Generic Legal Question: if one party in a civil suit hires a private investigator, is there anything illegal or against legal ethics if the PI misrepresents themselves while trying to gather information? Assume the PI is not impersonating a police officer or doing anything outright illegal in and of itself.
[This is inspired by a report that a judge is pissed off at Uber because they hired a PI who pretended to be a journalist in order to get information about the plaintiff in a civil suit against Uber’s CEO. I’m wondering exactly what reason a judge in that situation has to be pissed off. Not that I’m defending Uber, just curious about the general legal issue. I mean cops can lie all (almost) as much as they want]
Mods: since this is a generic legal question not asking advice on a particular situation, I thought GQ was the right forum. Obviously move it if you want
That’s a really interesting question. At first, I thought that of course PI’s shouldn’t be allowed to lie, but then you mentioned that cops are allowed to do just that.
Might there be a difference in terms of what at PI is allowed to lie about? For example, directly denying that they are a PI if asked versus using lies to explain their presence (e.g. claiming to be a tourist) versus lying about something relevant to the investigation, like claiming that the target is incapacitated in order to trick a relative into revealing his emergency directives.
Each state has different legal standards or licensing requirements, so it might vary (three states have no standards at all!). But the general rule of thumb is this: A PI is a private citizen, and therefore has all the same rights that a private citizen has. This is part of the reason people hire PI’s in the first place… They are not bound by some of the restrictions and laws of evidence that restrict police investigation. For example, a conversation between two private citizens does not require a Miranda Warning.
I don’t know the exact details of the case in question, but my take is this: As a private citizen, I am allowed to engage in conversation with anyone I choose. I may ask any question I choose, and it is up to the other person whether they wish to answer me. If I am later served a subpoena and asked to recall a portion of my conversation in a court of law, then I am obligated to do so… And if the person I talked to was somehow mistaken as to my identity or occupation, that’s not my problem. (The list of lies a private citizen is *not *allowed to tell is veeeery short.)
Now, having said all that, claiming to be a journalist to dig up dirt on a plaintiff in a court case is shady as shit. From a strictly moral perspective, this is dick move no matter how you slice it. That said, it is not actually illegal (unless their state has some legal restrictions I am not aware of). That may be why the judge is angry… The company is using PIs in a manner that is morally repugnant but not actually illegal, and so there is nothing the judge can actually do to sanction them.
The actual act of misrepresenting oneself in the course of an investigation is not only permitted but often essential. PIs, bail bondsmen, etc often rely on ruses, “social engineering” and straight-up lies to gain access to their target. I would love to know exactly how many fugitives over the years have confirmed their identity to a “flower deliveryman” just before they were arrested.
Couple of things … what the PI hears is generally not admissible in court as the PI’s testimony, that’s hearsay … also, the PI can be cross-examined and exposed as a liar … lying tongues deserve the court’s ire.
OTOP, I have no objection to a civil service processor dressing up as a UPS driver. “Package for you, sir, here …” and the deed is done.
Lawyers are bound by their code of ethics to always refrain from misrepresentations to the court, to the bar, and to the public. That rule applies to their employees too. Cops have ethics, but not that rule.
I am not a DA, but my sense is that a prosecutor similarly cannot direct a police officer to lie. Police running their own investigation would not be subject to legal ethics codes, though.