Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Why police lie under oath

nytimes.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

31–40 of 130 posts

Re: Why police lie under oath

#31

Post by Anechoic »

dlokshin wrote: post #28
inuhj wrote: post #20

I was arrested when I was 18 after a guy I was with was caught selling mdma at a gathering in the desert. The police report was filled with lies. The officers approached me during the night(it was 10F) and asked to sit in my car. I was having a heart to heart with my girlfriend but obliged because they were obviously cold and being welcoming is part of that subculture. They made some lewd inappropriate comments about…

Wholeheartedly agree with the erosion of personal freedoms in the favor of laws made by people 'who know better.' Speeding is a perfect example--any law that 80% of people on the freeway break is a terrible law.

any law that 80% of people on the freeway break is a terrible law.

They are actually supposed to be set so that 80-90% of the people are obeying the limit (see MUTCD), but that often results in limits that are perceived as being too high by communities.

Re: Why police lie under oath

#32

Post by ryanmarsh »

My brother is in prison for murder. He did it and confessed to it. Still, during the trial the detectives saw fit to lie under oath, and bring forth evidence of his character (his diary) obtained illegally (they lied and said it was obtained via a neighbor who found it in a trash can in his house 0_o). All of this even though they had an open and shut case. It blew my mind that in a case that they had in the bag and where the evidence of the crime itself was enough to put him away forever they still did all of that. The story of the diary was especially ridiculous. It's not like the detectives told some whoppers just to make things easier on themselves. They lied about all sorts of small things, like how his arrest actually happened. From that I learned to fear the system. If they'll do that with a slam dunk case, what will they do to get a conviction when the case is a tough one? How many men has this state (Texas) executed as a result of this system?

Re: Why police lie under oath

#33

Post by rosser »

lutusp wrote: post #25
pasbesoin wrote: post #22

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There are already laws against perjury, and in many cases, IIRC, it is a felony. Ironic, isn't it, that prosecutors are unwilling to pursue all these potential felony convictions...

Lawyers tell me that judges rarely prosecute lying under oath, they just rule against the liars. The reason? If a person is accused of lying under oath, what's to stop him from lying more during the perjury trial? He's already accused of that crime, so more lies makes little difference. This is why perjury trials are so rare. Also, "perjury", strictly defined, means testimony that's both material to the issues and le…

How does the result of committing perjury ("a miscarriage of justice") factor into whether or not it's been committed? AIUI (IANAL), perjury requires three conditions be met: a materially false statement (1) made with intent to deceive (2) while under oath or affirmation (3).

Can you provide a citation or point to some case law for my edification, please?

Re: Why police lie under oath

#34

Post by politician »

gonehome wrote: post #26
siphor wrote: post #24

The whole system is blatantly fucked up and I'm more stunned by people's non-chalant reaction or 'it's the law reaction'. I live in a small town in New Jersey where my mom works for the town.. recently there was a police 'strike' around contract negotiations, where, to prove the town should give them a raise they stopped writing tickets to show the town how much money the police department makes them. What this means…

I generally agree with this, but it gets tricky when you factor in social services. If a society decides that it should support health or medical services with public funds then there is a line of logic that conditions based on that support (such as a seatbelt laws, drug laws, or even banning soda) should be allowed. I don't agree with this, but if I was arguing for that side that would be how I'd frame it. The seatb…

Wow, it never occurred to me that the seatbelt law is particularly weird given motorcycles.

Re: Why police lie under oath

#35

Post by jjoonathan »

mc32 wrote: post #29
jlgreco wrote: post #19

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Forget banned, they should be jailed, if not worse. They are undermining the entire legitimacy of the justice system, a cornerstone of our society. There are few worse crimes than undermining our ability to punish crime itself. Extraordinary responsibility should be balanced with extraordinary liability.

>Extraordinary responsibility should be balanced with extraordinary liability. I agree on principle. I think it's quite corrupt and defeatist to think otherwise, but on the other hand they are just people --as fallible as anyone. Other than watchmen for the watchmen ad infinitum, I don't know that this kind of problem would ever be eradicated. (something like Google Glass for the police could work, if people allow th…

> if people allow that police work necessitate some ugliness at times

The silent majority can and does realize this. Proof: http://mashable.com/2013/02/01/reddit-atlanta-mall-manager-t...

