My question involves police conduct in the State of: MI
I was once involved in a lengthy and large scale investigation that lasted several months and used a lot of resources. The slam dunk evidence they thought they had at the beginning of the investigation turned out to test false by the end of the investigation. The prosecutors ended up charging me anyways then immediately dropping the charges at the first pre-trial because they said the case lacked any 'factual or hard evidence'. I'm trying to figure out why I was ever charged to begin, and why they couldn't have made that determination before hand. Was there something to be gained in formally charging me then immediately dropping it? We're they potentially trying to appease the detective who ran the case and consulted prosecutors in the beginning who told her to go ahead and prosecutors would pursue charges?
I was once involved in a lengthy and large scale investigation that lasted several months and used a lot of resources. The slam dunk evidence they thought they had at the beginning of the investigation turned out to test false by the end of the investigation. The prosecutors ended up charging me anyways then immediately dropping the charges at the first pre-trial because they said the case lacked any 'factual or hard evidence'. I'm trying to figure out why I was ever charged to begin, and why they couldn't have made that determination before hand. Was there something to be gained in formally charging me then immediately dropping it? We're they potentially trying to appease the detective who ran the case and consulted prosecutors in the beginning who told her to go ahead and prosecutors would pursue charges?
Criminal Investigations: Do Detectives Consult Prosecutors Prior to Initiating Large Investigations
Aucun commentaire:
Enregistrer un commentaire