Is a minor's request for his probation officer's presence inconsistent with his present willingness to discuss his case freely and completely with the police?

In this case we must decide whether a minor's request for his probation officer's presence "reasonably appears inconsistent with a present willingness" concurrently to "discuss his case freely and completely with police . . . ." (People v. Randall, supra, 1 Cal.3d 948, 956, 83 Cal.Rptr. 658, 663, 464 P.2d 114, 119.) In People v. Burton, supra, 6 Cal.3d 375, 99 Cal.Rptr. 1, 491 P.2d 793, we held that a minor's request to consult his parents invoked the minor's Fifth Amendment privilege. As we stated there: "It would certainly severely restrict the 'protective devices' required by Miranda in cases where the suspects are minors if the only call for help which is to be deemed an invocation of the privilege is the call for an attorney. It is fatuous to assume that a minor in custody will be [21 Cal.3d 476] in a position to call an attorney for assistance and it is unrealistic to attribute no significance to his call for help from the only person to whom he normally looks a parent or guardian. It is common knowledge that this is the normal

Page 361