/ PI confict of
the other side
by Edward L. Woody
January 5, 2003
This could be an even worse conflict of interests than I first thought.
EDITOR'S NOTE: Please see previous letter from December 10th
-- > Letter
to Chief Bratton: Official LAPD policy allows abuse - either be
a cop, or be a private eye ... but not both
It just occurred to me that anyone who may have hired an attorney
to defend them in a criminal case might have received less of
a defense than they deserved or paid for.
What if the law firm they retained hired a private investigator
for their case ... a licensed private eye who was also a sworn police
officer ... and they were convicted because that police officer
/ private investigator sided with the police department, withholding,
ignoring, or never looked for evidence which would have freed the
Simply put, how can private investigators / police officers properly
investigate the defense of their clients, if they are loyal to the
How many cases could be involved? Hard to tell, because no one convicted
will ever know whether the P.I. they paid to work their case was
also a cop ... unless a list of all cop / private eyes and their
client lists are made public.
It seems to me that the appeals court could be very very busy processing
all the cases that may have been corrupted this way. I know many
lawyers who would hire a cop / P.I. just to get their wealthy clients
off later in appeals court.
This situation absolutely needs to be corrected ...
How can cops arrest criminals with one hand, help the criminals
beat the case with the other hand, and take money with both
hands? Where lies the loyalty of the police officer / private investigator?
Isn't this vigilante justice? The cop / P.I. becomes the judge,
and decides whether or not the accused is guilty or not, based either
on his loyalty to cash or to the police department. He'd have to
decide whether to help the defense or the prosecution, as
he sees fit ... or as finances dictate.
De Oppresso Liber,
Edward L. Woody
323 / 850-6181