this.
<< Home
