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

101–110 of 173 posts

Re: Government Chemist Tampered With 40,000 Cases

#101

Post by CamperBob2 »

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…

But she didn't think she was being evil. She somehow persuaded herself that what she was doing was okay.

And Hitler, Stalin and Mao didn't?

Clue time: Nobody thinks they're the bad guy.

Re: Government Chemist Tampered With 40,000 Cases

#102

Post by noonespecial »

She did not act alone. It is abundantly clear that the prosecutors knew that there was some funny business going on. There are extremely perverse incentives for prosecutors to cheat by any means possible for career advancement.

The only way to fix this is to set it up so that "getting a conviction" in no way whatsoever enhances a prosecutor's career.

Re: Government Chemist Tampered With 40,000 Cases

#103

Post by aeturnum »

goldenkey wrote: post #67
aeturnum wrote: post #63

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I agree that the prosecutors are probably guilty of some kind of misconduct. However, I think the email you quote is the kind we would see either way. We expect prosecutors to be unabashed in their pursuit of convictions - it's their job. They should cajole and berate, in turn, people who help or hinder their cases. That may be a shitty model, but it's the model we use. We have a responsibility to only punish people…

Results should be impartial. Bribing the lab tech is not what I would call a fair and balanced process.

That email, unless pleasantries or enthusiasm count as bribes, would not be considered a bribe. It's just good practice to be polite to those who can help you. Perhaps we should legislate that prosecutors should be dour towards everyone they encounter, less a pleasant experience bias someone?

P.s. I realize that improper conduct by both parties is probable in this case, but the quoted email certainly does not cross the line.

Re: Government Chemist Tampered With 40,000 Cases

#104

Post by rayiner »

jjoonathan wrote: post #6

3-5 years?! THREE TO FIVE YEARS???!!! There are no words. Agents of the law need to be held more accountable for their actions than your average citizen, not less. This is disgusting.

It's a white collar crime and she's an educated person who isn't black or hispanic. That's not every factor behind the sentence, but it's an uncomfortably large subset of those factors.

Re: Government Chemist Tampered With 40,000 Cases

#105

Post by sejje »

DanBC wrote: post #95
yetanotherphd wrote: post #80

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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)…

I look at her and I think "I would never do anything like that!" But is that really true or am I just rationalising with the benefit of hindsight? There was an article on HN about a man running a family business who started defrauding money. It needed the cooperation of other people. Rather than creating any elaborate lies he simply told them, and asked them for help. (I can't remember any more about it, which is mak…

If you go deep enough, some chemical reactions managed her thoughts and behaviors, and negotiated your reaction, as well.

At some point people have to be held accountable and called names like evil. The idea that she can talk herself into believing otherwise is a travesty, mostly because it allowed it to continue.

I think the word evil was invented to describe people exactly like this woman.

Re: Government Chemist Tampered With 40,000 Cases

#106

Post by sejje »

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.

I think it's far more sensible than imprisoning innocents.

I think all these cases should be worked within a very brief period or the convictions should be suspended until they are.

Re: Government Chemist Tampered With 40,000 Cases

#108

Post by sejje »

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.

I would want, but not expect, far stiffer punishment than that.

This isn't "you suck at your job," this is "you are an evil person, and willingly have broken the law that you know so well to destroy the lives of others in an attempt to further yourself."

Re: Government Chemist Tampered With 40,000 Cases

#109

Post by FreezerburnV »

msandford wrote: post #93
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.

If taking a life is savage, how much more savage is it to systematically, wrongly deny people their freedom for the sake of promotions? Is that any less barbaric than denying people their freedom because some people needed their labor in order to enjoy comfortable lives? When that used to happen it was called slavery and from what I can tell it's been abolished worldwide (or nearly so) because we've mostly agreed it'…

On kind of a tangent to the actual topic of the article being discussed, but I saw you mention how you think slavery has been abolished worldwide. I'd like to correct that thinking and let you know that slavery is still a very active thing, with millions of slaves around the globe, and people being captured even in the USA as sex slaves to be sold around the globe. The nearest count I know is at least 27 million people still exist as slaves.

http://enditmovement.com/

Re: Government Chemist Tampered With 40,000 Cases

#110

Post by rayiner »

DanBC wrote: post #23

This kind of case is fascinating. The woman wasn't evil. But her actions really are. It's very easy, too easy, to say that she is evil because what she did was so bad. But that's lazy, and it misses the interesting stuff. How do people get caught up in performing such horrendous acts? There's a bunch of cognitive stuff going on, and some subtle manipulation. I suspect that something similar is how we end up with app…

How did she justify these things to herself?

1) Most of the people probably were guilty of the crimes they were accused of. A technically faulty conviction means legal innocence, but not actual innocence.[1] Everyone deserves due process, obviously, and "probably" isn't good enough to convict someone, but it is something that can help someone like this rationalize their actions. "I'm just helping get a conviction this guy deserves anyway."

2) Like most people involved in the criminal justice system, these are not sympathetic people. Prior convictions, prior jail time, gang affiliation, etc. You can imagine her rationalizing by saying that even if the accused weren't guilty of the specific crimes against them, they were guilty of something.

Obviously I'm not trying to justify the actions of the chemist here. The criminal justice system has due process and protections and those things are important. But the fact of the matter is that most people who are brought through it are not "good people." That's just the nature of the system. The police don't arrest random law-abiding middle class people and pin crimes on them. For people who work in police work and prosecution, it's a constant parade of various degrees of unsympathetic characters. That's the psychological environment in which this chemist was working. And again, without justifying her actions, if you're trying to understand her psychology, that's where you need to start.

The Nietzsche quote is appropriate here: "And when you gaze long into an abyss the abyss also gazes into you."

[1] This is something I think people have a tough time grappling with. I have friends who do work on wrongful convictions and prisoners rights. It's extremely important, valuable work. But often their work involves defective convictions, not people who are truly innocent (as a matter of actual fact, not as a matter of legal determination).

Post reply on HN