Comment by MCRed | Hacker News Reader

Comment by MCRed | Hacker News Reader

A few years ago I remember reading reports of the FBI forensic labs doing much worse-- taking evidence from the crime scene and contaminating evidence taken from the accused with it so that it would produce a "match" and the like. It was a big scandal.

In fact over the past 20 years I've heard this story at least a dozen times-- where crime "labs" at different levels of government and in different states (eg: state labs, federal lagbs, etc) were caught doing this.

And when it happens, that isn't enough to get people to be able to appeal unless they have evidence the lab did it in their specific case.

One of the problems of our system is that the criminal system is lacks checks and balances. The judges, prosecutors, police all work for the government. They all have the same interests-- they all report to people who want to look "tough on crime".

Since the police immediately take over crime scenes and collect the evidence and then get the evidence analyzed, they have a lot of power to be corrupt in the interest of more convictions-- and the consequences are negligible for being caught.

Whose going to try a dirty cop? You can shoot a guy in the back on video and never get put on trial for it in this country. (I left Texas when a cop gunned down an unarmed black kid who was on his knees crawling away from him... shooting him multiple times in the back... on my college campus. The cop lost his job and then joined the police force in a suburb. No charges were filed. Apparently a black kid crawling away was "threatening" to the white cop. Alas, I moved to a liberal state and was then myself the victim state corruption- though fortunately, the damage was only $3k to a lawyer.)

This is why I think any evidence submitted in court needs to come from an independant lab, done in a double blind way, and with several audit cases sent to that lab regularly (eg: taking dna from people not involved in crimes and send it in as if it was part of an investigation and see if they are fabricating evidence.)

The idea that the government is independant and objective is to me, now that I'm older and have seen these scandals over the years, laughable.

Every time it happens everyone acts like its' a rare thing.

It's not.

I think, the problem is similar to the trouble we have with judges in our country. One judge recently said something that really put a very shady light on many of his colleagues. I regret, that I don't remember it exactly, what he said.

The trouble in my opinion with some judges in my country and with the police in some countries is, that everybody just assumes, that because they work for law enforcement, they have a high level of integrity. But when you look how they are educated, the subject "integrity" is not even touched (I even don't think, that it is taught in law schools).

In my country, when somebody is already a judge, there is nearly no chance at all, that this person will be held accountable for misjudging. I think, not even the highest courts can replace a judge that repeatedly and knowingly is bending the law. At least I don't know of any case at all where a judge was punished or even replaced. And don't think, that all judgments are correct in my country.

In my opinion, when there is one thing to be learned from history, it is that any person can err and even the best meaning persons can change into dictators over time depending on situations.

Yes, and having travelled extensively and lived in Mexico and Chile, my experience tells me that while the USA has failed to have adequate checks and balances, other countries often have even less. I loved both of those countries, but I wouldn't really feel safe in Mexico, and I didn't feel fully safe in Chile. I think the Carabineros of chile are taught integrity and are mostly above reproach, however, and so I hold Chile out as a good example of doing it right. But even still, none of these countries have enough checks and balances.

I think the problem is there's a magical thing that happens to people when they think about government.

They somehow think it's ok for government to do things that individuals cannot. And once you give a group of people that magical power, it's easy to forget that they are people.

When I was younger, I thought that the western countries (US and Western Europe) are better (off) than other countries like South America or Asia, because they have much less corruption than those countries.

Today I am differentiating much more and I must admit that I am not knowing, why we are better of as for example South American countries. Of course, they have a high level of corruption, but when you look deeper, you will see, that we in Europe have also much corruption. The main difference: While in many South America countries everybody knows about the corruption, for example in Germany corruption is much much more covered -- but it exists, maybe even in the same degree as in South American countries. It is just covered much more. What makes me worry is, that while the normal police-men in Germany may have integrity, the normal top-politician seems to have none left. I can give no name of a top politician today, where I would assume, that he is not influenced or even bribed by some groups.

I think, that this gives a really bad signal to all the people in this nation. Many say: "Why should I pay taxes, for those crooked people?" And I must admit, that this is a strong argument in these times.

The difference is that in the US and EU, stuff generally works. People are educated and there's some sense of doing things properly. This sense seems far more diminished in South America. And many people just come to expect this. So people that can do well, they (rightfully) look out for themselves. When everything sucks, there's just more important stuff than worrying about a state official stealing millions.

If things in the US started falling apart then I'm guessing folks would get upset and demand changes.

