To: All Departments, and Officer Employees
From: Colonel Pat Bacon, Director of the State Police Department
Date: May 21, 2014
Subject: Planting Evidence, Perjury, and Falsifying Police Reports
It has come to the attention of this department that there have been reports of questionable conduct from some of our officer employees.
Police officers that are supposed to enforce the law, at times become more aggressive than the criminals themselves. How much corruption there is and knowing its characteristics are important steps to understanding corruption and then being able to successfully control corruption without illegal ...view middle of the document...
It is the belief that the how and why you do something is more important than the results of your behavior. When your actions are inherently good, then the outcome doesn’t matter because your conduct was ethically sound, but if your actions are inherently bad, no matter what the outcome was, your conduct is ethically wrong. We are a society that relies on ethics, morals, values, integrity, rules and laws, and that there are consequence’s to every action that is taken, good or bad.
This example of noble cause corruption is based on an actual case: In 1988, a Boston Detective Sherman Griffiths, was shot and killed during a drug raid. The man, Albert Lewin, was accused of killing the Boston police detective was found not guilty, because it had been discovered that the police had lied, faked an informant, and doctored evidence in an attempt to cover up the inadequacies of the a search warrant that was used to during the raid. Former detective Luna, who was one of the officers indicted on charges of participating in a cover-up at the trial against the defendant finally came out with the truth. They also had fabricated an informant in the search warrant. The ADA had acknowledge that the evidence against the defendant was all circumstantial and that the only physical evidence against the defendant was the murder weapon with his fingerprint on the gun linking him. The fingerprint when produced was 30 months after the crime, and the defense attorney challenged the authenticity of the print. All this just to get the “ends to a means”, the loss of an officer is not the ends to the means of getting criminals off the street. The New York Times-Archives (1990).
At what cost was this all for, a family lost a husband, father, son, and brother, and for what reason, while another detective lost his career, all to catch a criminal?
What do we see as being wrong with this case?
First off, there were officers of the law that had faked an informant, if they had no one to actually give them information that could be relied on, then the officers should have never made up the informant in the first place. Secondly, everything they had for a search warrant was fabricated and doctored up, when they could have done more research and found evidence that would have been sound and trustworthy to bring into court. Thirdly, the detective had participated in the cover-up came clean in court. Detective Luna should have spoken to his superior’s about everything that had happened, being honest might have saved his career, or not, no one can know for sure. Finally, the gun showing up some thirty months later, the gun should have been in lock-up, with the availability to get to right away without it being challenged in court, and without the implication that because of the deceitfulness of the officers, they could have planted the defendant fingerprints on the gun. Had they done more research on this man, even if it might have taken another six months, they would have had...