Why Police Lie Under Oath

Why Police Lie Under Oath

...Peter Keane, a former San Francisco Police commissioner, wrote an article in The San Francisco Chronicle decrying a police culture that treats lying as the norm: “Police officer perjury in court to justify illegal dope searches is commonplace. One of the dirty little not-so-secret secrets of the criminal justice system is undercover narcotics officers intentionally lying under oath. It is a perversion of the American justice system that strikes directly at the rule of law. Yet it is the routine way of doing business in courtrooms everywhere in America...”

Police departments have been rewarded in recent years for the sheer numbers of stops, searches and arrests. In the war on drugs, federal grant programs like the Edward Byrne Memorial Justice Assistance Grant Program have encouraged state and local law enforcement agencies to boost drug arrests in order to compete for millions of dollars in funding. Agencies receive cash rewards for arresting high numbers of people for drug offenses, no matter how minor the offenses or how weak the evidence. Law enforcement has increasingly become a numbers game. And as it has, police officers’ tendency to regard procedural rules as optional and to lie and distort the facts has grown as well.

http://www.nytimes.com/2013/02/03....html?_r=0

QUESTION: Should police get more leeway in court given the challenges they face in maintaining law and order in today's society or should we continue to insist on honesty above all else in the criminal justice system -- even if it means fewer arrests?

What do you consider "more leeway" to be?

Perjury is illegal for all.

/thread

It's not commonly prosecuted though, especially for members of law enforcement. If the practice of lying in court is indeed as pervasive as suggested here, should our justice system change to make it less acceptable for a cop to offer false testimony?

There always have been and always will be LEO's who are less than honest who have or will lie on the stand, and that is absolutely wrong and is not to be tolerated. Those individuals should be charged with perjury if caught and dismissed from their employment as that is inexcusable.

However, do you believe lawyers and the defendants don't lie in court? Do you believe some LEO's lie more than defendants and liars lawyers?

Your opinion article fails to mention the fact that lawyers routinely lie, smear, manipulate and distort the facts and will do anything to get their guilty client acquitted.

Your opinion article also fails to mention the fact that defendants will not hesitate to lie under oath in a court of law, and such lies are encouraged by their liars lawyers.

Your thread which is based on an op-ed piece is extremely one-sided.

When viewed nationwide, I would submit that it is not as pervasive as suggested here, and it is not acceptable to offer false testimony to begin with.

The writer of the article seems to be trying very hard to make it sound as if they all are doing it, which is not the case. It is a very one-sided article and a one-sided dishonest opinion.

So we're supposed to believe your opinion wrt how "routinely" this happens?

Bullshit. That's nothing more than your own personal (and highly biased) opinion trying to masquerade as a so-called "fact".

Good thing your extremely one-sided opinions are here to balance things out.

The writer of your posts seems to be trying very hard to make it sound as if [all lawyers] are doing it, which is not the case. It is a very one-sided post & a one-sided dishonest opinion.

So we shouldn't make such blanket assumptions about cops, but only about lawyers... Hypocrisy much?

You might as well. My opinion is just as valid as some op-ed writer...

See above. I fully admit my bias. Do you admit that the op-ed writer is extremely biased?

I've seen police officers testify on the stand, and I've seen liars lawyers "in action" in the courtroom.

I've seen liars lawyers (some, absolutely not all) lie, distort and manipulate in court many times, and I can very honestly say that I have never personally observed an LEO make a statement that I have known to be intentionally false.

Do we know of an obvious conflict of interest wrt the op-ed writer like being a former cop?

Without such a similarity, I would err on the side of saying the writer's opinion is *more* valid because it lacks such bias.

Do you admit that what you claim are "facts" are nothing more than your own one-sided opinions?

Jusy because someone presents evidence that you don't like doesn't make them "extremely biased". Although it is a convenient deflection...

I've seen pigs police lie on the stand. I've seen pigs police lie to the prosecutor handling the case. Guess that makes us even...

Thanks for the continued reminder of why anecdotal evidence is the lowest form of "evidence".



I've seen pigs police lie on the stand. I've seen pigs police lie to the prosecutor handling the case. Guess that makes us even...