$2 Test Identified Bird Shit as Cocaine. Cops Keep Using It to Arrest People(vice.com)
vice.com
$2 Test Identified Bird Shit as Cocaine. Cops Keep Using It to Arrest People
https://www.vice.com/en_us/article/evj89n/this-dollar2-test-identified-bird-shit-as-cocaine-cops-keep-using-it-to-arrest-people
43 comments
There should be penalties for false arrests; mandatory payouts to victims for starters. If the state suddenly has to start paying out $150,000 a pop every time someone is falsely arrested, then they will fix these tests.
Police unions should be self-insured, backed by their pensions. Without direct incentive there is no incentive.
It doesn't even need to be a punitive like $150k. An equitable $5k to compensate for time wasted, legal fees, and emotional stress from being kidnapped would suffice to realign incentives.
Good point. Just enough so that it smarts but doesn't have to be punitive.
In America, there really isn't a concept of false arrests. There is a "not guilty" verdict but not an "innocent" verdict. If you're forcing states to pay out in the case of not guilty verdicts, then you're introducing a whole new host of bizarre incentives.
Then we'd need laws for scamming the false arrest system. But people snorting bird shit would be hilarious.
This reminds me of the cat urine South Park episode : https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2GIiOsuDRFk
I don't know why...
I don't know why...
There are already incentives to arrest as many people as possible.
Exactly. Prisons are just like hotels: keep them constantly full and money will keep coming, no matter from where.
That is akin to not being able to accept the null hypothesis in statistics, as we assume innocence ant try to prove guilt (with the p-value of "a reasonable doubt"). While we should not explicitly disincentivize negative results, this doesn't mean that we shouldn't penalise p-hacking.
America has that concept encoded in the fourth amendment and the law built up around it.
Most forensic tests are quite broad including GSR and blood residue.
It’s not about what else they trigger on but how likely that this would be the case in a set of controlled circumstances.
A cocaine test that triggers on bird poop is still completely acceptable unless carrying bags of powdered guano is the new rage these days.
Same thing with a GSR test that may be triggered with certain other chemicals, you only get reasonable doubt when there is a good explanation why would you’ve been exposed to those chemicals nominally.
BTW medical tests aren’t that different, it’s up to the doctors to make sure they exclude all other possible explanations besides what they are testing for and we don’t really complain.
It’s not about what else they trigger on but how likely that this would be the case in a set of controlled circumstances.
A cocaine test that triggers on bird poop is still completely acceptable unless carrying bags of powdered guano is the new rage these days.
Same thing with a GSR test that may be triggered with certain other chemicals, you only get reasonable doubt when there is a good explanation why would you’ve been exposed to those chemicals nominally.
BTW medical tests aren’t that different, it’s up to the doctors to make sure they exclude all other possible explanations besides what they are testing for and we don’t really complain.
Well, they let that one, particular, suspect off when the test was caught failing in that very public fashion.
So, I mean, in they're view, they probably figure that they, well,
"Fixed the Glitch":
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BUE0PPQI3is
Other people's constitutional rights will likely be violated, but hey, "these things work themselves out" right?
/end sarcasm
How do people live with themselves when they knowingly implement shoddy products and processes like these that literally ruin peoples' lives? It's crazy.
So, I mean, in they're view, they probably figure that they, well,
"Fixed the Glitch":
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BUE0PPQI3is
Other people's constitutional rights will likely be violated, but hey, "these things work themselves out" right?
/end sarcasm
How do people live with themselves when they knowingly implement shoddy products and processes like these that literally ruin peoples' lives? It's crazy.
literally ruin peoples' lives
The remarkable truth is that most regular people in the US don't actually care about wrongly ruining people's lives. Most people are primarily concerned with living their own life, and avoiding winning the shit lottery, and when they find out someone else won, they count their lucky stars it wasn't them and move on.
It would be far better if people invested time, effort, and money into dismantling the shit lottery itself. But most people don't have the resources. And, dismantling the shit lottery is a good way to increase your odds of 'winning' it. (Speaking truth to power most often doesn't end well for the speaker.)
The remarkable truth is that most regular people in the US don't actually care about wrongly ruining people's lives. Most people are primarily concerned with living their own life, and avoiding winning the shit lottery, and when they find out someone else won, they count their lucky stars it wasn't them and move on.
It would be far better if people invested time, effort, and money into dismantling the shit lottery itself. But most people don't have the resources. And, dismantling the shit lottery is a good way to increase your odds of 'winning' it. (Speaking truth to power most often doesn't end well for the speaker.)
> How do people live with themselves
Easy. The reasoning goes: Since people are convicted, those people must be guilty. Therefore, anything which is done in order to get people convicted is good and acceptable. They then sleep soundly at night knowing that they convict only guilty people.
(Previously: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=18450620#18453319)
Easy. The reasoning goes: Since people are convicted, those people must be guilty. Therefore, anything which is done in order to get people convicted is good and acceptable. They then sleep soundly at night knowing that they convict only guilty people.
(Previously: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=18450620#18453319)
They might think, well, it's not as bad as a fake bomb detector.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/ADE_651
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/ADE_651
It's not as bad as police dogs that 'find' things on-command, by the real police officer, to give him/her probable cause to search your car/etc...
If the tests are so inconclusive wouldn't that mean police officers are depriving people of their constitutional rights to freedom of movement? There have to be counter suits and either this company or the police force are liable for false imprisonment.
Cops are, with rare exception, ever held liable for their abuses of power. Lawsuits are payed by the taxpayers, so they have zero incentive to behave legally.
