Posted on 12/18/2007 9:37:29 AM PST by Khankrumthebulgar
Correction. Not until you are accused of a crime.
Just for fun someone should call the cops and accuse <1/1,000,000th% of child rape. Then we'll see just how big a fan he is of phony evidence.
{Lying by cops is now acceptable?}
Lying by cops has always been acceptable. I was once interviewed by an FBI agent. He went to great lengths to warn me that lying to the FBI was a Federal crime punishable by a long time in jail. I asked him what the penalty was if HE lied to ME? He was stunned! Deer in the head lights stare, speechless.
Interview over.
Its ironic that advocates of special rights for criminals are so violent.
Yep, and it will take a long time to sort out. Right now there's a public inquiry going on here because a medical examiner turned out to be an incompetent fraudster and now a lot of murder cases he worked, some going back decades, have been reopened with at least two convictions overturned so far.
Asking the police to not submit fake evidence is not “special rights for criminals.”
You want someone to be raped so you can accuse me.
Why would that be your first choice unless you think criminals should have special rights over victims?
So they are allowed to use fake documents to induce a confession but are allowed to say the fake the confession founded on a lie is real.
When you have defendants who consider the unlimited financial resources of the state vs their limited ability to mount a defense, the clearly shocks the conscience.
No confession should be induced by fraudulent evidence.
If this is fake what else has the officer “accidentally” testified to? How many other times did this “expert” produce a report?
people do not understand, prosecutorial misconduct is SOP!
Wow. You missed the point. And given your comments on this thread I’m not surprised. You get a stiffy at the thought of people in the slammer, and nothing’s going to stop you.
I much prefer the finding the actual criminals, convicting them using actual evidence and locking them away forever, than just finding some dumb kid, faking the evidence and chuckling as he’s hauled off.
Cops and DAs who are dirty should serve the same sentence an innocent subject would have received if they had been guilty.
“Rather it is a pattern across the country of Police and Prosecutor’s misconduct.”
And let’s not forget: while the police and prosecutors are busy railroading the innocent, the actual guilty parties go free - and catching them and convicting them gets less and less likely as time goes by.
Violence and sex.
Are you connected to this case?
The blood draw was actually filmed. At first, the technician asked to get the blood sample from his finger. The doctor asked instead to have the blood drawn from his forearm, which was his right, since he volunteered to take the test. He wore a shirt and sweater which could not be pulled up over his elbow.
Since the doctor passed the test, the accuser's reputation was ruined. Years later, the rape victim hired a PI to obtain some DNA from the doctor. The PI broke into the doctor's car and stole a tube of used Chapstick. A private lab tested the DNA and found a match. The illegally obtained evidence was presented to the police, who reopened the case. The doctor was finally convicted, eight years later.
Not only have you completely missed the point of my comment, as well as of the central truth in this case, you’re now slipping into bizarre theories and accusations.
Simply put, people who don’t care that the police are using fake evidence to convict innocent people do damage to real law enforcement and jurisprudence. Perhaps they should experience such treatment firsthand if they are so confident that the police have psychic powers that ensure they always arrest the actual perpetrator.
I have not spoken to any ex-cop that won’t admit that the police lie anytime they think it will help them to get a conviction. Some have laughed about it. Real funny unless you are the one put in jail because of it I guess...
Note to self: Next time I use a “lie detector” consisting of a metal collander and a copy machine that spits out “He’s lying” after every answer, don’t put the documents into evidence.
“Why would that be your first choice unless you think criminals should have special rights over victims?”
An accused person is not a criminal. There are certainly cases where the accused receive inappropriate treatment and where victims do not get justice.
Ram rodding fake evidence thru the system is not the answer. Fake evidence does not equal justice.
Absolutely. I can't believe the police department declined to say whether the detective had been punished. He should have been fired, arrested, convicted, and sent to prison for a couple decades, with his accumulated assets and pension paid to the person he perjured himself to try to convict falsely.
What about "victims' rights"? Well, in this case it does not appear there was a victim - a severely mentally challenged woman, without the faculties to understand the consequences of her actions, made up a story. But in cases where there are victims, how are those victims better served by convicting the wrong person? There's no such thing as the "perfect crime" and rarely are criminals smart enough even to avoid leaving enormous amounts of evidence. The police don't need to make things up if they have the right suspect. Faking the evidence only lets them convict the innocent, while the person who actually harmed the victim goes free.
“...and a copy machine that spits out “He’s lying” after every answer...”
Please tell me that didn’t happen.
There are so many laws, you can't help but commit a crime.
Sounds like your dad is a wise man.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.