USA Today investigation: prosecutors rely on 1000s of lying cops. Last month, I wrote about Jacob. Challenged his arrest. Judge found cops “implausible.” Then same prosecutor continued to rely on them. Didn’t disclose anything to next victim of misconduct.nytimes.com/2019/09/25/opi…
“The judge found the officers’ testimony “implausible,” holding that the search violated Jacob’s constitutional rights, and granted Jacob’s motion to suppress the firearm. Soon after, the prosecution dismissed all charges.”
“A month later, however, I learned that the same prosecutor was relying on the same team of officers to prosecute another man. He, too, was charged with possession of a gun found under similar circumstances.”
“A week after that, I passed by the officer whose testimony under oath the judge had rejected as “implausible.” He was sitting in court, waiting for another judge to sign off on a search warrant — to enter and search someone’s home — sworn out by him.”
“The message that the system sent to this officer and continues to send to others is clear: You can do anything and the system will not hold you accountable. In fact, the system will protect you.”
“Fortunately, there is a growing national conversation among forward-thinking DAs to take police accountability more seriously. DAs like @Krasner4DA in Philly & @KimGardnerSTL in St. Louis have “do not call” lists of officers based on findings of incredibility or misconduct.”
“If more prosecutors start rejecting arrests from bad officers, a message can be sent & ability to continue hurting people can be stymied. A system w/ no disincentive for misbehavior & no accountability for those w/ power to take away a person’s liberty is profoundly dangerous.”
