Essay On Falsification Of Evidence

Police officers are seen with controversy in today’s society, with the media never failing to broadcast police misconduct and brutality, and half the population defending the police under any circumstance, it is easy to be misled on the real issue. Most police act through the way they believe are the most justifiable, but police justification has shown to be a problem in our country, as police officers are more likely to put their own biases ahead of the facts and evidence, and not admit when they make a mistake or admit when they are wrong. Although it would be unfair to group all police together while there are some who are true to the badge, prejudice and biases are still a problem in police society and has gone unpunished and ignored for too long. While the civilian population is trusting these police officers to protect them, the officers are

Falsification of evidence is usually used to convict a person who is assumed guilty, but cannot be convicted due to the lack of evidence. Those who believe they are doing society a favor by falsifying evidence, and that they are putting away a criminal who “deserves it” are justifying their actions without actually looking at the evidence and the facts. This tunnel vision is the cause of many convictions of innocent people, and can even be persuasive enough to fool a jury. Leading authors on justification Carol Tarvis and Elliot Aronson have even wrote, “Once a detective decides that he or she has found the killer, confirmation bias sees to it that the prime suspect becomes the only suspect. And once that happens, an innocent defendant is on the ropes” (137). When the law enforcement get tunnel vision about this, when they believe that only one guy did it and shut themselves off from any other reliable information, they are ignoring the facts and it could result in a wrong conviction and the actual criminal walking