… ‘testilying’, and the myth of “the new professionalism“. State courts simply aren’t up to the job, and never will be so long as prosecutors’ and judges’ (or do I repeat myself?) unapologetic devotion to their own political self-interest trumps any devotion to duty.
You should read the whole article, but here are a couple of choice quotes:
“Officers are very rarely if ever investigated or prosecuted for the kind of “testilying” that they do, in part because the whole prosecution machine depends on testilying,” said Gideon Oliver, the former president of the NYC National Lawyers Guild, who has represented many defendants in street protest arrests.
…district attorneys have to work with police in making their cases, so they’re very gun-shy with taking steps that might alienate either individual officers or the NYPD as a whole,” … “There’s also the politics of it. Taking steps to impugn a police officer or the NYPD involves some political risk,” Gangi says. “Every District Attorney in the city is a politician, an elected public official, and is therefore reluctant to be seen as an antagonist of the police.
The latter quote is, of course, a frank endorsement of broader, not narrower, use of federal habeas corpus, where at least some – not all, but some – of the political risk is abated.
The government and its police already have enormous advantages in their courts. It’s pretty disgusting that on top of that some of them believe they can lie and cheat, too.
Not to mention intolerable.