Overview: For this discussion, you will apply the right to an attorney to a scen


Overview:
For this discussion, you will apply the right to an attorney to a scenario.
Scenario: Your burglary investigation of Jim Davis has progressed. After the non-custodial interview of Jim, you let him go and continued the investigation. Jim denied his involvement, but his answers seemed deceitful to you. Jim agreed to provide a buccal swab for his DNA. You submitted his DNA to the crime lab. A week later, a resident reported an ATM had been dumped in the alley behind their house and set on fire. You respond to the scene, discover it is one of the stolen ATMs, and collect it as evidence. Evidence technicians obtain one strand of hair from the ATM and submit it to the lab for DNA analysis and comparison to Jim’s DNA. The lab provides inconclusive results, but the results do not exclude Jim as a suspect. You ask Jim to come back to the police department for another interview, and he agrees.
Instructions:
In your initial post:
Discuss when the right to an attorney would and would not apply in this scenario.
Discuss how to handle comments like, “Do you think I need an attorney?” Or, “Should I get an attorney?”
Discuss how the “two-week rule” might apply to this scenario.
Support your position and responses with case law.


Leave a Reply