This is a purely educational website. Nothing here is legal advice or creates or implies an attorney-client relationship. If you have a specific legal issue, PLEASE talk to a lawyer who practices where you live—laws vary from place to place, and how they're applied varies from courthouse to courthouse. Your local county bar association can probably refer someone.
By using this site, you agree that you are awesome. Use of this site also constitutes acceptance of its
Terms of Service and Privacy Policies, which are known to medical science as a cure for insomnia.
It's best to keep all discussions in the comments. But if you really need to reach Nathan privately, go ahead and email him at n.e.burney@gmail.com. He won't mind.
THE ILLUSTRATED GUIDE TO LAW and the PEEKING JUSTICE logo are pretty damn cool trademarks and should probably be registered one of these days.
© Nathaniel Burney. All rights reserved, though they really open up once you get to know them.
So that does raise the question: why don’t they? Is it perhaps less about work in the sense of difficulty, and more in the sense of time? Do officers feel it’s more time consuming?
Or is it that, from the get-go, they already have an idea of what story they want, and like an interrogation, are more concerned with getting witness statements to support it?
Well, it’s a bit counterintuitive on the face of it isn’t it? Which sounds like more work: trying to pick out facts from what’s most likely a long and rambling story with a great deal of irrelevant details, or directly asking for the details you want?