On television crime dramas, prosecutors always seem to be around when police interrogate murder suspects.

In the real world, that's not usually the case.

But should it have happened 11 days ago in Troy?

The Friday, Dec. 29, arrest of two Schenectady men in a quadruple slaying at 158 Second Ave. in Troy the previous week was followed by suspicions of a possibly improper police interrogation. Its contents would be inadmissible if, for example, the questioning continued after either of the men asked for an attorney.

Such suspicions are nothing new in the Collar City. In 2006, a city councilman asked for a public review into allegations that city police were denying suspects their rights to counsel. In 2014, the state's highest court reversed the 2009 murder conviction of Adrian Thomas in the death of his 4-year-old son, finding Troy police used "highly coercive deceptions" and "cajoled" Thomas into confessing.

And in the recent murder trial of Johnny Oquendo, prosecutors could not use some statements he made to police because he had invoked his right to counsel. Oquendo was ultimately convicted of murdering his stepdaughter, 21-year-old Noel Alkaramla, and dumping her body in a suitcase in the Hudson River.

In the current case, James White and Justin Mann have been charged with killing Brandi Mells, 22, Shanta Myers, 36, and her children Jeremiah, 11, and Shanise, 5. White, 38, and Mann, 24, were indicted Friday on first- and second-degree murder charges in addition to counts of burglary, robbery and possession of stolen property.

Initially, Mann was sent to jail on a parole violation. District Attorney Joel Abelove's office held off on a preliminary hearing. At issue was the admissibility of a statement Mann allegedly made to a State Police investigator and a Troy police detective.

Through a spokesman, Abelove on Monday refused to say if any member of his office had monitored city and State Police during their interrogation of the suspects. A Troy police spokesman also declined comment.

There are inherent issues in prosecutors playing the role of police.

"I have never had a DA become involved in the questioning of a defendant," said longtime Albany defense attorney Lee Kindlon. "It reeks of a conflict and, I would argue, the district attorney becomes less of an impartial advocate and instead becomes a witness."

But having a staff attorney involved in the questioning does offer some advantages.

Schenectady County District Attorney Robert Carney said his office does not sit in on police interviews as a matter of course, but has monitored some interviews when actively involved in the investigation.

"During breaks in the interview, an ADA may suggest a line of questioning that would illuminate elements of a crime that the interrogator hasn't focused on," Carney said. "An ADA might also focus on legal issues that may have come up during the interrogation that necessitate further questioning —such as an ambiguity as to whether counsel has been invoked."

Carney added: "It is not a problem if an ADA is not there as long as the interrogator is properly trained and follows established procedures. Now that we record all such interrogations, whatever happens in the room is preserved for all to see."