OK, well that was some posts about nothing. My friends' scene was cut out. There was a flashback to the courtroom where the rapists were acquitted. My friend was the prosecutor who failed to convict the boys. His wife was a courtroom observer. Since it ran three minutes over anyway I see why they had to cut it out. But it is still a shame for my friends.

Ignore my side note. Didn't realize that she was chief of investigations.

Closer finale: So the big consequence of all her murders and bullshit is that Brenda gets a new prestigious job as a public servant? Aside from setting up people to be killed, haven't her new bosses noticed that she is insubordinate, does not play well with others an does not believe the rules apply to her? And she still has not learned: the hill she chose to die upon was refusing to accept a reprimand for attacking a murder suspect in front of five witnesses in the absence of any threat?

Major crimes: Predendaza is angry about plea bargains? Aren't about 95% of all criminal cases settled in plea bargains? Also he is mad about a deal for 30 to life? Even though California is a death penalty state,aren't executions comparatively rare there? Or it is the "wrong crime"? The crimes the perp confessed to are ones he was actually guilty of under California law. So he gets off for other ones, but that is nature of a plea bargain - confessing to some of what you are guilty of in return for not being convicted of other things. And for a veteran with a background of mental illness, the death penalty is not certain anyway. So Raeder was right - from the prosecution standpoint a really good deal, one they might have made even without budget constraints. The rule about staying in place after officer involved shooting even when in hot pursuit of a dangerous shooter is something that would not happen in real life. Part of the cop show meme about "poor persecuted Po Po having to operate under all the red tape placed there by people who don't understand what police have to go through" . In practice you can't even convict a cop of murder when shooting an unarmed man, lying on the ground who has already been shot. Or for that matter for tasing the *victim* of a crime [link]

From what I understand(from Simon, and Michael Connolly, et al,) if there weren't plea bargains, the legal system would grind to a screeching halt.)

I despise the "I have to break the rules to do my job!" thing. It makes me start rooting for the cop to get his ass handed to him.

What's the difference between a consulting detective and a PI that might help the police?

Also, can't lie, if this is official, it's officially too twee.

I think what you are implying is true - no difference unless the CD did not bother to get a license in which case the CD may be violating the law.

But I think I know why Doyle used the term. Private Investigators were not only known, but the unblinking eye was used by the Pinkertons as their symbol - hence "Private Eye". The thing though is that the Pinkertons were not all that successful at tracking down criminals. The Jesse James gang ran circle around them and laughed at them. But they were very successful as thugs, beating up Union Members, even helping Spain against revolutionaries. So while they were romanticized they were also despised, seen as sleazy, especially by the liberal minded. Doyle was definitely liberal minded. So when Doyle invented Sherlock Holmes, had him describe himself as a consulting detective. Just to make it clear that he was not some thug you could hire to beat up people. Doyle pretended by implication that there was a difference in denotation (I don't even remember him mentioning the term Private Investigator, but he may have done.) But I don't think he could have supported that difference. You could have hired a Private Investigator in the 19th century to try doing what Holmes did, though I doubt they would have succeeded. But Doyle strongly intended a difference in connotation, and in that I think he succeeded. I don't think I need to elaborate on that.

I don't what "Consulting Detective" means today. It was the term Doyle used, so I suppose those bringing Holmes into the 21st century mostly feel obligated to use it.

Er in fairness to the Pinkertons, they were successful in catching robbers pre-civil War. And Alan Pinkerton handle intelligence for much of the term of the Lincoln Adminstration. The Pinkerton's turned to strikebreaking and such as their primary revenue source post US Civil War. And when that was eventually outlawed they became providers of Security Guards, which they still do today, along with conventional PI services.

The point is, at the time Doyle was writing the first Sherlock Holmes story PI brought to mind "Pinkerton" and "Thug" and "Strikebreaker".

Al Swearingen hates their guts.But he's a criminal.

There are any number of ex-FBI agents and other former law enforcement people, plus specialists in particular aspects of forensic science, who consult with police departments today. The original Holmes could say he was the only one, but not a current-day Holmes.