Police notes can't be vetted by lawyers, Supreme Court says

Shocked that this wasn't already the law out of general common sense. I wonder how many doctored police notes have been used to convict the innocent or exonerate bad cops?

Of course they can't, it's wise decision.

Some things in life are too obvious for writing them in laws.

Some things in life are too obvious for writing them in laws.

Exactly. During my law enforcement career we were often told to be careful with what we put in our notes and I got into the habit of having an uninvolved officer read over my report to ensure that it flowed smoothly.

We were also told how to treat our notebooks if they were ever called into evidence by a lawyer. All pages dealing with the suspect were to be left alone. All other pages we could staple together with as many staples as we wished. I found you could put over 100 staples per page.

Some things in life are too obvious for writing them in laws.

Exactly. During my law enforcement career we were often told to be careful with what we put in our notes and I got into the habit of having an uninvolved officer read over my report to ensure that it flowed smoothly.

We were also told how to treat our notebooks if they were ever called into evidence by a lawyer. All pages dealing with the suspect were to be left alone. All other pages we could staple together with as many staples as we wished. I found you could put over 100 staples per page.

And that's why trust in the police is waning.

"A job that you love"

That may be true, but these kind of actions by the police are, imo, a reaction to the way a lot of defense lawyers behave. If a cop simply writes exactly what he's thinking/feeling/suspecting etc in his notes, and then those notes are read out of context it can easily make a good cop look bad.

cops shouldn't write that stuff tho, but a straightforward account of what they observed. Those notes are legal documents and need to be treated as such.

Look at the Dziekanski case - they put the 4 cops in a room together and allowed them to collude on their statements. Now they're charged with perjury, tho it is their superior officers who should be charged as well.

That may be true, but these kind of actions by the police are, imo, a reaction to the way a lot of defense lawyers behave. If a cop simply writes exactly what he's thinking/feeling/suspecting etc in his notes, and then those notes are read out of context it can easily make a good cop look bad.

True enough. Simple solution - shoot all the lawyers. On the flip side, not providing all notes etc. or only preparing them with a lawyers input can make an innocent suspect look guilty and let a guilty one get away.

I for one know defence lawyers are douche nozzles, but that's their purpose. It's not to be liked and stroked like a kitten, it's to provide the best defence for their client. If one makes a good cop look bad, I don't see that as the cops' fault.

That may be true, but these kind of actions by the police are, imo, a reaction to the way a lot of defense lawyers behave. If a cop simply writes exactly what he's thinking/feeling/suspecting etc in his notes, and then those notes are read out of context it can easily make a good cop look bad.
If the prosecution is just and according to law, only a god can help this person, every lawyer is powerless. Your prosecution must be as good as their defence, every lawyer who will be trying to do something as you say "with behaviour" in this situation will look like a clown.

May I choose the wall?)))

And that's why trust in the police is waning.

Exactly. Part of why I'm not getting any hours with my agency these days is because I handed over my unedited notes on a shooting where I showed up after the fact. Seems that some of what I wrote down had been excised from the notes of the other deputies present and a security camera at a nearby Costco substantiated what was in my notes...and the lawyers were bird-dogged to the security camera because I had observed it and suggested that the video evidence be recovered.

Seriously, even though I'm hardly a career LEO my limited exposure to the inside of the system has left me very jaded. I used to be adamantly pro-law enforcement (as my old posts will indicate) but since the past few years I know better. It's also been pretty sad that I've had a couple of run-ins with other agencies where their guys were way out of line and they dropped it when they saw my badge. Which makes me wonder just how many regular citizens end up with citations or in jail just because some thug-with-a-badge is in a bad mood.

Some of you people constantly wonder why I advocate for an armed citizenry when you supposedly have the police to 'protect' you (and they have no legal obligation to do that) and I contend that anymore the police are who you need to be most worried about.

A criminal can kill you and they'll probably not get away with it. A cop can outright murder you and experience proves that the whole system will line up to cover him and protect him.

I don't think that arming yourself is good protection against the police. You'll likely wind up dead or charged with first degree murder. You pull a gun on a cop, then what? Shoot him, go to jail big time. Disarm him and let him go, you're going to have a whole SWAT team after you.

Guns aren't the only arms. A lapel camera might be of more value.