Massive Demand to
Lock Up the Innocent
in a Democracy
Florida Supreme Court
Innocence Commission
Embarrassing Charade
The Myth That
Burns Our Cities
Mock Trials and the
Common Mediocrity
of History
Coerced Jailhouse
Confession Witness
Satanic Scam
New York Police
and Justice Reforms
Legislative Concepts
and Proposals
Attorney General
William Barr is a
Sick Retard
Debating with the
Law-and-Order Mob
Letters to my
Justice without Fraud
Challenge to Republicans
Running for Office
Voters Give Police
A Mandate To Lie
Republican Cop Cult
Disconnects from Reality
Mass Incarceration
Worse than Immigration
for Republicans
2020 Election
Newt Gingrich
Republican Fossils
Timeline of Destruction
of the Republican Party
Criminal Guilt
Determined Socially
Guilty Until
Proven Innocent
Quick History of
Police Misconduct
Intellectual Dishonesty
In Defense of Perjury
Is A Vice
Real Justice
Crosley Green
Common Cause of
False Convictions
Embarrassed Cop Setup
John Alberto Torres
Supports Replacing
Juries With Politicians
False Prophet
Ann Coulter
Sheriff Wayne Ivey's
Political Activism
and Ideology
Jailhouse Witnesses
Release Two
To Convict One
T-Shirt Artwork
Contact Info
About Site



Debating with the Law-and-Order Mob

There is no First Amendment to emphasize the importance of police. On the contrary, much of the Bill of Rights is designed to limit and fight them. This despite murderers getting away with it being one of the grievances in the Declaration of Independence.

Do you know how many people get life sentences, based on stories that incarcerated drug felons are coerced to invent for sentence reductions? They are much worse than newspapers. Newspapers print stuff, and it is out there forever for you to examine. Jurors hear witnesses once, and are forced to remember days of testimony, and decide in a few hours if it is true, without even being allowed to look at a transcript. Rules of evidence won't even allow most facts, and are designed to favor the stories of lying drug felons over every other type of evidence.

Afterwards, there is no category of appeal where you get to say "I can prove the witness lied, look at the transcript." When you get convicted based on stories invented by lying drug felons - which is the standard way that our justice system produces convictions in major cases - it is over.

Here is a 21-year-old girl being framed for shooting a man when he was fleeing:

prosecutors lie that victim was shot while fleeing

It never happened, and she is currently serving two life sentences without parole for it. The first person to write down the false narrative was the Orlando Sentinel:

The Lying Sentinel

The story she was charged with was invented in a strip club, based on previous false news stories about her being arrested with GHB, which also never happened. Unlike "hands up don't shoot" which was disputed by a mob and the US DOJ, there is no institution or mechanism, or even a person with any money, to fight these lies.

How many times does this involve a group of people doing something illegal, and when arrested the perps turn on each other, trying to blame each other to "get a deal". In some cases it is very hard to determine WHO pulled the trigger at a murder scene or WHO was driving the car in the hit and run. I guess the should all be NOT CHARGED because nobody is talking, and they should all be able to just plead for a lesser charge. That's what criminals and those who sympathize with them would LOVE to see happen. Just stick together and everyone gets by with a slap on the wrist.

How many perps claim they were with a group bent on murder, but they swear they didn't know about the plan. They thought they were just all going out for ice cream at a church social - but then found themselves at a murder scene instead and were "too afraid" of their friends to stop what was happening. Only an idiot believes them.

People would have it easier if they didn't hang with people who commit crimes. Even if someone didn't pull the trigger, they are just as guilty as the one who did. Doing a robbery or a home invasion or a burglary means a death, however unplanned, can happen, and your "friends" can turn on you to save their butts. The thug life has its pitfalls....and it should.

Innocent people getting life in prison based on lies because they were in the wrong place is not the law. Legislators could not get elected based on that platform. And suddenly the law is important to you when it is a cop, or someone in your family. You don't like the law, but suddenly you are all about the law and particulars when it comes to Breonna Taylor. So essentially you are saying what every member of a mob says "Lock up the people I don't like." And then their families vote for Andrew Gillum for 50 years, and you look to point the finger for a lost country. Point it at yourself.

In a country where weed is legal or mainstream everywhere, and you can get a mandatory minimum life sentence for a drug crime which the victim paid you to commit, using lies to give life sentences to all the innocent people who are friends with drug dealers or murderers, is a way to lose enough percentage of votes, for socialists to win elections and free the people who are actually guilty.

Do you not see the flip side, where every time you convict an innocent young retarded person based on police lies for hanging out with thugs, left-wing people respond with laws and judges that free actual murderers. So your silly disposition that lying, and breaking the law, is good if it punishes innocent people for hanging out with drug dealers, leads to the opposite of what you want. It leads to leftists getting elected in statewide and national elections, and the entire country turning into Chicago.

That is the pitfall. Which Republicans like you are walking into like Mr. Magoo. You simply cannot win elections in a Democracy by supporting police in the crime of perjury. The plurality of the Bill of Rights is designed to fight lying police.

Criminals getting away when there is no evidence except coerced lies and coerced claims of confessions, is what those who wrote The Bill of Rights and crossed the ocean in a sailboat for, would "LOVE to see happen." China is the country that your vision fits. Not the Bill of Rights.

On top of it, you as a taxpayer have already spent at least $500,000 to give Mandi Jackson a 70-year sentence for something that didn't even happen. The appeals court will probably intervene at some point, forcing you to spend millions more before the end of that 70 years. For something that did not even happen. It is very easy for you to say "screw her, she was hanging out with strip-club people, lock her up." But at the end of it, it is not so easy as it is coming out of your mouth. The taxpayer will have spent over $1 million, her family will vote Democrat for 50 years, the victim's family is tortured with trials and lies about what really happened. And Democrats get elected.

Is it really such a cake position for you, to support police perjury, and locking up undesirables based on lies?

Then how do you explain California? The entire political & criminal justice heirarchy (specifically DA's) is corrupt. They routinely refuse to prosecute murderers & rapists, releasing them with no bail to kill yet again. If the LSM ceased enabling it, and started reporting it like they should, California would have a chance of restoring civility, law & order.

Instead the leftists double-down on stupid, and, consequently, residents are leaving the state in droves. Rents are dropping fast in SF & good luck finding a moving van or UHaul in any city in Cal. Rates have gone up 800% since a year ago. Check for yourself.

Police and prosecutors pay no penalty for breaking the rules and victimizing the innocent. Making sure innocent people can bond out gives them a much better chance to escape injustice. There is no hope to stop police from breaking the law. Sadly, just letting people out is the best available remedy.

I know, I know! Its not white privilege I don't get arrested because I don't commit crimes!

And then one day you get arrested and you realize you knew nothing. You must think we should get rid of jury trials. Because everyone who is arrested is guilty. The people who wrote the Bill of Rights were not so dumb to think everyone who gets arrested is guilty. And cop worshippers tell me over and over they don't care if someone is innocent. They want to lock up undesirables.

What the hell are you talking about??? Do you know? I do know there are people that get arrested that aren't guilty. However, w/ dna, cameras everywhere etc etc it doesn't happen as much.

Most major criminal cases are built on the coerced testimony of felons. And don't argue when I say "most" because it is your side which doesn't like to require and publish statistics. It is much easier to find a felon with an active drug case looking at a mandatory minimum, and coerce him to say what happened (as long as what he says can get convictions), than to collect evidence. And once police have that narrative, they will search for and manufacture evidence to support that narrative. And they will avoid canvassing the neighborhood for video or finding other evidence that might muddy their narrative. And there is no regulatory body to prosecute and punish police for this misconduct. In fact it is rewarded when they get a higher conviction rate.

By the time the defendant gets a lawyer six months later, all that video from the neighborhood will be gone. Items from the scene which could have been tested for DNA but weren't, because the result wouldn't fit the police narrative, are gone. Witnesses whom police didn't write their names down because their stories didn't agree, are gone. And your side is against laws like they have in New York, to give the accused access to the scene and to witness names sooner.

DNA can be used to convict the innocent. DNA swabs can be logged with intentionally vague labels. And then crime scene techs invent on the stand exactly where and how they collected it, to fit with their narrative. And again there is no deterrent, no punishment if they get caught. Like this:

And I know you will say it is good that cop lied, because the defendant needed to be locked up for life without parole, because he is guilty. Or at least he is an undesirable who should not have been doing what he was doing. And so jury trials are an obstacle to what you want, and it is appropriate to hack them with mock trials when necessary.

Cop worshippers? Who worships police! I don't worship anyone you know nothing!! Yet, if you are in a known drug area, you are dealing drugs and have a large wad of cash on you more than likely you are a drug dealer. Yes duhhh!

I choose not to be in those places. Steal, carjack, rob businesses or homes! I don't murder! I don't join gangs that murder and shoot everyone who is walking. These are all things that keep me out of jail.

These are choices I make not to take drugs as I saw how destructive and hurtful to yourself and others drugs, alcohol is so why go down that road!!

See I'm bright and learn from others mistakes and my own. But most in prison keep doing the same stupid crimes over and over then get mad they are arrested!!!!

