My Interview

Interviewing the person I did was very interesting, and proved to be quite helpful. I interviewed Justin Jiron. Justin prosecutes criminals in court for the state of Vermont, and he deals with cases about searching and the fourth amendment all the time. He knew a lot about the subject, which astonished me since its taken me forever to learn about my topic and in his career he has to know all of these things for so many other topics as well as the one I’m covering. Justin and I got to talking and he told me some things I did not come across in my previous research. One bit of what he talked about was that in the court of law, if an officer obtains evidence that violates the fourth amendment, the officer cannot hold the confiscated items against them in court. This is understandable because a person’s right to being protected from search and seizure, even if they have illegal material on them, is still their right, and officers should not be able to take that away from them unless they have reasonable suspicion. He also explained to me that a person who is unconstitutionally arrested does not have to but can consent to being searched of their person. This and the rest of the information Justin gave me will be very helpful and will most likely help me out a lot when writing my editorial later on.

I knew Justin worked in the court system somewhere, so I had to figure out what exactly he did. I found out that he prosecuted criminals for crimes such as search and seizure and I asked to set up an interview over the phone with him. He agreed and said he'd be more than happy to do so. So I called him up and we talked for a good bit of time. When interviewing Justin, he gave me well thought out answers and though it took me a second to write down the gist of it, my talk with him in my opinion went quite swell. He told me it sounded like I had done my research based on the questions I asked. I asked him a total of five questions, all of which took me a decent amount of time to think of, and he answered them with answers that sounded like they'd be pretty legitimate in the court of law. It was very interesting hearing the different scenarios he explained to me that related to my question. The hardest part I’d have to say for the whole interviewing experience was basically setting it up; from finding someone that would be a good source of information to even finding someone who also had the time. Overall I think it was quite enjoyable, basically I killed two birds with one stone in my interview because I got a lot of information on my topic and had a nice interesting conversation about subjects that relate to it.