Hacker News new | ask | show | jobs
by cpncrunch 3254 days ago
>tried to foist on the innocent man

I'm not sure if that's the case. The article seems to be saying that they did actually find the drugs in the alley, and the officer was essentially recreating the finding of the drugs using his body camera. Obviously that isn't an acceptable way of using the body camera, and it has the unfortunate effect of causing the case of a potentially guilty drug-dealer to be dropped.
2 comments
jdenning 3254 days ago
Another way of saying "recreating the finding of the drugs using his body camera" is "falsifying evidence".

Edit: In the US, people are innocent until proven guilty.

link
calvano915 3251 days ago
Why wouldn't the initial search be conducted with the body cam on? This is falsifying evidence, whether the person was guilty or not.
link
cpncrunch 3251 days ago
Presumably because he didn't know they were going to find anything. We already know he didn't know about the 30 second thing. If he did, it wouldn't have been a problem, he wouldn't have needed to do the recreation at all.

I'm saying it was possibly illegal but not amoral. There is a difference. Compare to planting drugs to frame someone innocent.

link