Over the years I have become aware that people’s memories are very unreliable and so eye witness testimony on the stand is not the trump card that many would have it be. In fact, the “innocence projects” have proven many men innocent and gotten them off death row where eye witness testimony had wrongfully convicted them.
But there is a much larger problem with false testimony in courts: the police. In a recent post about police and their lack of honesty I see this:
It has been well known for decades that police habitually falsify reports, manufacture or destroy evidence, and routinely commit perjury in order to convict innocent people or exonerate “brother officers” guilty of crimes. The practice even has a name, “testilying”, and seems to have become the rule rather than the exception in the 1960s (when courts began to strengthen the rights of the accused); by 1992 a poll of judges and prosecutors showed that in their belief at least 20% of police testimony was false, and since it is in the best interest of these officials to minimize the issue we can estimate the real figure was more like 40-50%. Since then, virtually everyone who has studied the practice agrees it has grown steadily worse, largely due to the “War on Drugs” and the “thin blue line” mentality cultivated by increasing police militarization. Legal ethicists believe it has reached epidemic proportions: in 1998 noted defense attorney and law professor Alan Dershowitz testified before Congress on the extent of the problem and quoted a police source who said, “Cops are almost taught how to commit perjury when they are in the Police Academy” and that when it comes to minor offenses, “they’re almost always lying.”
As the public becomes more aware of the blatant criminality of the police their credibility with juries has declined somewhat over the years. This is a good thing. But we are also faced with even worse criminal acts by the “justice” system. Now the prosecutor and the police have moved to fill any police credibility gap by suborning perjury. This ancient practice has become the standard practice in American courtrooms to the extent that it is an epidemic. Since the State protects its own agents (judges, prosecutors, and police) with immunity and “discretionary prosecution” to the extent that they know almost any misdeed in the line of getting a conviction is safe, we see blatant falsehood has become normal procedure.
A technique called “climbing the ladder” might be new to you and has gained in popularity among prosecutors and police over the last few decades. This is explained well in the book Three Felonies a Day: How the Feds Target the Innocent by Harvey A. Silverglate, a book that was even recommended by a Federal Judge at a conference on ethics.
“Climbing the ladder” works like this: first find the person you want to destroy. Let us use as an example a business owner of some kind. He knows and deals with a multitude of people so find some small fry and build a trumped up case against him that could send him to prison for decades. Scare the crap out of the guy. Ah, but then offer him a deal to avoid his predicament. The deal is to testify in court to whatever the police or prosecutor tells him to say. Use this first man to entrap a second and so on until we have eye witness testimony against the “big fish” target. A total fabrication? Sure, but we are dealing with agents of the State, what else would you expect?
Who are the real criminals in our society? The police and the courts. Have you not noticed?