[retrochameleon]

There needs to be consequences for shitty, procedure-ignoring police work. Period.

Minimum 1 year of jail time for grossly wrongful arrests that could be avoided with standard procedure or investigation tactics that were not applied.

[helterskelter]

I agree with this sentiment but when you start punishing this sort of thing you create more incentive to cover it up. It's a tricky problem and I'm not sure there's a perfect solution.

What we really need is a change in police culture.

[retrochameleon]

Then the system should be redesigned such that transparency is a priority and cover ups are not feasible. And when cover ups eventually get found out, the punishments even more severe.

[true_religion]

We already have administrative punishments for the police when they incorrectly assign blame and cause a public relations mess.

Is the termination of your career and/or potential retraining and social embarrassment not already an incentive to cover up?

[tremon]

If the punishment fails to correct the behaviour, it is insufficient punishment or the wrong punishment. In this case, I'd say that individual punishments are the wrong tool to correct systemic behaviour. It should be career-ending for brass and prosecutors to be effective.

[jcgrillo]

> change in police culture

until then, there's a simple rule which works well: never talk to a cop. Or at least say the minimum number of words possible, give them nothing to use against you. Present ID if they ask for it, but never admit anything. If they persist, "lawyer". That has worked for me.

[account42]

Add even more disincentives for coverups (i.e. hard prison time) and rewards for whistleblowers.

[vablings]

Medicine has a culture that adapts to this quite well. If you make an honest mistake and communicate it, you are often persecuted by your peers but not hung out to dry legally by your hospital and generally your actions are always defensible.

Similar practices are used in law enforcement, but the legal implications are seemingly more severe

[pstuart]

These dialogs always prompt me to chime in with my solution: make the police be self-insured, backed by their pension fund.

The police today have zero incentive to serve the public, they have zero skin in the game and can literally get away with murder.

Any time you hear the call for "law and order", that is the audience that supports the current system, because they like it like this.

[balderdash]

Great idea, Except that this will never happen because public sector unions are important voting blocks. Public sector unions should be abolished (don’t have a problem with unions) but the conflict of interest is just too great.

[retrochameleon]

Great point. Obviously can't expect them to vote against their own interests, because higher standards, higher accountability, and higher transparency will always be against those interests.

[xtajv]

> These dialogs always prompt me to chime in with my solution: make the police be self-insured, backed by their pension fund.

I'm curious, what exactly do you mean by "self-insured"?

(Is the idea to combine literal insurance underwriting for retirement planning with a monetary incentive system for ongoing work performance)?

[tremon]

They mean that penalties and restitutions for wrongful prosecutions and wrongful convictions should not come from taxpayer money but private insurance. Right now, police departments feel zero pain from judgements against them so they have no reason to structurally correct their behaviour.

[bdangubic]

how is police going to pay for private insurance though? from police officer salaries (which come from taxpayers)?

[forshaper]

Police in some states are actually self-insured, though not backed by a pension fund.