It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Scientists claim New York police forced them to fake DNA

page: 2
22
<< 1    3 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Mar, 13 2016 @ 07:41 PM
link   
a reply to: Spider879




That's the basis of their law suit , being pressured to force a conclusion ,

No. The basis of their law suit is that they were fired, not because they cheated on the exam, but because they were "whistleblowers".



because overzealous police and prosecutors have a history of withholding evidence, that's how reps are built.
There is no claim that evidence was withheld.


If this keeps happening then some will take issue with the above.
It's been happening for quite a while now.




posted on Mar, 13 2016 @ 07:47 PM
link   
a reply to: Phage




There is no claim that evidence was withheld.


From the article maybe

From the discussion you're participating in, this claim has been made as per the title because presenting false data includes withholding actual data which you call evidence.



posted on Mar, 13 2016 @ 08:03 PM
link   
a reply to: wisvol




From the discussion you're participating in, this claim has been made as per the title because presenting false data includes withholding actual data which you call evidence.

No. Presenting false evidence is quite different from withholding evidence.

The OP has provided an article, with the same title as the thread. There is nothing in the article which makes the claims of the title.


edit on 3/13/2016 by Phage because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 13 2016 @ 08:06 PM
link   
a reply to: Phage

No doesn't apply

presenting faked data when in possession of non fake data requires withholding evidence

nice strawman



posted on Mar, 13 2016 @ 08:07 PM
link   
a reply to: wisvol




presenting faked data when in possession of non fake data requires withholding evidence


What data was faked?

edit on 3/13/2016 by Phage because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 13 2016 @ 08:11 PM
link   
a reply to: AugustusMasonicus

I would be surprised if they opened that can of worms, not willingly they wont. If the falsely convicted have enough $$ for good lawyers perhaps.



posted on Mar, 13 2016 @ 08:12 PM
link   
a reply to: Phage




There is nothing in the article which makes the claims of the title.


In the version we are permitted to read, probably.




What data was faked?


In this here case, I'd say we wait for the public service to determine this, right?

your sense of humour is delightful



posted on Mar, 13 2016 @ 08:16 PM
link   
a reply to: wisvol




In this here case, I'd say we wait for the public service to determine this, right?

I guess. Even though it has nothing to do with the lawsuit.



posted on Mar, 13 2016 @ 08:19 PM
link   
a reply to: Phage

The conclusions of lawsuits are made by public service

you know this, and say




a reply to: wisvol
" In this here case, I'd say we wait for the public service to determine this, right? "

I guess. Even though it has nothing to do with the lawsuit.



why?



posted on Mar, 13 2016 @ 08:19 PM
link   
a reply to: wisvol

Once again, I have no idea what thought you intend to convey.



posted on Mar, 13 2016 @ 08:20 PM
link   
a reply to: Phage

Would either example be an obstruction charge?



posted on Mar, 13 2016 @ 08:23 PM
link   
a reply to: vonclod

I don't know.
But since this is a civil suit about unlawful termination, I don't think it's relevant. Nor does such a claim actually seem to have been made.


edit on 3/13/2016 by Phage because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 13 2016 @ 08:29 PM
link   
a reply to: Phage




Once again, I have no idea what thought you intend to convey.


I'll reword it again using this:

Why do you claim the lawsuit has nothing to do with public service settling the question you asked, which was




What data was faked?


?



posted on Mar, 13 2016 @ 08:32 PM
link   
a reply to: wisvol




Why do you claim the lawsuit has nothing to do with public service settling the question you asked, which was

I didn't claim that.

I said the lawsuit was over unlawful termination, not faked evidence.



edit on 3/13/2016 by Phage because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 13 2016 @ 08:39 PM
link   
a reply to: Phage




I didn't claim that.



Since you wrote this, I have on record the reason why your contributions should not be considered, and I wondered about this earlier, thanks.

Good luck



posted on Mar, 13 2016 @ 08:41 PM
link   
a reply to: wisvol

And again, no idea what you intend to say.
But thanks, I guess.



posted on Mar, 13 2016 @ 08:59 PM
link   

originally posted by: vonclod
I would be surprised if they opened that can of worms, not willingly they wont. If the falsely convicted have enough $$ for good lawyers perhaps.


I am sure there are plenty of defense attorneys salivating at the prospects of trying to exonerate their clients based on this report.



posted on Mar, 13 2016 @ 09:01 PM
link   
a reply to: AugustusMasonicus

What report?

These are claims made the plaintiffs in an unlawful termination suit. As far as I can tell, none of them actually involve faking DNA results.

edit on 3/13/2016 by Phage because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 13 2016 @ 09:14 PM
link   
a reply to: Phage

And as I said, I do not think it will stop some enterprising defense attorneys from trying to cite what was linked in the Original Post.



posted on Mar, 13 2016 @ 09:20 PM
link   
Well, it is New York, and it is the criminal justice system, so sadly, it's very probably that corruption like this is factual.



new topics

top topics



 
22
<< 1    3 >>

log in

join