I think, partially you made a good point. We have a lot of talents and also a lot of sense for integrity in our countries. But when we look at history, even societies with good starting and a lot of sense for good and right things, can fail very, very fast! I say that because I am German and I know what happened in our past.

>If things in the US started falling apart ...

What exactly do you mean? Technically or society?

I think "falling apart" does not go by a click, but comes incremental. I see a lot of incremental decline in western societies at least from the 80s.

I also hoped, that people will go upset and demand changes. But I guess it is like the boiling frog. The frog feels comfortable in the lukewarm water and when it incrementally gets hotter, he does not recognize and when he does, it is just to late. We all are the boiling frog.

You're right, it's a slow decline. I suppose I mean that if fundamentally, water, electric, public safety, Internet, police response, etc. just didn't work, to the point where you didn't totally count on them, then people would be more upset in the US, to the point where they'd demand change.

Yes, I would agree to that. Thanks for the explanation, I was not sure, how to understand your statement.

My concern is, that people are more upset when their favorite tv show is not view-able as when our democratic systems are eroding.

I think there is a big slice of perspective you're missing here.

Yes, at the higher levels of power everything is dirty.

However, you have to look at what the consequences of that are, how it manifests in a society, and how far it spreads.

And in Germany, it works pretty well. Yes, enormous government projects don't always go to the most capable or efficient. Yes, big business owners contribute to politicians, avoid taxes, and erect legal obstacles to competition that would benefit society. However, the society basically works. The corruption is not interfering with basic services to the people. A journalist can write what she wants without fear of physical reprisal. Individual property rights are by-and-large respected. School teachers actually benefit the children. Police officers don't operate as a tax force on their own behalf. Thats not the case in every country.

So while I agree with you that even the 'best' countries still have a very real battle to maintain integrity, there is absolutely a spectrum and largely, North America and Western Europe are near the top of it.

I think North America is corrupt beyond any help. Look at the deep state they do horrible things and no one cares. And there is no freedom of expression, even as i write this im afraid. The cia infects people with sifilis has torture concentration camps all over the world where they imprision people without a trial and inflict upon them all kinds of sick and perverted tortures. They traffic drugs and control criminal organizations in sveral countries, they are the top dogs in the underworld. They persecute journalists they hire some to decieve the public. They are really toxic and deceithfull. Not to mention the wars they go in foreign countries and kill thousands if not millions and destroy any trace of civilization. They a destructive force. =(

>North America and Western Europe are near the top of it.

When North America and Western Europe are near "the top of it" (I don't know, if I completely understand the sentence correctly, but I guess you mean, that they are best in integrity ...), than this is not a good sign in my opinion.

I see an enormous decline in democracy, freedom and integrity all over the world. And as I live in Europe, I see it very drastically here. Of course I am worried about developments in countries like Russia or China, but I am even more worried about the state in which the countries are, which should be role models of freedom and democracy.

>In fact over the past 20 years I've heard this story at least a dozen times-- where crime "labs" at different levels of government and in different states (eg: state labs, federal lagbs, etc) were caught doing this.

Yes, the problem is that those "crime labs" are not scientists, they are basically scientists-turned-cops.

As you propose, those should be independent labs, perhaps private, that live and die by their reputation for results (and could be hit with a huge lawsuit if they're not careful, unlike a government agency).

And double-bind should be mandatory too.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/FBI_Laboratory#Controversy

> The history of the FBI Lab hasn't been without controversy. Dr. Frederic Whitehurst, who joined the FBI in 1982 and served as a Supervisory Special Agent at the Lab from 1986 to 1998, blew the whistle on scientific misconduct at the Lab. In a subsequent investigation, it was found that evidence had been falsified, altered, or suppressed, or that FBI agents had testified falsely, in as many as 10,000 cases, resulting in many false convictions. More than a decade later, cases were still being overturned because of this massive fraud.

Looks like they are back on track. I foresee in 2025 somebody writing "massive scientific misconduct and fraud has been discovered in FBI labs from 2010 till 2020, but the major reforms implemented since should prevent if from reoccurring in the future".

Made all the worse by the federal government's digital data collection, to which the only falsification that needs be done is an insert statement into a record, and not even falsifications need to be done, as they can likely paint a picture of a myriad of suspects who happen to have been at a point a and a point b within x and y interval.

Don't worry, it's just a few bad apples...that spoil the whole barrel.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com