[pretzellogician]

Good in theory, but having police with axes to grind airing inaccurate information seems ripe for abuse.

From the article;

>Chadwick had been charged and pleaded not guilty, but not tried - yet the podcast made no use of the word "alleged" and called the millionaire a "murderer".

Yeah, like that.

[inigyou]

In several countries that would be illegal, but the police would never investigate themselves.

[embedding-shape]

> the police would never investigate themselves

Makes sense, would be a huge conflict of interest. That's why most modern countries have separate independent investigative agencies whose purpose is to investigate the police. Sadly, some of the more police-horny countries tend to give these agencies faux power rather than something real, and in the worst ones, the police has qualified immunity anyway.

[HPsquared]

Defamation is a civil thing though, isn't it?

[sublinear]

The abuse is far more likely to come from the audience than the police. The true crime fanbase tends to have mental health issues.

[A_D_E_P_T]

On the one hand, it's one of the most popular genres out there. 84% of the U.S. population age 13+ are "True Crime consumers":

> https://www.edisonresearch.com/the-true-crime-consumer-repor...

But it's absolutely true that the internet-based tribe called the "TCC" -- the true crime community -- is a hotbed of severe mental illness and moral depravity. It's a very young-skewing demographic, too. You can think of it as Fandom for killers. I monitor my son's internet activity in large part to ensure that he's not exposing himself to it, and I would view any exposure to the TCC as the reddest of red flags.

[victorbjorklund]

But the police are official represeatives of the government and it holds more weight when they say "they are guilty even if court said they are not" vs if a random private individual says it.

[inigyou]

The police are the ones who can lock you in jail.