[BartSimpson]

Thanos,

Holding police accountable to the very same laws that they enforce is not a form of injustice.

[BeaverFever]

Thanos Thanos:

BeaverFever BeaverFever:

An officer who doesn't break the law has nothing to fear complete and accurate notes. If an officer makes a mistake on the job that compromises the intergrity of his arrest and testimony, his lawyer should certainly NOT be able to edit mention of the mistake from his notes just so he can save face and convict a potentially innocent person.

Would you also agree then that a defense lawyer shouldn't be able to use a minor technicality or discrepancy in the officer's notes to bamboozle a jury or judge to have a violent and dangerous client released from custody? Just wondering if there's any level playing field here with legal and ethical obligations on all sides or is all of this just another round of lets-crucify-the-cops.

Id like to refer you legal precedent set in the case of Apples v. Oranges.

Clear difference between what you suggest (both sides arguing over interpretation of the facts in front of a judge and jury) and and the topic at hand (1 individual secretly altering the facts behind closed doors).

But to answer your Q conceptually, in the face of incompetent or corrupt police, better that the justice system acquit the guilty instead of convict the innocent.

[uwish]

BartSimpson BartSimpson:

DrCaleb DrCaleb:

stratos stratos:

Exactly. During my law enforcement career we were often told to be careful with what we put in our notes and I got into the habit of having an uninvolved officer read over my report to ensure that it flowed smoothly.

We were also told how to treat our notebooks if they were ever called into evidence by a lawyer. All pages dealing with the suspect were to be left alone. All other pages we could staple together with as many staples as we wished. I found you could put over 100 staples per page.

And that's why trust in the police is waning.

Exactly. Part of why I'm not getting any hours with my agency these days is because I handed over my unedited notes on a shooting where I showed up after the fact. Seems that some of what I wrote down had been excised from the notes of the other deputies present and a security camera at a nearby Costco substantiated what was in my notes...and the lawyers were bird-dogged to the security camera because I had observed it and suggested that the video evidence be recovered.

Seriously, even though I'm hardly a career LEO my limited exposure to the inside of the system has left me very jaded. I used to be adamantly pro-law enforcement (as my old posts will indicate) but since the past few years I know better. It's also been pretty sad that I've had a couple of run-ins with other agencies where their guys were way out of line and they dropped it when they saw my badge. Which makes me wonder just how many regular citizens end up with citations or in jail just because some thug-with-a-badge is in a bad mood.

Some of you people constantly wonder why I advocate for an armed citizenry when you supposedly have the police to 'protect' you (and they have no legal obligation to do that) and I contend that anymore the police are who you need to be most worried about.

A criminal can kill you and they'll probably not get away with it. A cop can outright murder you and experience proves that the whole system will line up to cover him and protect him.

Well said...