3 ms·
We could start with a standard of not willfully lying about facts and see how it goes. I agree that the gray areas could get tricky, but just starting with most
by rurp 2y ago
We could start with a standard of not willfully lying about facts and see how it goes. I agree that the gray areas could get tricky, but just starting with most obvious cases might provide a lot of the benefit.
I think the current status quo, where cops can lie to citizens about anything and everything with no consequence, is pretty bad. Sure it might help with some specific convictions, but the immense lack of trust and goodwill that generates in the entire public must cause a huge amount of harm and lose a number of other solvable cases.
Even though I'm not engaged in any criminal enterprises I am still wary about saying anything to police. Even though most police are decent people, mistakes happen and they are often under pressure to hit certain metrics. Indictments of innocent people are hardly rare and you never know what a cop's angle is, given their freedom to lie at will.
- notahacker 2y agoYeah. It's really not very difficult to have a situation where (i) the bar for "the police officer made an inaccurate statement during the interview" being a reason to consider a "not guilty" verdict is really, really high and (ii) making misstatements in interviews is regarded as a blot on the professional record of the policeman involved and making intentional misstatements a serious misconduct offence Plenty of other countries manage it.