NY cop admits framing people on drug charges and teaching younger cops to do the same

There's your trouble :

Unfortunately, the more forfeiture laws legislatures enacted, the less attention police seem to pay to major criminals. Representative Henry Hyde of Illinois noted in June 1993 that 80 percent of the people whose property is seized by the federal government under drug laws are never formally charged with any crime.[6] Representative John Conyers of Michigan declared at a June 1993 congressional hearing: “A law designed to give cops the right to confiscate and keep the luxury possessions of major drug dealers mostly ensnares the modest homes, cars and hard-earned cash of ordinary, law-abiding people.”[7]

www.thefreemanonline.org...

really.



PS
greetz to apacheman...
(looks like you was right about the gulf eh?)

reply to post by TheButcher23


Wake up call here there happen to be a lot of people who (as a hobby)know how to...

1- find people through searches that would have Sherlock Holmes looking like an armature in comparison.

2- Many more than you realize others keep finely honed hunting dogs that will and can and any day of the week out track any government owned mongrel hound into the ground. In addition to that their handlers actually know what the are doing by listening to their hound not some strutting martinet in a classroom.

3- Have personal social networks that would make the founder of face book look like a rank amateur in comparison.

We as a group can do quite well without the government not so the other way around.

reply to post by Danbones


Hi...unfortunately, yeah.

Things are looking grim all over, and I can't see much that's going to get better anytime soon.

reply to post by Common Good

Just cause hes a cop doesnt mean he doesnt have to pay for his crimes. Why do you stick up for cops so much, and believe that they are always right no matter what? You have nothing to say about the evidence hes planting on people? This guy is just as much of a criminal as the rest of them locked up. This guy is lucky he only got 24 days. He should be bowing down kissing the ground right now.

I see my mistake on ,my post.I forgot to put in the word "not" before giving.

I side with everything you said above.

reply to post by truthseeker84


But this is the thing, where do you draw the line? What if a cop doesn't like me because I slept with his ex-wife? He could easily plant something on me to send me off to prison.

That is not how the system works. If a criminal outsmarts our police than more training needs to be done. We need to find new methods of catching criminals without resorting to planting evidence and faking statements. Because if you do it for one case than what's stopping you from doing it to the people you don't like?

reply to post by ProphecyPhD


If your wife(criminal|) has a known history as a whore, and her activitys as a whore hurt others but she cannot be put away (not that I think whores should go to jail for being a whore, so for this case lets presume her a murderous thieving crack whore) because she is a smart murderous thieving crack whore who has the cunning of a fox and knows how to excape the fist of the law, as most career crims do, then a good cop planting evidence to get her off the street is how it used to go down with the old cops I spoke to. You see they would only ever plant evidence on those they knew to be guilty, but who had escaped the arms of the law and needed to be off the streets for our safety. While a blind eye was once turned apon these situations, for the most part it no longer is, but the problem of proven crims escaping the law because of trickery still remains.

In a perfect world, the good cop would not have to do something that for the 'right' reason as the law would not allow the criminal to escape justice to contiinue with their thieving, murderous crack whore ways. If the system was not faulty, then the good cop would not need to be faulty. Planting evidence on a preson without evidence of previous skullduggery and mayhem I do not agree with, but I think perhaps in the OP these crims are career crims, and that is why the cop did what he did. You can thank him for not letting them slip through to continue their depravity and instead of bashing the cops try to improve the system that forces a 'good' cop to do this so he can put the right people away.

Originally posted by wardk28
I will play devils advocate in this story. What if those the two guys he set up on drug charges; one was a child molester that got off because the legal system fail and the other was implicated in several robberies but there was never enough evidence to arrest and convict? Maybe thats why he only got 24 days. We all talk about how messed up the legal system is and how someone should do something about it. Maybe this was his way of "doing something" about it. So what I'm asking is what you guys think about it. Would you guys be able to plant evidence on someone you know was involved in criminal activity, especially when it caused pain to many people?

You're injecting rationality into this litany of cop-hating diatribes. That is frowned upon here at ATS.

/TOA

reply to post by Vitchilo


3 caes are nothing.....

look at this in NZ:

www.stuff.co.nz...

Originally posted by TheButcher23
Actually it seems that ATS manages to find the rare and few Cops who spoil it for the rest.

Without cops and the law most of YOU would be dead by now as chaos would ensue. And the weak are always the first to go!!

Umm, no. In fact since the inception of modern police officers they are responsible for the deaths of more citizens then they "saved".

Cops only show up AFTER a crime has been committed. The 2nd Amendment is what keeps us safe, as well as our own instinct's.