It is obvious that lying by Law Enforcement is endemic, one need look no farther than the Crutcher Murder by Police which is only the most recent in a overwhelming litany of Police Murders, mostly of Black or Hispanic victims, where Officers have peddled clear and provable fabrications to escape justice for their heinous actions. What’s truly criminal is how often it succeeds.
Law Enforcement is not interested in Justice, it’s only interested in submission.
Another example of that is a recent report by the President’s Council of Advisors on Science and Technology which found most forensic tests commonly used to obtain convictions have no basis at all in scientific fact.
Prosecutors, from the Attorney General of the United States to the lowliest ADA, deny this finding and insist they will continue to use these methods, mostly because they can’t admit that the Justice system, and their personal judgement, is systemically biased and flawed. Innocent people, hundreds of them every day, are convicted of crimes they did not commit.
While the burden falls primarily on Minority communities, often to the extent that 80 or 90% of them have a criminal conviction, no one is immune- it doesn’t matter how White you are.
Attorney general to ignore new report finding that commonly-used forensics are bogus
by Kira Lerner, Think Progress
In the report released Tuesday, the President’s Council of Advisors on Science and Technology questioned the scientific validity of numerous types of forensics frequently used by U.S. prosecutors — including the analysis of bite marks, shoe prints, hair samples, tool marks, and firearms — which have sent hundreds of innocent people to prison.
Specifically, the report found that bite-mark analysis does not meet the scientific standards for “foundational validity,” that “there are no appropriate empirical studies” to support the validity of footwear analysis, and that “microscopic hair examination” is not valid or reliable, among other findings.
“While pretrial investigations may draw on a wider range of methods, expert testimony in court about forensic feature-comparison methods in criminal cases — which can be highly influential and has led to many wrongful convictions — must meet a higher standard,” the report said.
Immediately, Attorney General Loretta Lynch released a statement indicating she would ignore the recommendations.
“We remain confident that, when used properly, forensic science evidence helps juries identify the guilty and clear the innocent, and the department believes that the current legal standards regarding the admissibility of forensic evidence are based on sound science and sound legal reasoning,” Lynch said in a statement. “While we appreciate their contribution to the field of scientific inquiry, the department will not be adopting the recommendations related to the admissibility of forensic science evidence.”
The FBI also said it disagrees with many of the findings of the report, which the agency said “makes broad, unsupported assertions.” And the National District Attorneys Association (NDAA) released a statement saying its attorneys would continue using the forensic methods critiqued in the report because “adopting any of their recommendations would have a devastating effect on the ability of law enforcement, prosecutors and the defense bar, to fully investigate their cases, exclude innocent suspects, implicate the guilty, and achieve true justice at trial.”
The response from the country’s top prosecutors immediately drew criticism from criminal defense lawyers and other legal experts, who blasted the NDAA’s “reckless attitude” toward forensic evidence.
“The NDAA response reveals that prosecutorial culture is saturated with a deep contempt for science,” said criminal defense layer David Menshel.
“The NDAA is fighting to turn America’s prosecutors into the anti-vaxxers, the phrenologists, the earth-is-flat evangelists of the criminal justice world,” added Robert Smith, the director of the Fair Punishment Project at Harvard Law School.
According to the Fair Punishment Project, there have been a total of 1,873 exonerations of wrongfully convicted Americans, and many of the convictions were secured through the use of faulty forensics. The Innocence Project has noted that bite mark analysis, which Tuesday’s report finds deeply flawed, has led to several false convictions.
Even Fingerprint Evidence is not nearly as accurate as Prosecutors claim, because a lot of it is based on partial and smudged prints there is a significant and measurable rate of False Positives which has been demonstrated in several independent studies.
The only evidence that is really accurate is DNA and because of “chain of custody” problems it’s not necessarily definitive.
Oh, and documents like Banksters, Chris Christie and murdering Cops simply deny exist.