Yup. A particularly egregious case:
https://www.techdirt.com/articles/20190909/12232742945/ninth...
The Ninth Circuit:
"We recognize that the allegation of any theft by police officers - most certainly the theft of over $225,000 - is deeply disturbing. Whether that conduct violates the Fourth Amendment's prohibition on unreasonable searches and seizures, however, would not "be 'clear to a reasonable officer.'""
Note: Theft! Not asset forfeiture, but actual theft!
https://www.techdirt.com/articles/20190909/12232742945/ninth...
The Ninth Circuit:
"We recognize that the allegation of any theft by police officers - most certainly the theft of over $225,000 - is deeply disturbing. Whether that conduct violates the Fourth Amendment's prohibition on unreasonable searches and seizures, however, would not "be 'clear to a reasonable officer.'""
Note: Theft! Not asset forfeiture, but actual theft!
It gets worse than stealing:
https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2019/oct/06/witness-in-a...
"authorities have not identified a suspect or determined a motive."
Internal affairs clearly isn't a thing in the US. Or, if it is, it's a thing that doesn't work, coz when the witness of somebody getting murdered by a cop gets murdered in suspicious circumstances then it's not all that hard to identify a motive.
https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2019/oct/06/witness-in-a...
"authorities have not identified a suspect or determined a motive."
Internal affairs clearly isn't a thing in the US. Or, if it is, it's a thing that doesn't work, coz when the witness of somebody getting murdered by a cop gets murdered in suspicious circumstances then it's not all that hard to identify a motive.
> Yup. A particularly egregious case:
> https://www.techdirt.com/articles/20190909/12232742945/ninth....
> The Ninth Circuit:
> "We recognize that the allegation of any theft by police officers - most certainly the theft of over $225,000 - is deeply disturbing. Whether that conduct violates the Fourth Amendment's prohibition on unreasonable searches and seizures, however, would not "be 'clear to a reasonable officer.'""
Ignorance of the law is no defense...oh wait.
> https://www.techdirt.com/articles/20190909/12232742945/ninth....
> The Ninth Circuit:
> "We recognize that the allegation of any theft by police officers - most certainly the theft of over $225,000 - is deeply disturbing. Whether that conduct violates the Fourth Amendment's prohibition on unreasonable searches and seizures, however, would not "be 'clear to a reasonable officer.'""
Ignorance of the law is no defense...oh wait.
Let me rephrase that: Cops _in the USA_ are almost never held liable for abuses of power including outright murders.
This is unheard of in other first world countries, especially in Europe. I'm American but I've lived in England, Germany, Sweden and Switzerland where the cops are really polite civil servants. In the UK, cops don't even carry guns.
The current state of affairs in the US, including rapid militarization of police, is a harbinger of things to come.
This is unheard of in other first world countries, especially in Europe. I'm American but I've lived in England, Germany, Sweden and Switzerland where the cops are really polite civil servants. In the UK, cops don't even carry guns.
The current state of affairs in the US, including rapid militarization of police, is a harbinger of things to come.
Yes, good point. Typical American arrogance on my part :-)
Law enforcement has incentives to arrest as they are then seen to be doing their job. There are incentives for false positives and no penalties for wrongful imprisonment. Also related:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Base_rate_fallacy
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Base_rate_fallacy
Haven't seen much people with bird shit in their pockets.
Plenty of people drive around with bird shit on their car tho.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/2019/08/09/young-bla...
https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/2019/08/09/young-bla...
Or they track it in on their shoes.
How this doesn't get these cops fired for trying to falsely arrest someone using a test they likely know is flawed is insane (who would ever look at a white spot on the top of a car and think "yep that's cocaine"??). If there was any sense and lack of lobbying by police unions in the US it would be an easy priority to draft better laws on actions of cops.
In this instance, it's hard not to question the intelligence of a police officer thinking a white spot on the outside of a car might be drugs.
But overall, in the War on Some Substances, anything goes. Blame needs to start at the top. It's not like the cop purchased these widely-discredited field tests on their own.
But overall, in the War on Some Substances, anything goes. Blame needs to start at the top. It's not like the cop purchased these widely-discredited field tests on their own.
"They’re often not admissible in court, which is why police have to order follow-up testing from a lab." - whoa so you can be arrested based on evidence that is known to be inadmissible in the first place.
Not to defend policing in general, but shouldn’t this community recognize the recursive set of tradeoffs here?
Tests can rarely be both sensitive and specific. This test might have more Type I errors so it doesn’t commit Type II.
Likewise, a police officer is in the same dilemma. Are you really not going to arrest even though the test you were told to use came up positive?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sensitivity_and_specificity
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Type_I_and_type_II_errors
Tests can rarely be both sensitive and specific. This test might have more Type I errors so it doesn’t commit Type II.
Likewise, a police officer is in the same dilemma. Are you really not going to arrest even though the test you were told to use came up positive?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sensitivity_and_specificity
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Type_I_and_type_II_errors
You need to be arrested for birdshit or sugar doughnuts (that happened, too), and then we can talk again.
Or cat litter, or detergent or any other pretext, but wouldn’t my experience bias me?
If a society is to accept false positives then it follows that the arrest process would be less difficult and stigmatizing than it is in most places. Unfortunately, “the law is an ass” as they say.
https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/the_law_is_an_ass
If a society is to accept false positives then it follows that the arrest process would be less difficult and stigmatizing than it is in most places. Unfortunately, “the law is an ass” as they say.
https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/the_law_is_an_ass
To understand why cops get away with this crap look up the origin of the police AKA slave patrol.