You want to lock up undesirables, regardless of guilt of a particular crime. And you will support police lying in mock trials to achieve that goal. But instead of having police lie, or coercing felons to lie, you should seek what you want through the democratic process. You should get a candidate to run in support of amending the Constitution, to enable like a military tribunal decided by elected judges, or a ballot measure with the names of the accused, in certain cases. And you should support new laws to lock up undesirables for what they are actually doing. Like someone with a prior drug conviction who is present when a crime is committed, gets 15 years. But I know you also don't like democracy. You want to lock up undesirables without doing it within the law through a democratic process.

What the hell are talking about. I never even said anything about that. You keep saying the undesirables.

The so called "undesirables" are people and they free to make choices.

Not all police are that way. But I have never been picked up BECAUSE IM NOT IN CRIME AREAS BY CHOICE.

So you admit you think it is fair game to lock up anyone in a crime area. And then you wonder why black people, who suffer from the most crime, are most opposed to the police. They must be irrational voting for socialists.

No you are insane. Putting words in my mouth. You have grudge. You also think they shouldn't have to take person responsibility for their own actions.

If you choose to commit crime and murder you should suffer! How dare you take someone else's life or property or break into their house or car.

Black people can make good choices some do and some don't!!! You are irrational to say the least!

You didn't say "I have never been picked up BECAUSE I don't commit murder." You said "But I have never been picked up BECAUSE IM NOT IN CRIME AREAS BY CHOICE."

So you admit they are picking up people who have not committed murder, and have not even committed a crime, but are just in crime areas.

You are not even talking about what we were discussing. Your on some tangent about something else. Most defendants are locked up for life without parole.

There are all kinds of problems with our justice system. Right now it is controlled by deep state and they are fair. You can ask for a lawyer and stop talking at anytime!

You are acting like these people have the time to come up with evidence to wrongfully charge people! I'm not saying that doesn't happen. There are bad police and justice systems. No doubt about that. But I don't think police or anyone else is going to go around and set people up except deep state!

I do a lot of research on this and it sounds to me like you are criminal who wants to get away with it!!

You are arrested for reasons. If your dna is on something or the dead body in the form of bodily fluids than that proves it.

Don't put yourself in situations that are questionable!

I read and study this and they have to have a lot of evidence to prosecute someone. I never once said everyone who is charged is guilty.

It's like you went off on something we weren't even talking about

You are completely ignoring the "grudge" of people who find the justice system has flaws, and of innocents who have been victimized by police without consequence. Your solution is not punish police who engage in misconduct. You solution is "People who live in high crime or drug areas: Stop living there! People whose friends or family members are drug addicts? Euthanize them. Police want to stop and search you against the Bill of Rights? Screw the Bill of Rights, comply. Cop plants a bag of weed on you or lies that you reached for his gun? There should be no independent institution to initiate investigations, punish cops, and deter that misconduct, as well as punish those who fail to report it."

Usually drug addicts steal to keep their habit going. So if you are poor choosing to do drugs seem "smart". Now you have to beg, borrow & steal to keep your habit going.

You burn bridges as you use people and steal from them to keep your habit going.

So I can see that why the hell cant the rest of the idiotic jail surfers see that??!

No instead they blame police, the system and everyone else for their stupid choice !

Usually drug addicts are the star witnesses in major criminal cases. They are so desperate, they will swear lies on the stand to get out of prison and get more drugs. So police and prosecutors love desperate drug users, because it is so easy to get them to lie to convict the innocent.

Do you think it should be illegal for felons and people with drug arrests to be let out of prison as a reward for testifying? If not, don't complain when a system built on the coerced testimony of drug addicts is criticized.

Well one wonders why was this person picked up. This isn't what we are talking about anyway! I think stop committing crime and blame everyone else! Don't put yourself there to BEGIN WITH!!

So if you are there when a crime is committed, and police coerce drug addicts to lie about you, and prosecutors let drug felons out of prison as a reward for lying about you at trial, the solution is don't be nearby when crimes happen?

Arrogant people like you are nauseating! Far from an idiot. From a very young age I saw how alcohol & drugs create chaos and hurt the person taking the drug and everyone in their path.

I thought why would anyone take drugs, can't they see how horrendous it is for your body and psyche? Honestly very self centered and idiotic to take up drugs. As stated below I learn from others mistake.

I am far from rich and do not come from money. A lot of things out of my control. My choice not to commit crime is in my control.

Now the prisons & jails are full of people who did not make the right choices. Who didn't learn from other people's bad choices and see the agony and pain they cause themselves, possibly their children, their families.

No they don't care they make that choice to try a drug, EVEN THOUGH WE KNOW DRUGS ARE ADDICTIVE & MAKE MATTERS 10x WORSE, BUT THEY SELFISHLY DO IT ANYWAY.

Nah I think I'm 10x smarter than that because I don't put myself in places where crime is happening, commit crime or chose to commit crime. So Steve go f yourself!

You should prefer China, when they shoot drug addicts without a trial.

Not special! Anyone with a brain who applies logic, critical thinking and doesn't have poor me, I am committing crime then blame society for it, attitude can do the same!

I take responsibility for my actions! My life wasn't easy but if I pick up drugs or murder someone that's on me not society!!! So f u jackass!

You know when these people murder someone that affects everyone who loved that person. Yet you leftist always stand up for the criminals.

If a parent of killed children affected the rest of their lives because of a stupid selfish act of an a s s who took the life of another than blamed on society!

De Tocqueville contemplated what would happen when a critical mass of people realized they could vote themselves free money from the treasury. He never contemplated what would happen when a critical mass of people realized they could vote their family members out of prison.

No I don't believe in that! I just see people like you sticking up for criminals when they make their choices. They HURT OTHERS YET DONT GIVE A F ABOUT PEOPLE THEY HURT ! It's sickening!

Do Blacks Commit More Violent Crimes Than Whites? Is a black person more likely to be a criminal than a white person? According to 2016 stats from the US Census Bureau non-Hispanic whites makeup 61.3% of the population, and blacks make up 13.1% of the population. (2016 US Census results / archive)

2016 US Census by Race

If we look at the FBI statistics for violent crimes we can see that whites committed 241,063 of the 408,873 violent crimes, which is 58% of the total. So 61% of the population is committing 58% of the violent crimes, so the math lines up. (FBI Table 21 Arrests by Race and Ethnicity, 2016 / archive)

2016 FBI Violent Crime Statistics

If we take a look at the number of violent crimes committed by blacks we can see they committed 153,341 of the 408,873 violent crimes, which is 37% of the violent crimes. If blacks make up 13% of the population they should only be committing 13% of the crimes, instead, they are committing crimes almost three times as many crimes as they should be.

I am sticking up for the innocent, and the punishment and criminalization of police and prosecutors who victimize them.

I guess you think Thomas Jefferson, who wanted to drill a half-inch hole through women's noses for sodomy, was sticking up for criminals if he supported the Bill of Rights?

I guess you think those who demanded independence from The King, including a grievance that murderers were getting away with it in mock trials, were sticking up for murderers when they supported that no accused should be compelled to be a witness against himself?

Don't put yourself in places that crime is committed. Don't commit crime, don't do drugs, don't sell drugs. Don't manufacture drugs. Don't join a gang.

Don't hurt others stealing, drug addiction, murder, rape, don't join gangs! Don't do crimes & then you may not be picked up for committing crimes.

My friend is serving two life sentences without parole from age 21, because she cheated on her boyfriend and went home with her boss and did drugs with him, because her rent was late. Everything else is gossip. And I guarantee you support what happened to her.

No but sounds like it happened to you. Bring it to the proper people! A defense lawyer. I never once said that's okay to do. It's odd as you took what we were saying and twisted it!

No one should lie about anyone. If you are in a drug infested crime area don't be anymore and then if falsely accused see a defense lawyer or take to higher ups. Go to congressman, Take to the attorney general! Take to the supervisor of those police!

All that takes decades, and more than all the money an entire family will ever hope to have. And the cop worshippers fight them every fraction of a millimeter.

You're a sensitive Nancy. Your taking the poster's meaning and just free lancing against anyone statement they make. ( which I agree with). Where there's smoke there is fire! There is no systemic seceret police code to arrest blacks. They arrest who is breaking the law. It just happens to be way more blacks than anyone. Measure Jewish crimes per population to blacks, for a hint of blacks' inability to live civility compared to a another minority, like Jews.

I am sensitive to Andrew Gillum coming with 0.4% of winning, Republicans sneaking by with a few thousand votes in Florida and Georgia. And then Republicans say whatever reason people are voting for the other side, for socialists, we don't care. We want even more of it. Anyone who doesn't like it must be irrational or "sensitive" or just an undesirable who is too stupid to simply move out of a high crime area.

We don't have any statistics on religion and crime. So I don't really know how many jews are being locked up. But I guarantee if you started accusing jews of being criminal like people accused blacks of being criminal, you would be censored. And I can't think of a black person whom so many people would have looked the other way for, as they did for Madoff and Weinstein and Epstein.

Jews are a race, not a religion.

You should support a candidate with a platform of adding a checkbox "jew" to arrest reports.

Paranoid much? You're the kind of person that's wrong with today's society. Ignorant and looking for excuse to exonerate scum and their behavior that is incompatible with society! There is no debating you. I would love to meet you in person! But I doubt your scared weakness would ever allow that to happen. The poster is trying to be civil. I'm over attempting argue with naive wussies. I rather destroy you, before you procreate another imbecile.

You would love to meet me in person? Behavior that is incompatible with society? You would rather destroy me before I procreate another imbecile? The Bill of Rights is a big problem for you. Because trials are an obstacle to doing what you believe is right and good, an obstacle to cleaning the undesirables off the streets.

