[eru]

> I have no idea what the ratio of scientific backing vs. security theater is, though.

Yes, dogs give you a convenient excuse to produce 'probable cause' in order to authorise a search whenever you feel like it, because the signs the dogs give are interpreted by their handlers.

So it's not necessarily so much security theatre, as perhaps 'whitewashing' of evidence obtained in other ways. see eg https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Parallel_construction

[ozim]

Cannot find the story now but there was situation where they sentenced woman for drug possession ONLY because dog indicated so, but they found no drugs on her or in her car.

[jakelazaroff]

Do you happen to remember if she was sentenced because she was convicted by a jury? I have very little faith in the U.S. justice system so I guess that wouldn’t surprise me, but it feels likelier that they used the K9 “evidence” to coerce her into accepting a plea bargain (which, to be clear, is also bad).

[ozim]

Apologies she was not convicted but was jailed - I misremembered and it was rather hard to find but as I see it should be this story:

https://reason.com/2021/05/13/the-police-dog-who-cried-drugs...