Tuesday, May 13, 2008

How judges cover for cops

The NY Times reports on how judges are reluctant to accuse cops of lying:
Yet for all his disapproval of what the police had done, the judge said he hated to make negative rulings about officers’ credibility. “I don’t like to jeopardize their career and all the rest of it,” he said.

He need not have worried. The Police Department never learned of his criticism, and the officers — like many others whose word has been called into question — faced no disciplinary action or inquiry.
I found that the family court is similarly reluctant to find fault with CPS and other govt workers. In my case, Comm. Irwin H. Joseph did eventually find that the testimony of CPS social worker Sally Mitchell was not truthful, but he was reluctant to say so directly.

I don't think that it even mattered. Ms. Mitchell's career in harassing parents and seizing kids does not seem to have been hindered at all by her false testimony in my case.

1 comment:

LK said...

They're all part of the same team.