Stories
Slash Boxes
Comments

SoylentNews is people

posted by n1 on Tuesday March 28 2017, @02:49PM   Printer-friendly
from the good-cop,-bad-cop dept.

Submitted via IRC for Runaway1956

In January 2013, police raided the home of a Cleveland drug dealer, saying in a search warrant that an informant had recently bought crack cocaine there.

But the drug dealer had surveillance cameras that proved the officers were lying. He gave the tapes to his lawyer, who showed the FBI. The feds then worked to uncover a massive scandal of a rogue street-crimes unit that robbed and framed drug suspects who felt they had no choice but plead guilty to fraudulent charges.

Four years later, authorities are still unwinding the damage.

Three cops who worked for the city of East Cleveland are in prison. Cases against 22 alleged drug dealers have been dismissed. Authorities are searching for another 21 people who are eligible to have their convictions tossed. On top of those injustices, there is a slim chance that any of them will be fully reimbursed, because the disgraced officers and their former employer don't have the money.

Source: NBC News


Original Submission

 
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.
Display Options Threshold/Breakthrough Mark All as Read Mark All as Unread
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
  • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday March 29 2017, @06:25AM

    by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday March 29 2017, @06:25AM (#485709)

    It's not, it's just getting rather ugly right now because some people can't deal with not getting they want.

    The majority of the constituencies are getting what they want the most.

    The majority of the voters care a lot more about stuff like abortion, gun rights than they do about other stuff and they vote accordingly.

    The majority of the corporations behind the lobbyists don't really care that much about such stuff (they'll publicly go along with whatever the majority of the voters want). The corporations care more about lower taxes and regulations, and strengthening+increasing their monopolies. And that is why you see corporations funding both R and D candidates. As long as the candidates will support their goals and have a chance of winning they get the $$$$. The other candidates don't.

    The winning candidates get power, position and $$$$$$.

    Thus "everyone" gets what they want the most. Win-win right?

    The problem is when "everyone" wants stuff that's not good for them in the long run. But who really knows what's good in the long run? And good for who/what?