Yes. You nailed it. I can surmise from your posts that your an undesirable i'd like "to remove from the streets!"

You post as if, in a vacuum; the legal system is built to remove "you," or any other scumbag who is committing crimes. 99.8% of the dipshits in jail, are there for a good reason. Don't throw the Bill of Rights out there like you understand the principles of law. Because your interpretation is distorted. Amendment 4 is always justified, in cases where 'cop smells dope,' there is dope. Bottom line; you were unable to understand the previous poster, so your stuck in the same tedious rut that you're incapable of finding the acumen to figure out. So yes, you are an undesirable. I have been in a lot of Third World cesspools, but I'd much rather eliminate a Democrat than some Syrian, who never threatened my way of life, like the commies, errr Democrats are doing.

You said "99.8% of the dipshits in jail, are there for a good reason." It is true that cops are a lot better at filling up the prisons and the justice system with incompetent and relatively harmless dipshits, than at investigating and convicting actual criminal menaces.

Prove that most "major criminal cases are based on testimony of a felon."
I hope you're not an aspiring attorney, cuz you would suc.

With so many crimes to defend, most defense attorneys do suck. Result is a lot of families of innocents voting Democrat.

Would you support an independent institution at the state level, to require reports of every time a felon or someone with an active case testifies or makes a sworn statement or an informal proffer, and whether that person is a co-defendant, a witness, or a jailhouse so-called witness? Or would you rather I was unable to prove those numbers?

"My friend is serving two life sentences without parole from age 21, because she cheated on her boyfriend and went home with her boss and did drugs with him"

Your friend is not serving two life sentences for doing drugs with her boss.

There is not a law on the books in any state in this country that would permit sentencing even vaguely close to that.

You, sir, are a liar.

There is a system without state-level regulation, that allows the local political majority to overlook perjury in trials, if police have been able to convince the local paper the defendant is an undesirable.

It is because the police say the crime is terrible, and portray the defendant as an undesirable, that they are able to get away with a mock trial in the case of people nobody cares about. Certainly between a drug-using cheater sl*t and a hero cop, nobody is going to lay a finger on the hero cop for faking evidence, to protect a drug-using cheater sl*t from serving 70 years for a crime that did not happen.

I agree there is no law on the books for people to get what they want, which is to lock up undesirables in mock trials. But I think they should be open and honest about what they want, instead of coercing drug felons to lie in court, and overlooking police misconduct, to get what they want. They should seek what they want through the democratic process.

People who say perjury is a useful tool to lock up undesirables, should support a politician with a platform of amending the Constitution to remove the right to a jury trial. They should get elected and pass a law that there can be like a military tribunal of elected judges, or a ballot measure with the names of the accused, in certain cases. And people with felony convictions or who have been arrested for drugs, get 15 years for being in the vicinity of a crime.

Would you support an independent institution in the executive branch, to initiate investigations and prosecute police and prosecutors, who lie to convict drug addict hookers of crimes that didn't happen? No. Because you support locking up hooker drug addicts for crimes that didn't happen, because they are hooker drug addicts. Even though there is no law that says it.

I heard from somebody on here recently that there is no utopia, and there are going to be thousands of instances of police misconduct and injustice in a country of 330 million people. So 30 dead cops is really nothing, unless cops are some kind of overclass. Do you think more than 30 innocent people were convicted of murder last year? I know one, who got life without parole from age 21. And I guarantee not a cop on the planet cares one bit. So stick your dead cops in the sewer for all I care.

You would say how can they care, there is no record, no proof. That's right. The system is designed to trumpet the death of every policeman, and conceal and bury any example of them victimizing the innocent. Not many real victims of police are so lucky as to get a mob of race hustlers like the fake victims. But the fake victims get a lot of supporters from those people who were not so lucky.

Cops get a news story when they get killed. Most of the times cops lie about the innocent, there is no video camera. There is no news story. There is no way to prove it, and only immunity and a stone wall of silence and resistance if you do. The taxpayer pays for unlimited revenge when cops are killed. When cops victimize the innocent, families are destroyed trying to scrape together what little they can to fight it for years. And as often as not, nobody even believes them. They don't get strangers arguing their case on the Internet. Dead cops' families will never know the wretched obscurity of the families of the innocents whose lives are taken like ants, by lying immune cops and prosecutors.

I don't hope to make any moral arguments to benighted animals. I am simply pointing out that over decades, the families of innocents victimized by police and prosecutors accumulate to millions of voters with intense passion. Republicans squeak by in Florida and Georgia with a few thousand votes, and lost the popular vote to Hillary Clinton by 2.8 million. So over time, police and prosecutors victimizing innocents will hand the country to socialists with a greater inevitability than immigration. And I don't like socialists.

Maybe idealists who complain about the "hands up don't shoot" witnesses should look a little more closely at a criminal justice system built around the coerced testimony of felons. Unlike lies which are printed in the news media and examined forever, jurors are completely snowed by lying felons who take over trials with colorful storytelling that dominates every other kind of evidence. This includes co-defendants who cut a deal, random criminals, and the jailhouse confession scam. Jurors get a few hours to consider them, they don't even have a copy of the transcript, and there is no category of appeal where you get to say "I can prove the coerced felons lied, look at the transcript."

And no, I don't really have stats on how many drug cases are built on the coerced testimony of felons, those stats aren't compiled. But I do see a lot of people angry about it, and their preferred candidate Andrew Gillum coming within 0.4%. That is a stat which I cannot deny and do not like.

At least you were able to track down the statistics. Hospitals, even in terrible universal healthcare systems, are required to write down centrally collect, and publish statistics of physician activity, and hold them liable. Not so much in the universal justice system, where local police will refuse to even write down any record of a policeman's wrongdoing.

It is a disgrace every time a pro-police person makes any argument where they refer to statistics, or a lack thereof. Because pro-police people support not requiring standardized, detailed, and reliable reports - with penalties in the event of reporting failures - and centrally collecting and publishing statistics, of the conduct of police like doctors.

Every time the anti Bill of Rights cop overclass cult accuses a BLM supporter of lying, people should point out which side doesn't want to write down how many convictions use the coerced testimony of felons, or which cops have been accused of perjury. The cop-worship side lives off perjury. All those people who hate felons and dislike lying should get this picture stuck in their faces:

I am tired of cop worshippers complaining that the other side lies, and nobody pointing out the obvious.

Your question was "How are 'police lying'?" I "backed it up" as you requested with hard documentation of police lying, which you do not care to look at. This alone proves several things:

1) You are an MSNBC-type parrot who is not actually interested in critical thinking and exploring evidence,
2) You so lack self awareness, that you sincerely imagine you could be educated about a complex social phenomenon in the single "succinct sentence" as you requested, and
3) You are not very bright, if you think web browsers you are using will expose you to any harm by loading a web page.

Let's assume that by "how" you mean what are the general circumstances and the nature of police lies? There are many categories, including:

1) telling witnesses what the police narrative is, and telling them it is their moral duty to help get justice, before getting their statements
2) losing the names of witnesses who do not back up the police narrative
3) avoiding searching for evidence that could contradict the police narrative
4) staging and faking evidence to fit the police narrative
5) lying in police reports, and in sworn affidavits to obtain arrest and search warrants,
6) straight up lying in court

This arises from the nature of human beings to be ill-informed and to want justice, and to see fair trials as an obstacle to what they want. Once the police have given the media a sensational story to broadcast for clicks, and if they are able to convince the public the defendant is undesirable, then all police misconduct will be overlooked and not even written down, if it enables the local political establishment or mob to achieve their desired outcome in a mock trial. So guilt or innocence is decided outside of trials, as is the tradition in human history. And the demand for such a process results in the refusal to create any institution which could deter police lying in support of the conviction of those either police themselves, the media, the mob, or the political establishment already thinks are guilty, and the conviction of those who are such incompetent or broke nobodies, that framing them for crimes enhances a mirage of police fighting crime.

I will additionally point out several categories of lies that police, and their supporters, support. This includes the coerced testimony of felons, where they are threatened with crazy sentences, but then let out of prison if and only if they tell a story which enables prosecutors to convict someone else. People are reluctant to write down what percentage of major criminal convictions are built around the testimony of accused and convicted felons, whether they be co-defendants, third-party actual witnesses, or jailhouse confession so-called witnesses, who were coerced or paid in some way if, and only if, they recite the prosecution narrative. And nor do rules of evidence permit you to tell the jury what these testifying felons have been convicted of, or that there is no penalty for lying in court - even if it can be plainly proven they are lying - and in fact there is a reward for lying, a reward given by government employees. So jurors are like you, they don't know that prosecutors live off lies, and there is no worry of being caught, and in fact a political reward for locking up those the mob has been told are guilty, based on lies.

I offered many examples of police lying. You only looked at the first example. The nice thing about the first example, is you don't care the defendant was falsely accused of shooting a man who was fleeing just like "hands up don't shoot". In other words, the truth doesn't matter if undesirables are accused, but the truth is a big deal if police are accused. There was no camera on that street in Ferguson. But you will only accept the testimony of lying felons against other undesirables, not against police.

You advocate for a class system, with an immune police overclass like feudal Japan. My objection to that, in favor of the equality the USA was founded on, is proof that I am the most right-wing person on here.

