Ontario’s Crown attorneys will soon be required to report cases where they believe police officers have lied under oath after a Toronto Star investigation found more than 100 cases of police deception in Ontario and across the country.
I think the relationship between the Crown Attorney and law enforcement is too close for this to be effective. There should be a special investigations office within the Crown Attorney's office to deal exclusively with these types of matters.
The crown attorneys want the cops to lie to help make their case. This won't help. The fact cops were not disciplined after a case fell apart due to their lies shows that nobody really cares about this.
Don't the major Canadian police agencies have Internal Affairs units, or some call them Professional Standards agencies ? I have to suspect they do and the real responsibility for internal discipline at that level would rest with them - with referrals to criminal prosecution when appropriate.
I worked IA for two years and strongly believe in their mission. False Hollywood portrayals aside, most professional-minded officers support strong IA units.
well again, if a case collapses due to cops' lying on the stand, and there are no consequences, IA isn't doing their job. I harbor the suspicion that among cops there's a degree of being OK with lying if you know the scumbag is guilty. And I harbor a suspicion that on this forum there would be a lot of agreement with that policy.
"andyt" said well again, if a case collapses due to cops' lying on the stand, and there are no consequences, IA isn't doing their job. I harbor the suspicion that among cops there's a degree of being OK with lying if you know the scumbag is guilty. And I harbor a suspicion that on this forum there would be a lot of agreement with that policy.
I admit that there is truth in this, unfortunately. It's a case of human nature conflicting with legal standards and sometimes the weaker humans win, hence the need for a robust IA effort to help keep the system as clean as possible in the long run.
Agreed. But I think that human nature extends to the entire justice system. Ie prosecutors for sure, and even judges. And juries. So "Quis custodiet ipsos custodes?"
I worked IA for two years and strongly believe in their mission. False Hollywood portrayals aside, most professional-minded officers support strong IA units.
well again, if a case collapses due to cops' lying on the stand, and there are no consequences, IA isn't doing their job. I harbor the suspicion that among cops there's a degree of being OK with lying if you know the scumbag is guilty. And I harbor a suspicion that on this forum there would be a lot of agreement with that policy.
I admit that there is truth in this, unfortunately. It's a case of human nature conflicting with legal standards and sometimes the weaker humans win, hence the need for a robust IA effort to help keep the system as clean as possible in the long run.
Good. Name them and charge them and then FIRE THEM AND IMPRISON THEM. Good riddance.
Sorry, but when someone lies to get a conviction and a prison sentence then they deserve their own conviction and prison sentence.
Good. Name them and charge them and then FIRE THEM AND IMPRISON THEM. Good riddance.
Sorry, but when someone lies to get a conviction and a prison sentence then they deserve their own conviction and prison sentence.
That should go for EVERYONE who lies trying to get a conviction, including so called "victims".
Police would decide whether the officer will be charged with a criminal offence.
Makes me think this won't go anywhere.