[cosmojg]

> Hmmm, seems like a lot of people involved in this case should be fired, including the Apple Employees, SIS Employees and Police officers, reguardless of whatever other outcomes there are.

How might a government systematically disincentivize this sort of malicious and negligent behavior without it backfiring? And why hasn't it happened already?

I imagine the matter has been thoroughly explored by legal scholars, but I'm having trouble finding publications. Can someone point me in the right direction?

[pjc50]

The US has systematic incentives in place to create this kind of system: private prisons and elected local chief prosecutors. Both of those are incentives for false positives.

It also lacks police oversight; the UK has https://www.justiceinspectorates.gov.uk/hmicfrs/ and https://www.policeconduct.gov.uk/ , which while they are far from perfect are at least organizations with the capacity to put out a report saying "here's what went wrong and how it should be fixed".

In the US all police accountability is local, which means that the >51% of the voters who prefer being tough on crime (more false positives in the hope of more "true positives") get what they want.

[aszantu]

Stop punishment for simple mistakes, it starts with parents and school.

I'm in a safe environment where i can say i made a mistake and document it. And still i have a hard time doing it because how i grew up. It was much safer to be quiet or lie and get away than trusting authorities or parents to not punish me.

But removing that threat would change how the system works and how ppl deal with mistakes.

[rjzzleep]

Interesting, and yet all the people that worked for me massively respect me when I point out a mistake I did towards them in front of everyone else. It's probably related to the fact that I tend to be very strong when making those decision, but when I publicly announce my mistake in front of their peers it builds trust.

I basically learned that because I hated the bosses that would take credit for their subordinates ideas and then blame them when something went wrong, so I'm trying to do the opposite.

[jeltz]

Yes, but we should still punish negligence (and in my opinion harshly). That way people are encouraged to fix mistakes instead of ignoring them like they did here.

[throwaway0a5e]

Yup.

"never admit to the system that you F-ed up" is a lesson every kid should learn by the end of grade school.

Let that run for a generation and stuff like in TFA is what you get.

[anigbrowl]

It's not a 'simple mistake.'

[ruined]

it backfires due to conflict of interest. the set of people responsible for enforcing such a system have always been the same set of people responsible for making the mistakes. it would take a duplication of the entire judicial infrastructure and division of policing power.

this essentially exists in the united states with the dual state and federal systems, but the local systems are extremely resilient against investigations, and the federal system has no interest in actually performing this role.

in rare cases there have been FBI investigations and federal oversight of entire departments, such as the Seattle consent decree, but there are many problems with such arrangements as covered by local journalists and activists. i'll see if i can dredge up some links later.

[rogers18445]

They can't, which is why such incompetence is plaguing every single bureaucracy in existence. If the bureaucrats have an incentive to not make mistakes they will err on the side of caution and only deal with cases where certainty is high - as opposed to putting in more effort to ascertain what is actually going on.

[ruined]

back with links. seattle-focused. seattle's consent decree is not about correcting investigatory malpractice, but simple excessive violence and racial bias.

aclu has a timeline https://www.aclu-wa.org/pages/timeline-seattle-police-accoun...

federal oversight means the consent decree is subject to national politics that may be alternately undermining (executive branch republicans promote impunity) or disinterested (executive branch democrats fear criticism of reform efforts).

the decree is also affected by national events and attention. the late nationally-motivated police reform efforts are running into roadblocks as officials claim those goals conflict with compliance.

https://crosscut.com/2020/06/debate-over-policing-seattle-co...

https://crosscut.com/politics/2021/05/where-seattle-police-r...

notably, an internal police watchdog body created by the consent decree and charged with investigating officers, may only recommend action to the chief, who can simply reject it. the watchdog body is staffed by police and not civilians. there are some examples in the timeline above but here's one from last year.

https://www.seattletimes.com/seattle-news/politics/seattle-p...

and the police union is effectively able to write law that undermines oversight. the union contract actually supersedes city law on police accountability. this is a failure of the city council but was agreed upon by the overseeing judge.

https://www.thestranger.com/slog/2018/10/17/34045061/cpc-thr...

after nearly a decade of effectively resisting federal oversight and reform efforts, spd has developed an attitude of total impunity. a protest marched to the SPOG office last year, and at no provocation was dispersed with teargas and impact munitions as officers blasted a pop country song over loudspeakers. https://www.thestranger.com/slog/2020/09/08/44432799/police-...