Text 6333, 51 rader
Skriven 2010-03-28 11:16:32 av Peter Knapper (3:772/1.0)
   Kommentar till text 6255 av Michiel van der Vlist (2:280/5555)
Ärende: Statement against Statement (was: Murder charges after misc)
====================================================================
Hi Michael,

 MV>> Here courts are not so naive as to believe police officers never
 MV>> make mistakes and always tell the truth. If it is the word of the
 MV>> policmen against that of the accused, the court will treat it as
 MV>> any other case where it is one man's word against another's.

In NZ we have had a few re-trials recently where the accused was found innocent
(and released) of the crimes they had previously been found guilty and
imprisoned. In many cases there had been quite some time (20+ years) between
the original conviction and technology changes (such as DNA) mean that a new
(and completely contradictory) light could be shone on the events. 

The net result has been a re-look at how the local Police gather material for
their convictions, and one thing that has become apparent, is that in the past
the police do not seem to look at anything other than the "most likely"
suspect. This means the Police are not so much guilty of evidence fabrication,
but ignoring alternative evidence. The end result of this is the release of the
initial person arrested, but a loss of the REAL culprit, because relevant
material is no longer available.

Most NZer's would like to think our local Police "get it right" and most of the
time they do. Our courts DO seem to hold the police accountable, more so now
than previously, as technology improves and the population gain skills in
detecting a miss-carriage of justice", however one thing still concerns me,
that we are seeing too many 3rd party comments from people who enter a debate
at its later stages and claim to have a better understanding than the police of
the events. Without qualification of the "evidence" of this 3rd Party, we
cannot truly be comfortable with their input (IMHO), but the media here is not
always helping the end result in any way, but frequently being used to
"distort" the truth. This is a real catch 22 situation to me...

The bottom line is, how much investigation needs to be done to ensure the right
person has been arrested?

In many cases one has to rely totally on the arresting officer AND any involved
parties, to provide the most valuable evidence, and this (to me) results in a
real catch 22 situation. We all clammer for lower costs, but how low does the
cost need to be to still ensure you have a valid result?

I dont know the answer to this.....;-(

There is also a secondary issue here, how MANY previous convictions were wrong
OR how many accused found Innocent, that were actually guilty. This is a
perenial issue that there will never be an answer for IMHO...

Cheers..............pk.


--- Maximus/2 3.01
 * Origin: === Maxie BBS.  Ak, NZ +64 9 444-0989 === (3:772/1)