The Introverted Detective

The musical Chicago is a famous, favorite musical. It may interest many to know that Velma Kelly and Roxie Hart were real people, but had different names. The woman reporter who covered these events wrote the show Chicago as a satire and wanted us, as the audience, to hate the characters portrayed. They weren't written to be related to, at all. Maurine Watkins, 28,  wrote about Belva Gaertner (Velma Kelly) and Beulah Annan (Roxie Hart) as if they had been guilty and played the system. She was put on the murderess row beat because it was too boring for the men, apparently. Murder, boring? Ha! What you have to know about a reporter's access to jails was that they had 24-hour access in 1924. They competed with police to solve crimes, in their minds. Watkins would go in acting like what they used to call a "sob sister". As a result, they talked to her and she could use their words against them. Sob sisters were a way of playing the system and creating sympathy for t...

Informants are legal, first of all. They confidentially provide information to law enforcement agencies. Yes, they can get paid, but that is the minority. Most got caught doing something and complied with a sting operation (being undercover) to get leniency or charges dropped. One thing to remember with this topic is that their identity is protected unless they are called as a witness in court. Also, to be a legal informant, many things are considered. Some of this is common sense to an investigative mind, but some aren't. Below is a simple list of what is considered. 1. age 2.alien status 3.are they party to privileged info? 4. relevance of info 5.relationship to anyone involved 6.ability of officer to ensure they only do what they are supposed to / how they would use legitimate organizations for info 7. motivation 8. various risks to case 9. can statements be backed? 10. reliable/truthful? 11. prior record as witness 12. criminal history 13. risk of flight or harm...

Investigators have to be aware of whether evidence is admissible in court or not. It is important to your story line and plot that you know what can and can't be used as evidence in a court of law. You have the power to make your characters win and lose court cases based on this information alone. Admissible evidence is defined as being relevant, reliable, and obtained legally. Relevant means it must prove or disprove important facts in the case. Reliable means it is credible. Basically, you can't have an illegally obtained recording, an unreliable video tape that's bad quality, or an irrelevant Facebook post as evidence. Any good lawyer would object to this evidence, but then again, does your lawyer character have to be a good lawyer? That's your call, fellow writers. Inadmissible evidence is basically the opposite of what admissible is. It can't be used against anyone in court. Below I have listed some of the specifics of why it can be declared inadmissible ...

I've talked about how private detectives can be booked for stalking if they stake-out and tail people wrong. If you tail someone like detectives from noir movies your fictional investigator can get picked up for stalking, and the fictional police will laugh at your private investigator for their stupidity. What is considered stalking by law? Do you actually know? No matter what people claim it is, here are the facts when it comes to the actual (Ohio) laws. Private Detectives (PIs) can be picked up because someone is scared and perceives a PI driving by their home or office as a threat. Tailing too obviously, and too often, has the same effect and therefore the police can pick up your fictional PI and put them in jail. The laws on stalking/menace by stalking say that there is perceived threat (much like self-defense laws) of physical or mental harm. There is also a pattern of malicious behavior with the intention of intimidation. This can be cyber, too. Cyber is connected with s...