tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-915526970342955572.post3726580963518431861..comments2024-02-22T00:40:25.640-05:00Comments on Outdoors with Frischkorn: Brown County Five's court appearance doesn't impress prosecutorJeffrey L. Frischkornhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/16127663725006300815noreply@blogger.comBlogger1125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-915526970342955572.post-75105467659902864182012-03-22T10:58:08.660-04:002012-03-22T10:58:08.660-04:00If Garrity does not apply to a public employee, wh...If Garrity does not apply to a public employee, why would anyone in their right mind ever talk to an investigator from the Inspector General's Office? These 5 individuals cooperated with the Inspector General during the investigating of another ODNR employee. None of them had any reason to believe that they would or could be charged with any crimes. If they were the subjects of a criminal investigation they would be provided with a Miranda warning giving them the right to remain silent. That was not the case here because they believed that they were required, as a requirement of their job, to provide information to the Inspector General in the investigation of another ODNR employee. That the investigator concluded that there was collusion and obstruction of justice between these individuals because they did not process the matter criminally is ludicrous and ignorant. The net result will have a chilling effect on the ability of the Inspector General to conduct investigations. I am an attorney, and as this case currently stands, I will never advise any public employee to provide information to the Inspector General in any investigation without the benefit of a Garrity warning.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.com