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

Government Chemist Tampered With 40,000 Cases

filmingcops.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

71–80 of 173 posts

Re: Government Chemist Tampered With 40,000 Cases

#71

Post by [deleted] »

trekky1700 wrote: post #57
msandford wrote: post #37

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Superficially I have to agree with you that I look like a hypocrite. The government is the body which has a monopoly on violence. In other words, they're the only people who can legally do things to people that nobody would volunteer to have done to them, like going to prison. It's the government's job to provide courts through which disputes can be resolved, since you aren't supposed to take matters into your own ha…

By god, is the human race so savage that we resort to killing so quickly. This is a life, something some people would consider priceless. Not something you can view arithmetically, calculating the hours in damage caused versus somebody's time left.

[deleted]

Re: Government Chemist Tampered With 40,000 Cases

#72

Post by bayesianhorse »

Remarkable is the motivation of this chemist. No substantial money has changed hands, and she probably hasn't even received a promotion due to her higher conviction rates. She probably did it for the recognition or out of some perverse sense of justice. That's actually good news, because it means this case is probably very special.

Re: Government Chemist Tampered With 40,000 Cases

#73

Post by Crito »

eps wrote: post #30
alexeisadeski3 wrote: post #4

Those convicted should be released pending retrial immediately.

Judging by the article she wasn't fabricating evidence, but rather she was "strengthening" what she was given. All her cases clealry need to be re-evaluated, but unconditionally releasing everyone convicted is hardly a sensible option.

There is no way of knowing of that "strengthened" evidence was the difference between any given person walking or going to jail. They all need to be retried, and imprisoning them until that can happen is an injustice. Give them all the opportunity to make bail again until new trials can be arranged.

If the circumstances of their crime make it such that they cannot be retried (for example, all the substantial evidence was bloodwork that was corrupted and cannot be taken again, many months or years later) then they should be released. Guessing that they actually are bad guys isn't good enough.

Re: Government Chemist Tampered With 40,000 Cases

#74

Post by DigitalSea »

goldenkey wrote: post #34
DigitalSea wrote: post #33

The chemist involved was believed to have tainted over 40,000 cases over the duration of about 10 years and they'll only get 3 to 5 years? Seriously? Weev who was involved in the arguable AT&T data breach got a 41 month jail term, people who've been caught selling counterfeit DVD's have been given similar sentences. Dookhan should serve the sentences that she was responsible for, every single case. If anything, I thi…

Why is your focus on the chemist despite the fact that she was basically bribed? This is a conspiracy and the prosecutors and DA should be investigated. But of course, they're going to be the ones bearing the case against her, and taking the spotlight off themselves. And the only ones who will correctly investigate the DA/prosecutors would be the FBI, I really doubt anything is really going to be done here that will…

The chemist could have easily spoken out. Protections would have been put into place to ensure that she and her family wouldn't have been harmed. Obviously blackmail and fear plays a part here, but evident by the fact she didn't seem to be upset about being caught nor deny anything, sounds like a classic case of a sociopath (or even part sociopath). How could you live with yourself knowing for ten years you've ruined countless lives? Whether she believes it or not, she had her chance and the blame sadly does lay with her and the prosecutor for being complacent in the crimes taking place.

Re: Government Chemist Tampered With 40,000 Cases

#75

Post by jules »

gergles wrote: post #51
marze wrote: post #43

What about the prosecutors involved in requesting faked evidence? One would expect some long sentences.

I would expect them never being allowed to be a prosecutor ever again. There's plenty of other legal jobs they can have, but they abused the public's trust too much to ever hold this one ever again.

Yea, no. How about prison time? If you knowingly try to subvert the process that is there to keep innocent people from being found guilty, for personal gain, then you deserve a greater punishment than having to look for another job.

Re: Government Chemist Tampered With 40,000 Cases

#76

Post by mixmax »

austinz wrote: post #60

I find it hard to believe she'd be the only person to do these sorts of things. How many other people across the US in similar positions are surreptitiously tampering with the legal system right now? And how can we find them?

your hypothesis is backed up by this story claiming that at least one other chemist has also been tainting evidence and that 180.000 cases now need to be reviewed.

http://filmingcops.com/breaking-another-government-chemist-a...

Re: Government Chemist Tampered With 40,000 Cases

#77

Post by Crito »

[deleted] wrote: post #71
trekky1700 wrote: post #57

Earlier quoted context omitted.

By god, is the human race so savage that we resort to killing so quickly. This is a life, something some people would consider priceless. Not something you can view arithmetically, calculating the hours in damage caused versus somebody's time left.

[deleted]

I don't think that attempting to maximize suffering is a good idea. If you go down that path, then finding creative ways to lawyer our way around "cruel and unusual" will become the name of the game (say for example, claiming that a plainly cruel punishment is acceptable so long as we do it a lot, making it not unusual. This has been argued before on HN...[0])

I honestly find the suggestion that we should use life imprisonment instead of execution because it is more cruel to be far more disturbing than suggestions that we should just use execution. You are proposing that we do something that you consider more cruel then execution... I'm not good with that.

[0] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=5951315

Re: Government Chemist Tampered With 40,000 Cases

#79

Post by honzzz »

The chemist did something horrible and I am not trying to justify her actions. But I think that the true culprit of this is the system of incentives typical for US penal system. If the prosecutors are rewarded based on the number of convictions and prisons can be privately owned and prisoners can be exploited for private gain... something like this is inevitable. If sending people to prison is profitable business there is always going to be someone who decides to expand their 'business' by making sure as many people as possible get sent to prison no matter whether they are guilty or not.

Re: Government Chemist Tampered With 40,000 Cases

#80

Post by yetanotherphd »

DanBC wrote: post #56
3pt14159 wrote: post #49

Earlier quoted context omitted.

No. It is simpler than you are making it out to be. If you say "I did the test that proves it is heroin" and you didn't, and you are smart enough to be a chemist, and you see some poor guy get put in jail, then you are evil.

Okay, sure, whatever. But she didn't think she was being evil. She somehow persuaded herself that what she was doing was okay. That's the interesting bit. Why do people go along with things that they know are wrong. She wasn't alone in this, there are a bunch of other people involved too. And it's similar for other frauds and deceptions. She didn't wake up and think "Fuck it, I'm going to jail thousands of innocent p…

I think you need to dig a bit deeper than the rationalizations people give for their actions.

There is a difference between a person who genuinely considers what they are doing to be OK, and people who are actually rationlizing things they know deep down to be wrong.

I think your implicit assumption that anyone might have acted like she did, in her position, is wrong. Both a person's innate (not necessarily genetic) moral goodness, and the circumstances a person finds themselves in, play a role in how they are act.

In trying to avoid one kind of simplistic viewpoint, I think you are falling for the opposite one.

Post reply on HN