The answer is obvious. It works most of the time and when it doesn’t the consequences are usually not that bad.
I’m really surprised their word is still trusted in court.
deleted by creator
Because if they tell the truth they lose their jobs.
Not only that, but they aren’t trusted by their coworkers. So even if they keep their jobs, they probably won’t live to see what happens later.
Because they can spin the narrative before the video is released and even though the video shows them doing illegal things, brutalizing, and/or murdering people, the narrative is still enough to keep them out of trouble.
The quote from the expert about misremembering is just sad. It’s posted as an excuse, but if we accept it, we should throw all eyewitness testimony out the window unless it can be proven that there are multiple witnesses who could not have colluded. Why include the quote if you (the author) won’t point out the logical fallacy?
“But again, the main lesson is that if somebody gives an account that’s not the same as what you see on a videotape, it doesn’t guarantee they’re lying, but it often means that they are legitimately misremembering it,” he said. “Accusing an officer of lying, or anybody for that matter, should be a last resort and only with very strong evidence.”
The quote is from Laurence Miller, described in the article as “a police psychologist and law enforcement trainer based in Florida.”
He’s a cop — at least psychologically, and perhaps literally. His bio at The American Academy of Experts in Traumatic Stress says “He is a police psychologist with the West Palm Beach Police Department, the Palm Beach County Sheriff’s Office, and the Florida Highway Patrol,” which sure sounds like he’s on the payroll.
Ask a cop why cops lie, don’t be surprised if the answer is that “they are legitimately misremembering it.” Chalk it up as another cop lying.
