Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submitlogin

> the FBI provided two blank CDs, claiming the recording devices malfunctioned

The levels of day-to-day corruption within the US judicial system are almost comical at times, scary at others...

Between the police constantly getting away with committing crimes, prosecutors essentially blackmailing innocent people into pleas, and judges often ignoring the rule of law (with VERY shaky justifications), it seems like the entire system is fubar.

The US system is just corrupt through and through. I see nothing redeeming about it. The only people who seem to [sometimes] receive justice are the rich, and while that is the case on other countries, in many of those countries that is a "scandal" in the US it is "working as intended."



My opinion is that the levels of corruption in the American justice system have always been the same or are tending to decline in aggregate, similar to violent crimes (I don't have any statistics for corruption). It just seems that the opposite is happening because of the ubiquity and lack of cost associated with mass communication. To put it another way, when corrupt actions occur in a particular case, hundreds of thousands and possibly millions of people hear about it. This didn't always used to happen, especially when mass communication was centrally controlled by a few broadcasting corporations.


It would be helpful for you to have data to back up that sentiment. But quite frankly, I am very skeptical that corruption is on the decline. Yes, mass communcation makes it easier to hear about these sorts of violations, but easy mass communication has also opened the door to easy mass surveillance. So corruption is being expressed in new ways. Easy communications and information sharing also makes it possible for law enforcement to coordinate these kinds of dodgy ways of circumventing the spirit of laws and regulations.


The Corruption Perceptions survey is a useful metric. The USA tends to hang with Japan around the high teens in ranking year after year. Interestingly, there is a wider variance in perceptions of American corruption than for other countries.


>The Corruption Perceptions survey is a useful metric. The USA tends to hang with Japan around the high teens in ranking year after year. Interestingly, there is a wider variance in perceptions of American corruption than for other countries

I think the perception of corruption is interesting, because overall the West is far lower than elsewhere. Link for those interested: http://www.transparency.org/cpi2013/results

While when you actually talk to people, corruption in the West is pretty widely acknowledged and even outright accepted. For example, when the NSA stories first broke the reaction on Reddit was largely a mix of:

"Duh, this is confirming what we already know"

and

"Well, it's not like other countries aren't doing it too" (even though, at that time, only the NSA was being highlighted and there was little/no news about their European, Canadian, Australian etc. counterparts.

What had been previously relegated by the mass populace as conspiracy theory nonsense was very quickly accepted, and then very quickly relegated to acceptance.

What this would lead me personally to believe, from just watching these things unfold, watching the mass reaction to it and then talking with others about it, is that we in the West widely acknowledge corruption here but out of a combination of a feeling of powerlessness (what am I, Joe Bloggs, going to be able to do about it), being removed from it (this doesn't affect I, Joe Bloggs, all that much) and probably an inherent sense of nationalism (well, it's probably much worse over there in that other country) we actively downplay the level of corruption in our societies, and I believe that this probably ends up being reflected in these surveys.

I've no doubt that the above is conjecture, but it's just what I've formed from my own experiences. There is a very marked feeling of powerlessness though, and the little action taken, even political action, over the things that have been exposed in the West would solidify that opinion somewhat more.


the wider variance certainly would make more sense... the US has a ton of people. New Orleans PD is notoriously corrupt, the "Chicago Way" is even a thing (vote early and vote often!). Compare that to a mid size city/state like Des Moines, Iowa and of course you're going to see big differences in corruption perceptions.


While I fully agree that mass communication is inflating our perception, it also goes both ways. A person that get constantly bombarded that their profession is corrupt is more likely to yield to corruption themselves.


Indeed. It's hard to even say we have had popular rule of law given things like Korematsu, but these days we have legitimately challenging legal questions (about whether a human has to see something for it to count as a search, for instance), and as bad as some things are, it's not public mass lawless condemnation like there used to be. Now we have some private courts and a comparatively small number of suspicious governmental mishaps (perhaps an advantage to "Terrorism" being the enemy of our era -- hard to paint millions of people with that brush).


Systemic corruption, as with sketchy asset forfeiture, doesn't show up in corruption statistics. Pretty much any thuggery that did not end up in a conviction doesn't count.


I think you may be right about peoples' perceptions. No matter what the case, we should still work to improve the system by minimizing corruption.


Well there's got to be a way to test that hypothesis


>The levels of day-to-day corruption within the US judicial system

Yes, and it goes beyond the incompetence, crimes and corruption. It's expensive.

Amongst all the municipal election hoopla in Toronto, I read a tidbit that last year the cost of policing increased by almost $400 per citizen.

Now, I'll be honest, I have no idea what it really costs to run a police force, but it surprised me that it's increasing at such a rate. One would think that policing would become cheaper over time, via technology, an overall decrease in crime rates, and the nature of new crime that often involves people sitting in front of computers, both solving and committing the crime. That is unless you're buying all the new military toys to subjugate the citizenry.


