A better question to address is how a single rogue person could do so much damage. This is institutional failure. Just going after this woman misses the big problem.
How do you know? Getting rehired is routine for misbehaving cops.
The risk posed by allowing her to walk free in society is too great; she should be indefinitely detained.
as far as lying about her background, criminal background checks are par for the course in this line of business. anything drug related ever, or anything indicating a propensity for lying are automatic disqualifications.
Background checks obviously didn't figure out that she was lying the first time. Why should we trust them a second time?
i think you're somehow confused about the core concept of a background check.
i think also that you've got a bone to pick, and you're trying to figure out who it is with. good luck there, little buddy.
I don't know why you think I have a bone to pick... You seem a little annoyed that I am responding to something that you did not mean to be your primary point. You are going to have to find a way to cope with that.
Indeed. I wonder how hard it would be to have random testing of the chemists' work.
and defendants should have their evidence retested by independent labs when possible.
I don't disagree that there's an institutional failure, and that perhaps there are others to blame, but she has negligently affected countless lives by disregarding her oaths to uphold the law, and I believe that sort of thing should carry more penalty, not less. Also, we really, really need to start making our civil servants accountable to flagrant violations of the law, lest we have more of them lying before Congress without fear of actual penalty.
FYI, this post is egregiously oversimplifying, and I deserve ridicule for that, but I'm going to bed -- on a normal day, I wouldn't respond to this for some time.
I'm not a fan of our overly aggressive justice system, but if it is going to be overly aggressive, it needs to apply equally aggressively to the watchers as well. Any asymmetry in application of the current practices leaves far more room for abuse in the future than one that is applied equally to all parties. Justice is blind. If she is going to aggressively wield her sword, both your standard street thugs and corrupt government officials should have equal chance of getting struck by her sword.
We can't let the entire system throw her under the bus for 20+ years, while many other guilty parties get away after having been complicit or actively colluded.
From Wikipedia:
If at any time the subject indicated his desire to halt the experiment,
he was given a succession of verbal prods by the experimenter, in this
order:[1]
1) Please continue.
2) The experiment requires that you continue.
3) It is absolutely essential that you continue.
4) You have no other choice, you must go on.
I wouldn't be surprised if there were emails from prosecutors that essentially parroted these instructions in a more indirect form."Please examine the evidence again."
"Finding justice requires that you examine the evidence again"
"It is absolutely essential that you examine the evidence again"
"You have no other choice, you must examine the evidence again"
One remark in the original article said she had access to files and samples for many cases that she was not primary on. Perhaps that's the issue -- the ability to taint results across the whole departmental workload.
Simple network analysis of every person (arresting officer, DA and other crime lab technicians) involved in these ~34k cases should be able to come up with a dozen or so people that warrant additional scrutiny.
Not to mention, she falsified lab results to the degree that she didn't even do any testing at all on many samples. That's pretty much close to zero time to file the report.
When it comes to intent - she deliberately tainted some samples! Gotta ask yourself why.
What is even more horrible, is that she'll do the time, but all the prosecutors, whose careers she boosted, would walk away from this clean...
I'm not vengeful or violent mostly, but shit like that makes my blood boil a little.
Policemen who wish to carry a tazer used to get electrocuted with one, just so they have an idea what sort of punishment they will dispensing to other people.
I think that every lawyer and DA and what not should be thrown in jail, right in the thick of it, so they'd get a good idea about what they subject other people to.