[garrettgarcia]

> "Might not get a conviction" is a negligible deterrent against police overreach.

But it isn't just that. It's a possible perjury charge for lying to a judge. It's the strong likelihood of ending the detective's career or at least limiting it significantly. It's the political fallout from articles like this one. It's the potential civil rights lawsuit bankrupting against the department and detective. It's the personal shame and guilt that the detective feels for knowing that it's their corner-cutting that let a murder escape justice. Imagine having to face the victim's family if this guy is acquitted...

These are big deterrents.

[renewedrebecca]

Then why does this sort of thing keep happening?

This is another reason why police officers should be required to carry malpractice insurance, that they pay for.

[garrettgarcia]

How often does it happen? 0.1% of cases? 0.01%?

[mrkeen]

That figure sounds right - if you're talking about prosecutors being punished.

  A survey conducted by the Innocence Project, Innocence Project New Orleans, Resurrection After Exoneration and the Veritas Initiative looked at five diverse states over a five-year period (2004-2008) and identified 660 cases in which courts found prosecutors committed misconduct, such as tampering with key evidence, withholding evidence from the defendant or coercing a witness to give false testimony. [..] Of the 660 cases examined, only one prosecutor accused of misconduct was disciplined.

https://innocenceproject.org/why-holding-prosecutors-account...