You’ve been falsely accused of murder, and the police have overwhelming evidence against you.
Which detective from literature would you want on your side, to prove your innocence?
Bonus question: which one would be the most fun to be around while they worked to uncover the real murderer?
Great questions, Dale.
1. Perry Mason (who was part detective)
2. Travis McGee.
Thanks, Jim!
Mason would be utterly relentless, wouldn’t he. McGee would be entertaining to watch in action.
Jessica Fletcher, for sure
“Murder, She Solved.” 🙂
Definitely the team from the show Castle. And when they found other evidence, Richard Castle and I wouild co-write a book about it.
Turning the clearing of your name into co-writing a book with Castle is brilliant, Jane.
Of course, Sherlock Holmes and Dr. Watson
Same answer for the most fun. Watching Sherlock work would be great.
A classic choice, Brian, and with good reason. Watching Holmes work would be a masterclass in the important of seemingly minor details.
Another vote for Sherlock.
Fun? V.I. Warshawski, Nick and Nora Charles, some Carl Hiaasen’s characters.
Dale, what a terrific question!
Thanks, Debbie! Terrific fun choices–especially Nick and Nora.
I will be calling ay 221B Baker Street as well. Hanging out with Spade and Archer might be more fun though.
I’d love to have been a fly on the wall when Archer was still alive and to watch him and Spade discuss a case.
Getting away with it:
One day, a million years ago I was called to jury duty. The two sides are choosing a jury. The County Prosecutor introduces herself, introduces the defense counsel, and the judge. First question for the jury pool.
“Do any of you know me, the defense counsel, or the judge?”
Several hands go up, including mine.
“Ms. Costaintin, you, me, and Mr. D’Agrosa all graduated high school together.” From a few rows back I hear, “Carry I am class of 1980 too. I was sitting next to you.”
I did not get seated and have never been called to jury duty again.
I told that story because Paul D’Agrosa used to be who you called if you didn’t want a needle in your arm. He has switched sides. He is now an US Attorney. Probably not who you want defending you.
Wow, what a story, Alan. The one time I pulled jury duty, in a case involving (among other things) being intoxicated while driving, I told the county prosecutor I had been hit by a drunk driver years earlier, but that I would do my best to be unbiased. I ended up an alternate, was chosen when a selected jury member was excused, and ended up being the presiding juror (i.e. the foreman).
Love it, Alan. Similar to when my husband, who had been a cop until he got medically retired after being hit by a joy-riding kid in a station wagon, later got called for jury duty for a guy arrested for burglary. They asked him the usual questions, including can you be fair. He said no. They asked why. His answer was “Because I’ve arrested him three times for burglary.” Funny, they immediately rejected him and as with you, he was never called again.
1. Hercule Poirot
2. Mike Hammer
Both would be fun to tag along with.
Bonus answer: from TV or movies, Andy Sipowicz is my guy. Big heart, mean fist.
Great Friday question, Dale. 🙂
Thanks, Deb! Poirot and Hammer would both be relentless in their own idiosyncratic ways.
Sipowicz definitely has both.
1. Sherlock Holmes
2. Columbo
Great question, Dale!
Thanks, Kay! Holmes is certainly a favorite choice.
Columbo would be a blast to be around. I’d be chuckling when I wasn’t awed.
I’d take Perry Mason and then Columbo. Both were great, but Mason cut to the quick quicker.
Not a lawyer but I spent more time in the company of corporate lawyers than I did in academia getting my engineering degrees. Through long years of experience, they advised the best way to avoid losing a fight is not getting into one in the first place. My own personal experience strongly supports their assertion. And yes I’ve served as a juror a few times.
–
A 5/11/2020 study found murder trials had total errors of 33% for whites and 46% for blacks.The data were parsed into Type I (innocent but found guilty) to be 17% for whites and 28% for blacks. While Type II (guilty but found not guilty) to be 16% for whites and 18% for blacks.
–
The authors speculated that error rates for murder cases probably represent a floor for courtroom error rates given the much higher level of scrutiny afforded such matters. For trials involving allegations of lesser crimes, the “conveyor belt justice system” comes into play. Here, a defendant is often over-charged with a more serious offense and offered a plea deal to admit guilt to a lesser crime rather than face the risk of a lengthy prison sentence. This allows a judge to clear his docket backlog more easily and a DA to claim the bragging rights to a high conviction rate when running for higher office on a “tough on crime” platform.
–
My personal observations in this area with a sample size of only 3 would indicate a 100% error rate, and I admit this is probably too high. But if you take a base error rate of 33% to 46% for the most serious trials, even a modest upward adjustment would push these lesser crime figures up to a simple coin toss affair.
–
The courtroom dramas depicted on stage, screen, television and books give a far different impression.
The American version of House of Cards showed the “justice” system in all its dysfunctional glory, with the FBI coercing an innocent victim to plead guilty via a threat of prosecuting her for something she didn’t do, a major crime that would ruin her life.
1. Harry Bosch
2. Stephanie Plum
My childhood self would choose Encyclopedia Brown, or perhaps the Three Investigators: Jupiter Jones, Pete Crenshaw, and Bob Andrews.
I would actually not pick a detective from literature. I want Rick & AJ Simon on my case. 😎 😎 😎
Mattie Matlock and Hercule Poirot for me.
No contest: Auguste Dupin, the creation of the brilliant Edgar Allan Poe, famous for “The Murders in the Rue Morgue.” It was Poe who first proposed the existence of a mind-denizen that blurts out whatever we most want to keep hidden, in “The Imp of the Perverse,” 56 years before Freud and his “Fehlleistungen,” AKA “Freudian slips.”