I've seen this happen a number of times on reddit. Someone claims police brutality, the thread escalates to the main page, then eventually dies down with the top few posts taking a cool-headed stance. In fact, there have been times when I have found my own opinion on the less moderate side of the hivemind's consensus, and I consider myself fairly trigger-shy when it comes to criticizing the police for doing their job (possibly because I've never been on the wrong side of an arrest).

I've heard the claim repeated many times that "democratic oversight" could never work because people, in general, are too soft-hearted to understand the realities of policework. It just doesn't ring true to me: if anything, people tend to ignore violence if it has nothing to do with them.

Re: Why police lie under oath

#37

Post by ChuckMcM »

My sister in law is a public defender, she has managed to get cops that lie under oath fired. We're not talking capital crimes here, we're talking stupid traffic citations where the officer would rather lie than admit they made a bad call.

Her belief is that lying is like cocaine, you use it once to get through the case because you know that even though its not strictly the truth the right thing will happen, and then you use it because you really didn't prepare enough, and suddenly its not a 'big deal' in your mind, after all these are people committing crimes right? We're protecting the 'good' people from these scumbags. And you lose yourself.

Exceptionally sad.

Re: Why police lie under oath

#38

Post by gridaphobe »

gonehome wrote: post #26
siphor wrote: post #24

The whole system is blatantly fucked up and I'm more stunned by people's non-chalant reaction or 'it's the law reaction'. I live in a small town in New Jersey where my mom works for the town.. recently there was a police 'strike' around contract negotiations, where, to prove the town should give them a raise they stopped writing tickets to show the town how much money the police department makes them. What this means…

I generally agree with this, but it gets tricky when you factor in social services. If a society decides that it should support health or medical services with public funds then there is a line of logic that conditions based on that support (such as a seatbelt laws, drug laws, or even banning soda) should be allowed. I don't agree with this, but if I was arguing for that side that would be how I'd frame it. The seatb…

Interesting point about motorcycles. I wonder though, would motorcycles actually benefit from seatbelts? In an accident a car will provide a substantial amount of protection to the driver, so it's in the driver's interest to be fastened in place. Perhaps it's actually better for the motorcyclist to be separated from the bike as opposed to bring dragged along..

Re: Why police lie under oath

#39

Post by rdtsc »

mc32 wrote: post #29
jlgreco wrote: post #19

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Forget banned, they should be jailed, if not worse. They are undermining the entire legitimacy of the justice system, a cornerstone of our society. There are few worse crimes than undermining our ability to punish crime itself. Extraordinary responsibility should be balanced with extraordinary liability.

>Extraordinary responsibility should be balanced with extraordinary liability. I agree on principle. I think it's quite corrupt and defeatist to think otherwise, but on the other hand they are just people --as fallible as anyone. Other than watchmen for the watchmen ad infinitum, I don't know that this kind of problem would ever be eradicated. (something like Google Glass for the police could work, if people allow th…

> but on the other hand they are just people -- as fallible as anyone.

Responsibilities, privileges, and risks should be clearly presented to anyone applying for the position.

Imagine, for example, we applied the same argument to ATC controllers. "Oh they are just human, so they let the planes collide once in a while. No biggie. Maybe 10 days paid vacation" -- No way, right? There would be talks of manslaughter charges, putting better processes in place. Shorter shifts.

I can see "they are just people" excuse being used for those who are involuntarily stuck in the situation. Police works is still voluntary employment.

Also don't buy the "just a few bad cases" excuse. It is not just those few cops that are corrupt that are bad, everyone who sees, but doesn't say anything, is also part of the "spoiled bunch". I would guess most cops by now have seen their colleagues do questionable things and didn't say anything. So by this definition there are very few "good cops"

Re: Why police lie under oath

#40

Post by [deleted] »

dlokshin wrote: post #28
inuhj wrote: post #20

I was arrested when I was 18 after a guy I was with was caught selling mdma at a gathering in the desert. The police report was filled with lies. The officers approached me during the night(it was 10F) and asked to sit in my car. I was having a heart to heart with my girlfriend but obliged because they were obviously cold and being welcoming is part of that subculture. They made some lewd inappropriate comments about…

Wholeheartedly agree with the erosion of personal freedoms in the favor of laws made by people 'who know better.' Speeding is a perfect example--any law that 80% of people on the freeway break is a terrible law.

[deleted]
Post reply on HN