You said a minute ago we don't have video cameras. And so in many cases we have no choice but to use that testimony of felons who were present. Except unlike those people on the street in Ferguson who got nothing, prosecutors will use felon testimony, and let felons out of prison, if and only if the felons say what the prosecution wants. And if they don't make stories up that the prosecution likes, often as little as 14 words, they will spend years in prison.

Criminals lie. It's what they do. It's also why a criminal's testimony in court is automatically considered to be dubious. But lately, as a society, we have willed ourselves to be ignorant for the sake of "social justice."

Just the opposite is true. Case law prevents you from telling the jury the truth about criminals who testify, or calling them liars when they lie. The lies of felons can be used to admit evidence, and to prevent an appeals court or jury instruction from considering a case "circumstantial." Lying felons can tell a complete story with every detail of the crime in a single breath. It otherwise takes five days, 30 witnesses, and 100 items of evidence, to tell the same story broken up into tiny pieces. Lying felons are not held to the same standard as other evidence which contradicts physical evidence or is confusing. Lying felons will call hearsay or gossip or lies a confession. Lying felons are mixed in with normal witnesses. And prosecutors choose the most colorful convicts, so they are the only witness half the jurors even wake up for. That is why prosecutors build most major cases by coercing felons, who would not even be allowed to vote, to lie against the accused.

Coerced testimony is a loophole to admit garbage evidence, and take advantage of naive jurors who would never guess what a cesspool it is. Jurors are never educated about how the deal system really works, and what garbage coerced testimony actually is. So coerced testimony is like an "in case of no evidence break glass" tool which can be used to convict innocents and guilty equally, and up the overall conviction rate.

To the extent plea bargaining and coerced testimony is a sophisticated game, it favors habitual offenders and sociopaths, at the expense of first-time offenders, the innocent, the incompetent, and the honest. Someone who has been convicted of burglary, for example, knows more about the necessary details to prove burglary, which details he can then invent and include in any offers to the State. Someone who has been convicted in a trial, knows that perjury at trial is rewarded by the State rather than punished. An innocent person who is arrested for the first time knows nothing about coerced testimony. An innocent person who has never been to court before, does not know that the State will actually reward a felon who lies in court to convict him. By the time the innocent accused wises up, he will be serving life. He might then offer his own lies, to get out by securing the convictions of a series of novices and incompetents, often as a jailhouse confession so-called witness.

The Shire Reeve is a tool of the bourgeois mob, whether in Republican or Democrat areas, the law doesn't matter. But of course both would like to change the locus of control in areas where the law is controlled by the other side. Force is applied by who and against whom the mob desires, without regard to the law. Cops and rioters are exempt in different places on different days. But of course anyone can defend himself against a criminal rioter. It is government employees who are immune from justice that one must be vigilant against.

The Republican party lost their mind after "hands up don't shoot" and became like a cop-worship cult. The lies told by witnesses on that street in Ferguson are nothing compared to the lies prosecutors coerce felons to tell in court, to convict the innocent every day. Our Founders came here to escape mob justice and wrote the Bill of Rights. Now the Republican party has gone British, wanting to lock up all undesirables without trials. And the suburbs have turned into Japanese fiefs where their private soldiers are above the law.

Some forget that the monopoly of force granted to the government by the people is generally a good thing. "Street justice" has not worked to create peace and its ensuing wealth wherever it exists except for the people who control the enforcers (think of drug cartels around the world, organized crime, petty street gangs, &c). There is a balance to be observed between order and authoritarianism, but that is part of the democratic system.

I don't want to go back to a time where highwaymen were a thing and sitting "shotgun" had literal meaning.

Generally a good thing? Across what subset of history and geography?

If you like the democratic process, you should run on a platform of repealing the Second Amendment. Not try to get around and subvert the democratic process to achieve your preferences.

Yeah, vague dog bites man anecdotes are very compelling. Provide the case details and I'll believe it.

Your side refuses to write down complaints and record statistics. You then disgust me when you call instances which you refuse to record and report, unusual. A structure which does not deter police and prosecutor misconduct (provided it is approved by the local political establishment), enables the same phenomenon over and over everywhere, like the laws of physics. It is more like an apple falling than man bites dog. Everywhere throughout history have the laws of force been equal, and used against the commoners by the political establishment, where their soldiers are above the law and answer only to local daimyos.

Breitbart John Nolte: Woke Taliban Blacklist 'Kindergarten Cop' from Oregon Screening

Over and over, I hear from people in the pages of this web site, who support police misconduct and mock trials to lock up undesirables. In other words, if a person has a past drug arrest in Google, even if it was a false accusation, many Republicans will look the other way on police using lies, or coercing felons to lie in court, to lock up that undesirable, for whatever the media quotes the cops as accusing him of, for clicks.

I have a friend serving two life sentences right now for a crime that didn't happen. And much of the time when I provide proof of this to Republicans, they say look at her, she has a past drug arrest! They don't even care that it was a false accusation, proved to not be an illegal drug by the crime lab.

So there is no sicker bunch of freedom-hating people eager to lock up anyone who doesn't share their lifestyle or religion, than many Republicans fans of this website, including fans of Nolte, and probably Nolte himself. Probably the Taliban themselves also have this trait of calling other people they disagree with, some sort of "Taliban" the same as Breitbart John Nolte.

Nobody hates freedom more than the female Republican Karens who make up the cop-worship movement.

It is not about having cases reviewed, that is a cheezy solution where lawyers again want to be reviewed by their peers. The problem is there is no deterrent - no punishment - for police and prosecutors who victimize the innocent. And in fact there is a reward, to the extent police, prosecutors, and judges, are captive to the local political establishment in a tyranny of the majority. The correct solution is not some silly review board, but an independent institution in the executive branch at the state level, to require reporting, penalize reporting failures like the SEC, and proactively initiate investigations into police and prosecutors. Rather than the haphazard way it works today, where they are investigated by criminals, prosecuted by the mob, and tried at the ballot box at the national level.

I remember John Nolte whining like a pansy when it came to making cops face the law without immunity like everyone else. Or cops even being regulated as much as sellers of travel are regulated at the state level. And Nolte also whines about the terrible quality of universal healthcare. But he has no problem serving a cheapy universal justice product to people whom he considers underclass. Nolte is too much of a sad cheapy to pay up for the police product he wants.

I know, every time I post here I get the retard Taliban running around squawking like chickens because I have blasphemed against their cop religion. What is sillier, my web site, or the movie "Kindergarten Cop?" Which one is an example of protected political speech? Which one addresses serious topics? Okay, now which one would the Pat Patrix retard Taliban like to cancel, my website and comments? Or silly movies?

I know, people will do anything to defend the cop-worship cult from reality. First thing they will say is if you don't worship cops, your family will be at the mercy of rapists and carjackers like the 1970's. The last thing they say is come on, we refuse to write down any complaints of police misconduct, anyone who complains must be a crazy liar, cops only very rarely do misconduct, so far as anyone knows.

John Nolte is the one who wants to defund the police by refusing to pay for liability insurance or salaries high enough to attract cops without immunity. And it is because Nolte refuses to pay what he has to for police, that we have halfwit clown cops locking up incompetents and victimizing the innocent and being run out of their cities for it, and rising crime. Or even worse, people voting Democrat in national elections because the local Republican majority won't touch the lying scumbag cops who are their private soldiers, above the law like in Greenwood, Colorado.

Nolte should retract his Breitbart article about police immunity which was essentially an article saying he doesn't want to fund good policing.

Do you support raising police salaries high enough to attract cops without needing to give them immunity or look the other way when they victimize the innocent? Do you think cops are a high enough life form that they can withstand regulation at the state level like even sellers of travel or people who braid hair are regulated? Or are cops like zoo animals, completely beneath any regulation or accountability.

Stephen Miller: Cancel Culture Goes Hand in Hand with Rise in Violent Crime

I am sad that what Stephen Miller is saying is 99% BS and 1% police need to be paid more. Far from locking up major criminals, police spend most of their resources locking up incompetent idiots who run when they say stop. And far from investigating major crimes, police solve most major crimes by coercing felons to lie in court, often about crimes they were not even a witness to. Then they lock up an innocent person whom the news media canceled long before the trial, and march at the front of a parade. Our police have descended into the kind of sad fraud that the Founders were aware has been popular all throughout history when they wrote the Bill of Rights.

My friend is an extreme victim of police misconduct, she lost her life because of them. It surprised me there is no institution to prevent or deter what happened to her. It also surprised me her situation was not unique. All over the street and on the web I heard from people with similar stories. They were like yeah, duh, the cops are lazy and they will frame you. They were like yeah, duh, my last five boyfriends were cops, and they are as human as anyone, lazy and will frame a person, but the difference is they face no consequences.

Far from being silent, people complain about it all the time. But when they go to the police station, the cops refuse to talk to them or write anything down. This I have seen 100% of the time almost as often as I have seen cops lie. And when you go to Republican politicians they say what is this, hands up don't shoot? And when you go to Democrat politicians, they say see, Republicans are evil, we need socialism to tear down capitalism and deal with intergenerational trauma and the environment, a crooked cop is an environmental problem. It is sad to see Stephen Miller use this same kind of racism-is-environmentalism tactic saying cancel-culture-is-crime. Cancel culture is not traffic stops and drug arrests, it is angry libs on Twitter. Nice try.