If Toronto is anything like many American municipalities, a large chunk of that cost is pensions. Pension funds are often not fully paid up, and payments into the fund are often subject to rosy predictions about future earnings that lead to shortfalls if the fund manager underperforms. Additionally, public pensions often have a large 'defined benefit' overhang meaning that many beneficiaries are contractually entitled to fixed payouts. Finally, many public pensions are also based on final salary at retirement or in a short (1-3 year) period leading up to retirement, so it's common for in the US (and likely elsewhere) for police to work ridiculous amoutns of overtime in their last few years on the force in order to puff up their pension. Since the administration of a pension fund can involve payment obligations that reach back for many decades, the burdens of past financial or contractual mismanagement are often cumulative and ultimately fall upon the taxpayer.

This is not as exciting or scarifying as police spending too much money on military toys, but it's a much more likely explanation for budgetary increases. One other possible problem which has recently been an issue in San Jose, California is that police academies sometimes spend a lot of money training new officers, only to see them leave immediately after graduation for other cities/counties that offer better pay or benefits. In the US many municipalities run their own police academies and there are no contractual obligations on graduates. San Jose has been strenuously trying to reform its pension system, so (unsurprisingly) new entrants to the force get a much worse deal than senior members whose benefits are locked in and have to be paid for by cuts to the benefits that can be earned by new members. So graduates train up in San Jose and then take off for some other city in the area that's offering a sweeter deal, possibly with the encouragement of of the police union that is not enthused about pension reform.


" That is unless you're buying all the new military toys to subjugate the citizenry."

According to what I've read (relating to the US) unnecessary military equipment is generally supplied by the federal government or via funds acquired through "civil asset forfeiture" (theft).


There are significant costs to owning an MRAP, not just to acquiring one. Training, maintenance, operation, etc is all much more expensive when your police force has specialized military hardware.


I had to LOL at "training" but I agree that US police forces are spending more on maintenance and operation, especially since they pull these things out at the drop of a hat.


inadequate training can cost just as much as (or more than) adequate training. If a police department is requisitioning big powerful toys, they are going to play with them. Going off-roading in the desert burns just as much fuel as doing a proper training seminar.


My point was the police don't really train or else we wouldn't have all these issues with their lack of professionalism and capabilities. They might "train" on how to clear a room but they don't train on appropriate escalation of force, for example.


Which often becomes the new budget the following year.


Population of Toronto is ~2.5 million. $400 dollars a person is 1 billion dollars which is a bit absurd as an increase. It does however happen to be roughly what the city spends in totality. '13-'14 increase was ~12 dollars per person.


> the FBI provided two blank CDs, claiming the recording devices malfunctioned

I think "contempt of the court" is a tool which should be applied here. No warning, high fines.


fines? do you get fines as a regular citizen if you lie with premeditation to a judge or do you get jail time? plus government officials should be held to a higher standard -> higher penalties than regular citizens imho


Maybe we need a law making it a crime to illegally violate somebody's rights. Throw a couple of cops in prison for stunts like this, and we'd probably see a lot less abuse.

Otherwise upstanding policemen are being pushing into violating the law by their superiors. Make it a crime, and the police unions would help make these problems go away.


Well, actually, I am pretty sure it is a crime, just not one that is enforced in any meaningful way.


That's precisely it.

It's simply not realistic to have a group of law enforcement officers to investigate their own alleged wrongdoing and expect them be impartial.


>Throw a couple of cops in prison for stunts like this, and we'd probably see a lot less abuse.

I think you'd see a variety of political arguments against this that would amount to such an action helping terrorism, those supporting it are trying to undermine America's security, or that placing the fear of prison over an officer's actions amongst the force would prevent them from doing their job properly.

>Otherwise upstanding policemen are being pushing into violating the law by their superiors

They already are in many ways. There were leaks from the NYPD where the officers involved exposed that they were subject to mandatory stop-and-frisk quotas and that racial profiling was highly used in doing so. Likewise, drug busts provide huge income to local police forces [1]. There is therefore an incentive to bend the law because it brings their force income, getting these busts looks good on an officer's record and having a cash flush precinct means there won't be any holding back on giving out overtime.

1. http://www.wfsb.com/story/22078253/what-happens-to-all-the-m...


That's a cop out. In my city, the police have a specific list of things that they are and are not allowed to do with certain populations. Following those rules is difficult, because it means that they cannot intervene in many cases without following a particular protocol.

Police organizations are command & control organizations. Policemen follow orders. Give them a strong message and something to comply with, and they will do so.

The scary thing about recent developments with Federal law enforcement is that the command culture is accepting or demanding certain behavior. The ATF "Fast and Furious" debacle, various border issues, the DEA and FBI's construction of cases from illegally gathered information isn't a bunch of rogue agents -- it is leadership acting in contempt of the law.

If you hold the officers accountable, they will push back.




Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: