by BigTex » Wed 11 Jun 2008, 08:18:59
I haven't read all of the posts in this thread, but it seems reasonable to me for law enforcement to stop by and talk to someone about what they are doing and ask them to stop if it is illegal or potentially illegal.
It sounds to me like the guys were polite and professional.
I suspect if you had asked them to re-schedule the interview so that you could have a lawyer present, they would have worked with you.
In many cases, law enforcement welcomes the addition of a lawyer to the situation, since an individual is often more likely to listen to what his lawyer tells him than what the police tell him.
I really think we ought to take a step back and compare how this went down to how it might have gone down in another country.
It has been my experience that when an individual begins interacting with the government as if the government was some sort of inhuman entity, it makes it much easier for the government to interact with the individual in that manner as well.
If there is an issue to be resolved, the key is to ENGAGE on the most favorable possible terms. That's why you always want to hire a lawyer who is familiar with the law enforcement agencies involved, the prosecutors, the judge, etc.
If you don't have an attorney but are forced to deal with the government on a matter like this, the best posture to take, in my experience, is one of polite cooperation with as little emotion or fear as possible. If you are uncomfortable doing something or talking about something, it's best to just explain why you are uncomfortable and tell them what you would prefer to do.
Thus, instead of saying "I don't talk to PIGS!" and slamming the door, it might be better to say "Gentlemen, I appreciate you coming by today, and I would like to talk to you, but would it be possible to re-schedule this meeting at my attorney's office for later today or tomorrow?"
See the difference?