Republicans stubbornly deny that the justice product has any flaws that can be improved, they deny the need for improvement, they deny that it can be fixed in any way, they are too much sissies to offend the minority cop-worship cult. I have heard the silent majority, and they are not who Stephen Miller is hearing from or imagines they are.

The first people to be canceled are people who have been falsely accused of a crime, held without bond, and sensationalized for clicks by eager accomplices in the media. Newspapers have no investigators left, they just copy-paste the police Twitter feed, and juice it up where they need to with plain lies and fabrications for clicks. The newspapers are in the business of destroying innocent people who have been accused of crimes, just so they can show banner ads to the Breitbart mob or deliver their last paper to the bingo crowd.

The Breitbart mob wants to cancel all people who were even accused of a crime, by holding them without bond. There is not a single "constitutional conservative" among them who supports the Bill of Rights. They are a common mob like you could find in any city in history, or in the MIddle East today. The Breitbart mob is a religious cop-worship Taliban obsessed with locking up undesirables. Nobody who supports police has ever been canceled, it is the easiest and safest position on Earth to take. But say anything against the police and the entire Republican party will come down on your head without making any counter-argument except that good policing is too expensive, or any effort to improve the police product will take us back to the 1970's and you will get raped.

And I don't know what Stephen Miller is talking about with the Feds. Republican counties want to lock up drug users with mock trials. The Feds want to lock up Donald Trump with mock trials. The Feds think Republicans are the undesirables. You will never convince them there is any glory in arresting firework throwers.

Stephen Miller is caught in a time capsule, fighting the "rehabilitation" philosophy of the 1960's. The relevant number is not what percentage of people in the country believe X or Y. It is how many Republican voters - suburban males, white rural voters, young people - have suffered police misconduct or are turned off by the cop-worship cult. And compare that number to how many thousand votes Republicans are winning or losing by in Georgia, Florida, Minnesota, and nationwide. I am so impressed with the policing turnaround in New York City, it gave us Hillary Clinton and Sandy Hook Cortez, instead of Rick Lazio and Al D'Amato. The police canceled themselves in New York State and then say "dim doo nuppin." Or better yet "I'm not that kinda guy!"

There is a counter right on here of how many people want to cancel me, they are at the bottom left next to the down arrow.

Rules by exceptions" -- the Communist way. Millions of police interactions annually, and you want the whole system taken down for a few exceptions. Percentage-wise, the police have an outstanding record.

LOL, 99.999% of the time police refuse to write down any record of police misconduct. Then jerks come along and say it is not a problem. You create an independent institution in the executive branch like the SEC to require reporting and punish reporting failures and initiate investigations, then we can have an honest debate over exactly what the numbers are. You want to hide the numbers so you can continue to make dishonest arguments like you just did. No other profession gets to do that. Other professions like medicine have reporting, and they use the numbers to try to improve their product.

That doesn't even make sense. So the "police refuse to write it down" -- but the victim also says nothing? Right.

Whom can the victim say it to? It costs money every time the victim tries. Democrat politicians answer yes, Republicans are evil, vote for us, it is an environmental problem. Republican politicians say what is this, hands up don't shoot? The local political establishment says why are we going to take down our beloved cop, for the sake of a person the newspaper said is a drug criminal for clicks? And the social-justice mob only shows up and takes it to the national ballot box when a black person dies on video. So yes, there is literally nobody to go to, and I advocate creating a new independent institution the victim can say something to. You are against such an institution, and you know why you are.

So your solution must be to cancel police then. The more we normalize negative behaviors toward authority, not just police, the fewer good candidates you have to choose from. My evidence would be to look at how teachers have been left out to dry by our society. It used to be a noble calling. Now many jobs are left unfilled. It's now the same with police. You will get fewer good candidates with the kind of treatment they getting now by the millennial and younger generations.

People who lose a market for their product should improve their product, not hide the flaws and cram it down people's throats with a monopoly like the DMV or the post office. Pay police more. Remove immunity. Create an independent institution in the executive branch at the state level to punish reporting failures like the SEC, and initiate investigations into police and prosecutors. Even the UK NHS requires detailed reporting to try to improve.

After the creation of the SEC did they sell less stock? No, they sold more stock than ever. Because stock promoters' reputations were protected from the worst actors among them.

The way police are regulated at the local level, creates Republican safe districts where they don't care if the police are losing them national and statewide elections. In a place like Seminole County, Florida, they don't mind losing 10,000 votes from crooked police, the Republicans are still untouchable. Then comes the Governor or President election, and Republicans wish they had those votes that the local political establishment threw away to satisfy the mob, locking up undesirables in mock trials.

If you don't want to pay more to get good candidates, then you are the one defunding the police.

To your point, I find "police misconduct" to be far more frequent in movie and TV scripts than in reality. Some of those script writers could probably use a little kinetic correction, as could all those squealing and raving about "continuous and systemic" police misconduct.

Do you support a new independent institution in the executive branch at the state level, to require reports and punish reporting failures like the SEC, and to initiate investigations into police and prosecutors? If not, then you prefer to talk about what is in the movies on one side, and what is in your own myth or imagination on the other side, like global warming. You don't support collecting statistics to supply honest debate and research. Like a leftist, you want to punish those who disagree with you based on myth.

No, I think that's overkill. Let the municipalities deal with their own .0002% crooked cops.

They don't discipline their crooked cops. I hear story after story. Quite the opposite, the mainstream of cops are rewarded for cheating, to lock up as many as possible of the 20% of people considered undesirable by the local political establishment.

Then those people's families and sympathizers vote Democrat in statewide and national elections, and add up year after year, to more than Republicans are winning by in swing states.

I get told over and over right on this web site, that people approve of police lying to give my friend life without parole from age 21, because she has a drug arrest in Google. The crime lab tested the suspected drugs, the police were wrong about the drugs, the charges were dropped. But that never goes into Google. And so they made some half retarded cop LEO of the Year for faking evidence to lock her up.

And so here I am with her family, a member of the death-to-cops mob, praying everyday for nihilism. Because you don't want crooked cops deterred. You say let the municipality deal with it. But you know they won't, and you don't want them to. You want people to hate cops because you are myopic.

I think what it is, is local cops are actually dumb enough, to think they are the only ones lying and cheating and getting away with it. They don't realize there is a crew of three crooked jerks just like them in the next county. County after county, it adds up to Democrats getting elected.

I can produce someone from every walk of life lying at trial. I am surprised that you had not heard of man's imperfection. There are no perfect people walking the face of the Earth. "I did not have sex with that woman ..."

That is why we need deterrents, punishments for people who lie in court, so that we can have a functioning product to deter other crimes. Right now the local political establishment or mob will overlook or reward perjury, if it predetermines the outcome of trials to match the outcome the news media has told them they should want. People who disagree with the outcome then vote in state and national elections with a hope of rigging more trials their way. Police are the heroes in the process, immune to any consequences for doing to undesirables what the local majority wants done to them without regard to guilt of a particular crime. But rather than be honest this is what is going on to let people vote on whether they like this process, perjury is never recorded or reported. When someone tries to clarify the process so honest candidates can run for or against it, people deny what is going on and call anyone who exposes the process crazy or a liar or a drug criminal.

When the process is allowed to play out police are punished like anyone else. Just because it doesn't match up with what you think aside. A good example is with the cause of the rioting and looting. The police have been dealt with as prescribed by law not the mob. They will be punished by the law, not the mob. I am sure police would prefer that the "undesirables" not cause interaction with them at all. Floyd was passing counterfeit money, he was not innocent, he was a career criminal. No one should be tried by the press or public opinion but only by proven facts.

In the current process, police are not punished for victimizing the innocent, and only get any friction at all when a black person dies on video. Police are investigated by criminals and prosecuted by the mob. 99.9% of actual misconduct is overlooked, and a few instances of fake misconduct are blown up into national issues. When a stock goes up before a merger announcement, does the SEC need a mob to demand an investigation? When a homeless person is murdered, or there is a crop of marijuana in a national forest, do police wait for the mob to notice it and demand they investigate it? There needs to be an independent institution in the executive branch at the state level, to require reporting and punish reporting failures like the SEC, and to investigate police and prosecutors proactively.

White people throwing rocks are low IQ, low information that put Democrats in office. They are being stupid because they believe the Media. The biggest reason is they know they can get away with it hiding among the Blacks. The mob gives them the cover they needed to revert to animals. If you think they believe the BS of systemic racism you are indeed foolish.

Right now the mob you dislike is an official and designed part of the process. I propose fixing that and replacing it with a more rational and ordered and consistent and less haphazard process.

Think in terms of incentives. How do you incentivize a bureaucratic department? You don't. But how do you incentivize individuals to do the right thing? That's quite a different story.

You incentivize bureaucrats with elections. Right now, police and prosecutors and judges are captive to local politics. If the local mob thinks "the right thing" is giving someone with a prior drug arrest life for being in the vicinity of a crime, that is what police will be rewarded for lying to achieve. Then the local minority of undesirables will try to fight back by voting in statewide and national elections.

An independent institution at the state level could punish reporting failures like the SEC, and deal with instances of local police and prosecutor misconduct individually, not as national election topics. Because they would not be investigating their peers, or responding to local politics. Then that institution can be monitored by the voter at the statewide level, which is where the process was ultimately going to be monitored and incentivized anyway. Except this way is more efficient and direct feedback to the specific government service, not lumped in with marxism and other policies in national elections.

