Mass. Court Stupidity
- Saying public confidence in law enforcement must be protected, the state's high court ruled yesterday that police officers can be forced to take lie detector tests during internal investigations into possible criminal activity.
Patrick Bryant, a lawyer who represented the Massachusetts Coalition of Police union, said the SJC has banned the use of lie detectors in the courts and then singles out police officers to be targeted.
"So why would you subject police officers and only police officers, to a technology that is essentially bogus?" he asked.
Unfortunately, this case involves accusations of child molestation. And even though the parents who initially accused the officer of improper conduct admitted that the charges were unfounded, everyone has very strong opinions where children are involved and it colors their thinking (we are sometimes guilty of it ourselves. The officer returned to work in 2000 and as far as the article relates, no other problems have ever arisen, leading us to believe nothing ever did in the first place.)
Essentially, what the Massachusetts Supreme Court has done, is opened up their police officers to discipline based on a discredited technology that isn't even allowed to be used against any other citizen in the Commonwealth. Less rights for them just because they're the police.
Granted, Massachusetts is about the most liberal state in the nation. Until Obama made it to the Senate, John Kerry was ranked the most liberal senator with Ted "the swimmer" Kennedy being distant second. But we have a hard time imagining signing away due process rights simply because you want to serve and protect.
We wonder what their hiring numbers have been lately.
Essentially, what the Massachusetts Supreme Court has done, is opened up their police officers to discipline based on a discredited technology that isn't even allowed to be used against any other citizen in the Commonwealth. Less rights for them just because they're the police.
Granted, Massachusetts is about the most liberal state in the nation. Until Obama made it to the Senate, John Kerry was ranked the most liberal senator with Ted "the swimmer" Kennedy being distant second. But we have a hard time imagining signing away due process rights simply because you want to serve and protect.
We wonder what their hiring numbers have been lately.
Labels: we got nothing
posted by SCC at 12:01 AM
13 Comments:
Where is the ACLU when someone's rights are truly violated. Defending some actual criminal I assume.
This is a travesty.
Actually, according to the liberal Americans for Democratic Action:
In 2003, Kennedy was a 95 and Kerry was an 85; there were four 100s and 12 other 95s.
In 2004, Kennedy and 16 others were 100s; Kerry missed 75% of the votes but was "perfect" on the 25% he cast.
In 2005. Obama, Kerry, and 20 others were 100s
In 2006 Obama was a 95 (also Kerry); there were 12 100s including Kennedy.
In 2007 Kennedy was an 85, Kerry was a 90, and Obama was perfect in the 15 votes he made (out of 20 used as the metric).
IOW Kerry, Kennedy, and Obama are all about as liberal as possible, as are a lot of other Democrat Senators, including Clinton.
with apologizes to polygraph operators out there.
The tech is only as good as the guy reading it, so people can -- and do-- shop for friendly operators that will give them the results they want.
The lie box is one step above reading tea leaves. So I guess its OK for the cops, huh? Yeah, if they don't like it it must be because they are hiding something, right?
Jeeze.
"Saying public confidence in law enforcement must be protected, the state's high court ruled yesterday that police officers can be forced to take lie detector tests during internal investigations into possible criminal activity."
Um,thats a violation of Miranda/5th amendment.
If they are accusing you of a crime and read Miranda then its nolonger a Garrity/admin type situation.
They cannot force you to take a poly for criminal investigation.
This will go to SCOTUS.
Why not make it MANDATORY for all those f*cking priests who are child molesters take the f*cking lie box???
Violation of Civil Rights, straight up.
Unfortunately, this case involves accusations of child molestation. And even though the parents who initially accused the officer of improper conduct admitted that the charges were unfounded,
--
THIS HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH HIM BEING THE POLICE!! If they guy is a perv, he is a perv: hang him from his d**k! Leave the officer issue out of it.
The polygraph is not a lie detector. It detects the bodies physical responses to a stimulus, in this case a question posed to the person. Many things can affect one's physical response such as inappropriate guilt over past deeds (for all us Catholics), illnesses such as OCD and Depression, etc.. And as for the accusations mentioned, if they occurred during a divorce then you cannot give them much credence at all. Most male officers, and even some female officers now, know how powerful a tool a false allegation is and more and more soon to be ex's are using them. If you're a copper going through a divorce hire the best lawyer you can find and get it over with as quick as possible and remember to always have witnesses around when interacting with your former bride....
THIS HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH HIM BEING THE POLICE!! If they guy is a perv, he is a perv: hang him from his d**k! Leave the officer issue out of it.
========
Dumbass, the accusations were unfounded. As in "no basis in reality." As in the cop sued the parents making the accusation for millions, but lost in court. The parents made it up in an attempt to destroy the cop. READ THE F#$%ING ARTICLE YOU BRAIN DEAD F$%^!!!
Polygraphs,VSAs and other witch craft are total junk science.
The lie box is one step above reading tea leaves.
----------------------------
Maybe two leaves. It has its place in legitimate investigations but it should never be used as the sole evidence for anything. Much like paid rats, a lot of good information comes from it, along with a fair amount of nonsense, with no good way to know for sure what is nonsense and what is not.
the best reason ever to do no work and tell no lies.
I voluntarily submitted to a polygraph during an investigation into the actions of some of my Soldiers in Iraq (over a year after the alleged incident). I observed their actions during the incident in question and answered a bunch of questions. The polygraph seemed to indicate that I was not lying so the investigation finally ended. However, I still remain leery of them and I would probably not do it again. I know that I answered every question truthfully (they alternated between pertinent questions about the case and random ones about personal values), but upon checking my results, the operator stated something along the lines of, "one response was a little iffy, but you're good, everything checks out." I still wonder which response was "iffy."
<< Home