Re: **** tha police

On Sun, 27 Apr 2008 18:55:41 +0000 (UTC),
nospam@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
 (Paul Ciszek) wrote:

>
>In article <afe91454th9bqh3i997iuadca1nliblegu@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>,
>Tim  <Pleasedon'tspamme@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
>>On Sat, 26 Apr 2008 23:06:55 +0000, "Bill Bonde (
>>'the oblique allusion in lieu of the frontal
>>attack' )"  <tributyltinpaint@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
>>
>>>
>>>
>>>Greg Goss wrote:
>>>> 
>>>
>>>
>>>> There are far too many cases of police trying to suppress evidence
for
>>>> me to believe their story outright.
>>>>
>>>So you are saying when the police testify, the presumption should
>>>be against their verisimilitude?
>>
>>Even before that. Lying convincingly on the
>>witness stand is a skill they practice regularly.
>>In our adversarial system of "justice", its all
>>about winning and defeating the other side.
>
>It is called "testilying", and is indeed SOP.  Some years back, the
>then governor of Illinois put all scheduled executions on hold when
>irregularities in the system became to great to ignore.  One of the
>most egregious cases involved a murder that had been "recycled"--
>four men were tried for comitting a murder that two other men were
>already on death row for having comitted.  (And no, the scenario in
>which the four were guilty of the murder did not allow for the previous
>two also having comitted the same murder.)  In both cases, police
>officers testified under oath to the contradictory facts.

I sat in on most of the trial of one of our city's
finest for the execution style killing of a 19
year old girl while he was on the job.

There was nothing but cir***stantial evidence
because he probably used his recent forensic
evidence training to destroy it. The available
evidence could have been used just as readily to
convict other members of the force and I am still
not fully convinced that he did it or he acted
alone. He got 99 years after a second trial
because the community demanded a conviction.

The chief local investigator testified that he was
accurately quoted saying, "We could hang this one
on anyone."

The entire force testified and several of them
admitted to or were exposed by the defense as
having lied under oath. I believe that they did a
lot more lying that went unimpeached.

I was watching them very closely during their
testimony for any hints that they were bearing
false witness. I couldn't tell. There were some
civilian witnesses during the same trial whose
testimony was impeached. It was easy to tell. The
average person cannot maintain a falsehood under
intense questioning by a skilled attorney and the
defense attorney and prosecutor were among the
best. Cops can. They do it for a living and some
of them are as good at it as any actor.

My confidence in our justice system is gone. If
you are accused and you don't have the money for a
good defense, you might as well plead guilty and
throw yourself on the mercy of the court. I read
somewhere that innocent people get the longest
sentences because they fight the charges and
refuse to show remorse for the crime they didn't
commit.
-- 
Tim