And voters simply demand less perjury through deterrence by punishment, so the guilty are locked up and the innocent go free, rather than demanding general policies that lock up more innocents or release more guilty people.

Criminals are not innocents by the way. Once you choose to break the law it is on you from then on.

How about this guy, the prosecutor paid a witness cash to lie ,and he spent 20 years in prison for a crime he didn't commit...

Police love sadistically framing an undesirable. Because they know the newspapers and public only reward their work because of such coliseum displays.

I doubt it would be necessary to frame an "undesirable". Rap sheets as long as your arm do not lie.

You should support candidates who run on a platform of locking up anyone with a past drug arrest for 15 years, for being in the vicinity of a crime. You would lose elections. But you would be much happier. Because you would know why you lost. Right now you lose elections when people figure out that is what your candidate stands for, even though he never openly says it. Then you get angry thinking that people voted for socialism or who knows what.

So why aren't undesirables smart enough to obey the law, problem solved.

If every person who is arrested is guilty, then you don't need jury trials. So you should support a candidate who runs on a platform of amending the Constitution to get rid of the Bill of Rights. You know you would lose that election. And so you are driven to dishonesty, when you use police lying the same way the left uses the Supreme Court, to get a result that you could not openly and honestly get through the democratic process.

Your habitual offender laws work great. They are used mostly for two things, 1) to threaten con artists with life, to pressure them to lie and say other inmates confessed to whatever they are accused of, and 2) to lock up sloppy incompetents for life, who are too dumb to lie for the prosecutor in court, and get arrested twice for every dumb crime they actually commit.

I have a better solution. I propose that the group responsible for the majority of police interaction clean up their act and obey the law like the majority. I have never had a problem with the police nor do I know anyone that has. I am not a police officer but I am damn sick and tired of the real source of the problem and cannot imagine how they must feel. How about we fix the problem not just treat a symptom of the problem.

If you are sick and tired of something, you should find out what it is like to hear from a family member over a scratchy phone for 50 years, because a cop lied, or a prosecutor coerced a felon to lie in court. You are sick and tired enough to complain on Disqus. Those people are sick and tired enough to go out and risk years in prison to burn down a police station.

You don't know sick and tired, until you have a family member suffer unredressed injustice. And the people who support the unredressed injustice are too crooked to even run political candidates who are open and honest about what they support.

So you want the incompetent people who vote Democrat to continue electing corrupt people on the state and local level to police themselves ? You want Democrat officials to publish statistics ??? Similar to the fake polls they put out to discourage people ? I didn't say the state and local should not be monitored. I said that is supposed to be the job of the injustice department. There should be no plea bargains , good time or any other shortening of sentences. If prisoners misbehave, beat their azzez and add time. Jail house snitches should not be allowed, it is too close to self-incrimination . Is the system perfect ? No it is not. I told my child her whole life to obey the laws and have no interaction with the police. I told her that she didn't have to like or agree with the laws, just obey them. I explained the procedure to change laws if enough people agreed with her. I doubt you could find a guilty man in the entire prison system.

There is no independent institution to investigate police.

Yes there is or at least was. It is called the Justice Department. Then they were weaponized and became the Department to overthrow Elected Presidents. The Country was founded on the Rule of law that no one was above. We have allowed that principal to be bastardized on local, state and federal levels by the very people who are supposed to protect it ... the judiciary.

The judicial branch does not have the power to manufacture evidence, prosecute, or punish police who victimize the innocent.

I wasn't aware the FBI and the attorneys General had no power. Violation of Civil Liberties is a Federal offense and that is what manufacturing evidence would be.

Here is a cop staging a bullet call the FBI Check back in 100 days and we will see if they investigated that cop staging the bullet.

Republican prosecutors and sheriffs say jailhouse confession witnesses are an important tool to get convictions when they have no other evidence, and they have already told the papers the defendant is guilty. But it is just a complete scam that is as old as the hills, which the authors of the Bill of Right understood well. The Founders just didn't realize what would happen when you prohibited coercing confessions, because it had never been tried before. When you are not allowed to coerce confessions, it is still cheaper to coerce other inmates to lie, than to actually solve hard cases.

If you watched that on any liberal media network, then your eyes have deceived you. Might want to try stronger contacts to see better next time.

I have watched it in person, clown. Sickest thing I have ever seen. All witnesses can lie or be wrong. But in the case of jailhouse confession so-called witnesses, it is a complete scam setup, and all the lawyers know it, and the prosecutor knows the witness is lying, and they knowingly put the witness up there to lie and victimize the innocent.

Yeah, I'll take my chances with a lying politician (aren't they all, starting with the dems) let loose on the streets then say, the guy who was released last week then promptly killed the witness against him. You talk a game, but don't know the first thing about prison revolvers (who even inmates doing hard time can't stand because of their unpredictibility). Those are the idiots that are the real threats and they are being let go by the thousands. They will keep commiting crimes until they do something that will lock them up for good. The longer they stay in the better, but here you are shooting off your mouth about crappe you no nothing about - except for what you learned on those SVU cop shows or what some Phoenix degreed lawyer tells you. Everyone inside isn't innocent you complete and total moronic wonder.

I appreciate that you have no idea. It is a really sick thing, that is hard to believe. Even all the law school professors who write about it, don't fully appreciate it. Because they have probably not watched it in person, or had personal knowledge of the details the witnesses lied about.

The only thing most academics know is that dozens of murder convictions which were overturned when DNA was invented were based on jailhouse witnesses. But once you watch it with your own eyes and understand it, it is clearly always lies, and it takes over the trial in a way most academics don't fully grasp. And of course you are just a parrot who knows nothing.

What ???? Another stupid liberal on bb

I am to the right of you and anyone else on here. It is a joke to hear people talk about liberty and the Constitution, who don't support the Bill of Rights, and don't realize the Bill of Rights is a historic anti-police screed, based on long historical experience with police and human nature. You people are no different from the British or 1,000 dead civilizations before them.

You must be referring to the FBI lying to the FISA court.

It is the nature of the political establishment and the mob, to overlook lies used to predetermine the outcome of mock trials, to lock up whomever the majority thinks is undesirable, for the greater good. Democrat cities think police are undesirables. Feds think Republicans are undesirables. Republican counties think anyone with a past drug arrest is fair game to frame for life in prison.

Kim Foxx and her 25,000 felons are republican? Haha, the Dems are letting felons out by the truckload

When you lock up innocent people, or give people life because their friends lied about who owned the drugs, their families and sympathizers vote Democrat for 50 years. Republicans are too stupid to realize that if you lock up enough people, and especially enough innocent people, their families and sympathizers reach a critical mass after a few decades, to tip elections in places like Georgia and Florida. I notice not too many Republicans have been rewarded for Giuliani increasing policing in New York. Instead of Lazio and D'Amato, we got Clinton and Cortez. That is what de Tocqueville called "Democracy in America". The families of those in prison, realize they can vote to let everyone out. Rather than try to improve the justice system to separate better between guilty and innocent, Republicans just want to lock up more people including more innocents. And Democrats just want to release more people including the guilty.

A prosecutor that suborns perjury and the false witness should face the same penalties as the defendant.

Yes, in the Stela of Hammurabi. But 4,000 years later we have slouched to where it is standard practice for prosecutors to coerce and supervise perjury for local political reward. Here are some plain examples of a prosecutor supervising perjury without consequence:

Why is it wrong to confess at the jailhouse. If one must confess, where is the best place to confess? The church, the garden in the library with Colonel Mustard and the candlestick!!! Where?

They don't actually confess at the jailhouse. It is a scam, designed to play magoo idiots like you for suckers. Or I don't know, maybe you are doing the playing.

The interesting thing is, it doesn't matter if the confession the coerced inmate claims, is impossible based on all the other evidence. It is the only witness who tells a complete story in a single breath, instead of bits and pieces. It is the most colorful con artist selected from the inmate population, the only part of the trial half the jurors even wake up for. A dozen other rules of evidence, make nonsense confessions that contradict all the evidence, work better than all the other evidence. That is why prosecutors use jailhouse confession so-called witnesses even though they know they are lying, and even when their stories make no sense.

Do you think the people who wrote the Constitution liked criminals, and wanted to create a nation where criminals got away with it? Remember, one of their grievances in the Declaration of Independence was that murderers were getting away with it. Remember Thomas Jefferson wanted to drill a hole through a girl's nose for sodomy. And yet they wanted to make sure no criminal would ever be compelled to be a witness against himself. Why, if they wanted to convict criminals, did they want to deprive themselves of the best and most popular tool to do it?

I understand Republicans are parrots, who have not researched law enforcement across nations and throughout history. But those who founded our country had. And they knew that jailhouse confessions are not a valuable tool to convict criminals. They are the first resort of lazy hucksters, used to put over a fraud on the public without ever having to walk five feet to solve a crime. The founders knew jailhouse confessions are a scam.

How many guilty people do you think are in prison? I think they ought to remove any plea deal incentives, that'll cut down a lot of your "innoce.t" people in prison. I'm sorry but you hear of very few people who admit guilt when looking at prison, they'll have their fingerprints and them on video committing the crime and they'll STILL deny it. Coercing a guilty plea should be federal crime with a 20 year minimum. Suborning perjury from a witness should be the same. The issue is proving that happened. Which leads me to a question, how does a judge have the power to not allow a prosecutor to drop the charges like in the Flynn case?

