It wasn't me. You can't prove anything.


2009-03-11

Cop Fiction


I heard a story this morning about a couple guys who were busted transporting marijuana plants. As the story progressed, I picked some bits up. The people were moving the plants after a break in to their house the previous night. I would like to know if the house thieves told the cops about the plants and the cops started survailing the suspects. If so, do the plant possessors have a case for dismissal because the police only started watching them after learning of their crime by the commission of an unrelated crime?

That is not entrapment. There is a name for finding out about one crime by the act of another unrelated crime. I can't think of it. I'm not a lawyer. This is a legitimate way to bust people I believe, but this situation could be worse.

When I put my writer's hat on (fiction) I envision the cops rousting a known hose thief and coaxing him to hit this known house of ill-plant-growing repute in order to find out if they are indeed growing marijuana.

This would make a much better story than say, the idiots were transporting the plants in an open pickup right down main street. You know, past the police station. That would make for too short fiction. Hasn't every cop and lawyer show in history done this same plot to death? I would try to think of examples, but it is just plane cliché.

This brings up a question I've had for a long time. Why is there so much lawyer and cop fiction? The genera I'm really sick of is writers writing about writing. The next is lawyer and cop stories. I do not have a problem with them on a philosophical level. I'm just sick to death of them. I include CSI and investigative shows under that umbrella.

I remember a show about a bus driver that was pretty good called The Honeymooners. Is there another profession or industry besides the two above that has nearly as many active stories written and produced about them? I think not. It seems everything is about writers, actors, producers, cops, lawyers, and criminals.


No comments: