Reply to post: Re: Performance indicators

Privacy activists to UK plod: Wanna slurp folks' phone records? Come back with a warrant

Dr. Mouse

Re: Performance indicators

I think performance indicators such as arrest count have somewhat more to do with it than human nature or institutional mores.

I agree that they do not help, but I don't think they are the main reason.

I would suggest that the main reason is that cops spend all day, every day looking at the criminal aspect of society. Because of this, they become used to seeing anyone accused of or under suspicion of an offence as guilty. I think it ends up as a form of confirmation bias, They start from the view that the person is probably guilty. All evidence confirming that is given more weight than evidence disproving it. Those who are found not guilty in court "got away with it".

This is even more true in cases of a sexual nature, and is enhanced by the rules, now. Someone who accuses another of committing a sexual offence against them is immediately called the victim, and police are told to believe them in the first instance (i.e. presume the accused is guilty, the opposite of what our justice system expects). The accuser is called the victim, and the accused is thought of as a sexual predator from day one.

So, I think "human nature - and institutional mores" play a bigger part than performance indicators.

I don't say any of this to excuse police behaviour, BTW. I still think it's appalling how the police and justice system treat people, and also believe the justice system is set up to punish people harshly well before they are convicted (just look at the damage inflicted on people during the investigation and trial, the cost of good legal counsel, and the fact you can rarely recover this from the state even if the prosecution was deeply flawed from the beginning).

POST COMMENT House rules

Not a member of The Register? Create a new account here.

  • Enter your comment

  • Add an icon

Anonymous cowards cannot choose their icon