I would like an independent institution in the executive branch at the state level, to compel reporting of all events in the justice system in a standardized way, and punish reporting failures like the SEC. Then we could have stats to do real research and honest debate, and improve the product. But the local political establishments don't want to cede power to the state level where the voters are judging them (and often punishing the party for what happens in safe districts). Because that would be like taking the samurai away from the daimyos. They would no longer be able to cheat to lock up and release whomever they want to lock up and release.

No one agrees with lying in court ... although, if it advances their careers or causes, some might. We saw for two years people like James Clapper lie on TV about Trump's Russia Collusion, even though in sworn testimony he said he had seen none. What do you call that?

You are wrong. Absolutely many people do love and support lying in court. Across all races and demographics in history, there is a demand to remove the people you don't like from the community. In the USA you would never get a law passed to just remove unpopular citizens. But if a cop can get around that by just lying in court, or a prosecutor can coerce a drug felon to lie in court to give an unpopular person life in prison, then he is the hero.

Consider a hypothetical of a shooting at a party, where the person who owns the gun has an incentive to take a 20-year deal and and lie say another person did it. And that other person has an incentive to defend his innocence, and gets life. One woman said that is great, we can force all these awful people to lie about each other, and give all of them life. She said if their scumbag families don't like them all getting life just for being at the party, it is their fault for hanging out with scumbags. She scolded me, suggesting that if I had my way the real killer might get away since nobody can prove which one really did it. It is better to give everyone there life, to guarantee the real killer gets justice.

Of course she is myopic, she doesn't realize this is incompatible with democracy. She has just manufactured whole families and groups of nihilists who hold a permanent grudge against the state, their government, and the general public, for unredressed injustice, locking up innocent people that are dear to them. Their families and sympathizers will vote to destroy everything until the end of time. Because they are right, their neighbors are their enemy.

I told a man my friend is serving life without parole from age 21, for a crime that didn't happen because a cop lied. He said wait, you left out the very important detail that that your friend was previously arrested with 7 pounds of GHB. I said she never had 7 pounds of GHB, the crime lab said the police were wrong about the suspicious substance, and all charges were dropped.

He said he doesn't believe me, he believes 100 newspaper articles that say she did have 7 pounds of GHB, and she is an evil rapist. And because she is an evil date rapist, then it makes perfect sense to frame her for life in a murder case. And the cop who framed her did a good thing, and everyone agrees. No one would punish a cop for lying, to give a young girl life in prison for a crime that didn't happen, because multiple newspapers whipped up the public with embellished news stories for clicks.

I have plain proof the cop lied and faked evidence, and they awarded him LEO of the Year for the case. You think they will ever admit they were wrong? They will eagerly take 70 years of someone's life for a crime that didn't happen, and be celebrated for it, before admitting to lying.

Don't be naive, you are surrounded by humans. They would relish locking up you or your family member just for being in the wrong place at the wrong time, because the papers pile on and sensationalize it for clicks. They would reward the liars, and punish those who set you free, at the ballot box.

Even though I knew that this sort of thing goes on it still blows my mind. At a minimum those thugs need to be sterilized; a great many euthanized. Unbelievable.

Short of that, I am sure you totally support police lying and faking any evidence they can, and coercing witnesses to lie, to get these people off the street for the greater good. Even when they are innocent of a particular crime. And then to protect your racket, you want to make sure no statistics of what you are doing are even written down. And then slimeballs, and magoo idiots like the ones who write on this website, come along and say "According to my research, there are no statistics to back up these allegations of police perjury and misconduct."

Meanwhile Republicans pray for crime all day, thinking they need an antiquated law-and-order strategy to beat a corpse.

Law and order is never antiquated. You are an idiot. Ask your Seminole leaders about law and order. They will know you are an idiot as soon as you open your mouth. You are projecting dims foment of hatred, violence, crime, anarchy, and chaos.

Seminole County is led by some of the dumbest white trash ever to drop out of the human intellectual competition.

Used-car salesmen like Seminole County State Attorney Phil Archer say if police and prosecutors are held accountable for victimizing the innocent, we will go back to the 1970's and put your family at the mercy of rapists and carjackers. But crime in the 1970's was not a result of prosecuting police and prosecutors. It was a result of failure to prosecute all criminals, and letting criminals out of prison based on a "rehabilitation" philosophy.

This present-day cult where police and prosecutors are immune from justice, is actually a lot like the rehabilitation fad of the 1960's, where criminals who prey on innocents for sport were assumed to be decent people who should be given the benefit of the doubt.

I want police and prosecutors prosecuted when they victimize the innocent, do you? That would be law and order and justice. My bet is you want none of that, you hippie. You look at a sick Dennis Rader predator like State Attorney Phil Archer, and you say he is a decent guy doing his best, cut him a break. I want State Attorney Phil Archer to get the death penalty.

You say come on, it is not the fault of police that there are these crazy people who need to be locked up. We need to look at the "root causes" of why police break the law. It is tough out there on the streets, police have to lie and cheat to level the playing field!

Maybe if people stopped breaking the law and acting like thugs, police wouldn't need to plant weed on them and coerce them to lie about each other in court. Maybe if there weren't so many problem communities and problem people in them, police wouldn't have to do the things they do!

I don't care what the root causes are, or why police and prosecutors lie and fake evidence and victimize the innocent. I just want them off the street when they do, lock them up and throw away the key. I don't need to hear all kinds of excuses for what happened.

The police are like horror-movie monsters, because when they frame you, nobody will believe you. So the moment they enter your house your life is at risk, as if you had been dropped in the polar bear cage at the zoo.

Some cops, not "Cops". Like any group in society, not all bad, not all good.

I take an economist's view, that all people will do bad if there is an incentive and no deterrent. And I see an incentive for police and prosecutors to frame anyone who is an undesirable according to the local mob, and to frame anyone they can convince the paper to say that person is evil for clicks. And no deterrent.

Man is evil when unrestrained. In the United States, man has been successful at subverting the Bill of Rights, to be evil, like man traditionally has been throughout history. The real surprise, is that it took as many years as it did. The main difference at this exact moment in the USA, is it is concealed and obfuscated.

For example, did you know when they have no evidence against a suspect, it it is common practice to just pay a felon to lie and say anyone they want to confessed? And the rules of evidence favor this scam over all other evidence. Did you know that the way the criminal courts work there is no penalty or deterrent to lying under oath? But most actual evidence of what happened in any crime, is suppressed by case law. Add to that the jurors are an idiot mob for whom no court can afford to enforce the rules. The hit rate on true guilt or innocence is unknowably bad.

In a few more years, people will come to the popular understanding of how perverted the justice system has become. And they will make a conscious choice whether to make it official, or to return to some of the geeky ideals of our founding.

Hayek had a chapter in "The Road to Serfdom" titled "Why the Worst Get On Top." That is an example of a system that selects evildoers as its employees. Right now you have to be willing to do evil, to wield the tools of the justice system the public wants wielded. And the most evil are selected for the most success. The more times you pay felons to lie, the more evidence you fake, the more of a hero you are.

There is BAD in everything... but sometimes the truth hurts that most cops are the good guys.. it really hurts when you are stupid and led by Antifa and BLM...

The "bad in everything" argument doesn't work. when cops refuse to write down or report examples of cops being bad. Do you support a new independent institution in the executive branch at the state level, to require reports of all activity from the justice system and punish reporting failures like the SEC? No. You don't want cops to be regulated like doctors or sellers of travel or insurance brokers. Because you want to conceal how bad they are. Because you want them to be bad when it suits you, and against whatever group of people you don't like. You want your own private rules, where the local political establishment can railroad anyone they find undesirable. And outsiders should mind their own business.

"And outsiders should mind their own business."
Project much? Take your own advice, hypocrite.

All your authority comes from the state level. All the laws, all the courts, all the prisons. So you don't have any of your own business, it is not allowed to you, not legally at least. But I know you get around the law.

Doctors and Insurance people don't put their lives on the line with every meeting with a stranger. Grow up you idiot!!!

So cops should be allowed to create unredressed injustice with no accountability, because their job is dangerous? That is chaos and violence. You are simply saying we will improve society, by just not counting the evil that we do. So every time you do good, you get a star. And every time you do bad you get a mulligan. At the end of every day, you say we got an A+, A- if you really want to be picky. Because our failures don't get counted, we can't ever do that, writing down our failures is kryptonite. It is a sickly corrupt and dishonest system. But you will go down with the ship, rather than improve the product.

You are a moron ... cops must be perfect 24/7/365 ... while dealing with the filthiest of the evil life-long criminal filth ... and the beyond evil robbers, rapists, pedophiles, torturers & murderers get to be evil 24/7/365 ... because that's what they are - evil criminals ... and then drug addicted trash like Floyd overdoses and dies-by-cop ... and the RATS riot, loot, burn & murder - their own neighborhoods & citizens ... to honor their new hero - a lifelong criminal & drug addict.

I know, any actual arguments or discussions of police and the justice system are taboo. We just have to say these pasty idiots are heroes, and anyone who says otherwise is stupid and obtuse. And above all, always insulate ourselves from any facts or research, by making sure each police department is its own cocoon of secrets and ignored misconduct, which is never recorded at the state level. And we can all pretend the misconduct doesn't exist.

I figured out a few weeks back, cops are so dumb a lot of them actually think they are the only crooked ones getting away with it. They don't realize there is a crew of identical crooked idiots the next town over, doing the same crooked things and also getting away with it.

You do know Trump and Republicans support a program that requires a database that must be reported to and checked by all police departments when hiring to verify they haven't been involved in any illicit or behavioral misconduct in other police departments, right?

That's a start. Sometimes they call the Securities Act of 1933 "the paper act" and the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 "the people act." The 1934 act created the SEC, to enforce the 1933 act. So there needs to be a Police and Prosecution Commission, to investigate and penalize people who fail to write down and report the data required in the database. I promise you, if I call the FBI and say "my local cop didn't get reported to the database" I will never get a callback or investigation.

Oh yeah, like they arrested all those investment bankers who caused the financial collapse of 07? I find your faith in government disturbing.

At least you know what the SEC did or didn't do, so you can argue about it and vote on it. Do you support a new institution to record and publish everything local police do? Or do you just want to defund them because you don't trust government?

Does your website include how many police officers have been killed while doing their job? Does it include how many times people have lied in court against a police officer? I didn't think so. You are a stupid liberal that has been eaten up by propaganda and now you try and spread it. FOAD

When a police officer is killed doing his job, other cops don't intentionally lose evidence. When a police officer kills someone, there is no designated cop to take the case. Is it the job of the victim's family to look into it? Or the mob? Is it the local prosecutor? State level law enforcement? The DOJ? If a cop kills someone, in most cases every one of those institutions will ignore it. When a cop is killed, the police never ignore it, all those institutions jump in it without having to wait for the other.

What happen to the cop that allegedly kill george floyd? they hid evidence? All the institutions ignored it?

It was a very rare case where a black guy died on video, so the mob took an interest. And only after those two things did anyone else take an interest. So the mob is a necessary and designed part of the process. No mob, no video, no black skin, no Democrat local political establishment, no investigation.

That is the system you prefer, where 99% of instances of real misconduct are overlooked, and fake misconduct is blown up into national election issues. You don't want an independent institution in the executive branch at the state level, to deal with police misconduct in a sane an orderly way. You want a few cops viciously sacrificed here and there, for all the bad things that go unpunished.

Dang, all that! I guess the part about "framing you" could be true, it could be tough to prove ones innocence' against the "machine".
However precedent has to be considered and discussed correct?
If one gets framed, what is one's past relationship with the law, 1st offence, 2nd offence, 7th offence? Just to walk into someone's home who does not have a record of infraction(s) with the law, it's going to be quite difficult to try or prosecute a completely innocent victim.

So you admit you can frame anyone with a past drug arrest. There is nothing to stop it, no institution to stop it. And in fact you will be celebrated. And once you can frame anyone with a past drug arrest, then you can threaten that drug felon with life in prison, to get that drug felon to swear to any testimony you want. And then with nothing institutional to stop it, you can use that coerced testimony of drug felons (who would not even be allowed to vote or own a gun) to frame anyone. And once the newspaper prints your allegations - since they can't afford reporters any more and just copy-paste the local police blotter or sports figures - once the newspaper copy-pastes your allegations (without being able to afford any investigation), the public will make you a hero for framing that completely innocent person.

The case of my friend is interesting: There are 100 newspapers articles in Google, including USA Today, that say she was arrested with 7 pounds of GHB. In fact she never possessed GHB. The crime lab said the police were wrong about the unknown substance, and all the charges were dropped. But because Google contains the false story that she was previously arrested with 7 pounds of GHB, they made the cop who lied and faked evidence to take her life without parole from age 21 "LEO of the Year."

I am glad when Republicans are honest this is how the justice system works. It is nice to discuss things with honest, rational people, who honestly think people with past drug arrests should be framed for the public good. Maybe we could even pass an honest law, that anyone in the vicinity of a crime with a past drug arrest gets 15 years. And anyone with a past drug arrest loses the right to a jury trial. So police don't have to do the dirty work, and nobody has to lie or let felons out of prison as a reward for lying. These are honest rational proposals, about reality. Whereas Democrats are on another planet talking about nonsense all day, saying it has to do with inter-generational trauma and global warming.

You think LEOs are not regulated??? There is MORE regulation of LEOs than medical professionals!! You are a VERY ignorant person!!

LOL the FDLE told me it is the job of private attorneys to prosecute police. I won't even waste my time challenging you to give me the name of the police regulator in Florida. There is none. I heard of the FREC, not the PPC. There is no number you can call and get any answer in most places. The SEC on the other hand, nobody even needs to call.

EVERY LEO is bound by the minimum standards of his accreditation agency. They are also bound by State and Local oversight. They are bound by ever changing case law and Supreme Court precedent. They have to get Certified and MAINTAIN Certifications on EVERY piece of equipment and special skill!! They are bound by Department Policies and Proceedures which are as thick as Dictionaries!! They are held accountable by Internal Affairs, Accrediting Agencies, Other LEO agencies ( Most Often FBI), Criminal Prosecuters, Defense Attorneys, Judges, Civil Courts (Law Suits) and Accrediting Agencies!! Try talking to a training/ Compliance Officer!! Stop watching Cop drama TV!

Judges, lawyers, accreditations, case law don't actually put police in prison when they victimize the innocent. Local oversight is "you did a great job framing that druggie, too bad the lawyers caught you this time, next time make sure to collect less actual evidence." FBI oversight is "please leave a message at the tone."

I don't own a TV. On TV, crime scene investigators actually care what happened, not just finding and ignoring evidence to fit the police narrative.

Rafael A. Mangual: How the growing trend of criminal-justice reform for its own sake will make policing riskier and the city less safe

The guy who wrote this article wants to defund the police! These people whine over and over it will cost too much to hire police, being a cop will be unattractive, they will quit, nobody will apply... SO PAY POLICE MORE, CLOWN! Once you have paid police more, and you are attracting better applicants doing a better job delivering the product you want, the number of things we have to debate about will be greatly reduced.

Then we can argue about whether it is all a free lunch to lock up more people. The more people you lock up, the more people's families vote to let everyone out. You are going to give a guy life because someone else paid him to help commit suicide with heroin? When you would have probably taken the first chance to put the heroin user himself in prison? And then all his family and sympathizers will vote Democrat for 50 years, and you have to argue and fundraise and campaign against them, because some hedonist jerk killed himself? Republicans act like it is a free lunch to give people life for drug crimes, and then whine all day that they have to run against people voting for socialism in the other party.

You never even consider that your mandate to lock up more people is filled the way demand for every product is filled, in the cheapest way possible. Republicans make no efforts to improve the accuracy rate on guilt or innocence. Then they complain that death-penalty cases cost so much. When they are the ones who demanded a criminal justice system built on the coerced lies of felons, to lock up as many people as possible, including innocents and incompetents. And then they get millions more people pushing back, with crazy laws that let everyone out, guilty or innocent, as fast as Republicans reward cops and prosecutors who put everyone in, guilty or innocent.

It is a free lunch to shoot incompetent idiots who run when police say stop. It is a free lunch for cops to plant drugs on people so they can't get a job for 20 years. It is a free lunch for prosecutors to coerce felons to lie and convict the innocent. Republicans refuse to write down and report all this stuff to weigh it in an honest debate. It is all hidden in a cocoon of secrecy at the local level. Then Republicans pretend it doesn't exist, and wonder why they lose elections.

As long as cops and judges and prosecutors are captive to tyranny of the majority under the local political establishment, misconduct will be overlooked and rewarded, and the justice system will be hacked to get around the Bill of Rights and round up undesirables Chinese style. Until you fix that, until you improve the product to prevent cops from being used like in feudal Japan, Republicans will be spending all their energy losing ground to socialists in statewide and national elections. Because innocent people's rights are being trampled, and Republicans either like it, or refuse to believe reality.

The justice system is a sick flawed demented scam. Half of Republicans want it that way, the other half have no clue. And all of them refuse to consider any kind of product improvements which would make their product compatible with democracy. Republicans are losing elections over this piece of corrupt garbage the justice system, but they are chained to it like a cop worship cult while the whole country sinks because they can't stop reciting tough-on-crime slogans from 40 years ago and recognize what is happening.

Here is a prosecutor lying at trial and saying a victim was shot while fleeing, just like in Ferguson:

Do you even care at all when you see police and prosecutors supervising perjury and faking evidence? You don't. And nobody can have a successful political party, when they support police and prosecutors in the crime of perjury. So you can write and whine all day, clean off your keyboard, because it is only going to get worse for you until you clean up the justice system in a sensible way, or socialists will do it for you their way.

It is like Sowell said in "The Vision of the Anointed": People have been making errors and committing sins as long as there have been people. The necessary ingredient for an error to become fatal, is insulation from feedback from reality. Republicans refuse to comprehend any of the flaws in the justice system, or how they manufacture millions of people voting against them in close elections. Sowell additionally mentioned how, unlike the private sector where people pay a quiet price for errors, politicians will carry on indefinitely, and drag down a whole society, without ever admitting they were wrong. Because the price of publicly admitting error and adjusting course is too high.

#1 If you mess around with illegal stuff and or hang around with criminals you're going to be identified as a criminal even if you didn't do that crime. #2 If you're a person of color your karma will be to be suspected even if you didn't do anything. So knowing that you need to stay far away from any possible criminals or criminal activity.

If you are a political party who supports cops committing perjury to give life sentences to people who have not committed the crime they are convicted of, because they are friends with people who have been arrested, your party will lose and your country will die.