Why do judges automatically give more credibility to what a cop says over the defendant?

[NNN0LHI]

http://www.suntimes.com/news/metro/534789,CST-NWS-metro30.article

CICERO

Former officers going to prison

Two former Cicero police officers were sentenced to short prison terms Wednesday in the beating of an innocent man. William Peslak smashed Michael Dominick's head into a car. Fellow officer Joseph DeKiel, who was not present during the beating, lied and said Dominick was resisting arrest. U.S. District Judge Charles P. Kocoras sentenced Peslak to five months and DeKiel to two months.

[R_M]

1. It's disgusting!

:puke:

[sniffa]

2. judges Love bacon

and who can bLame them. *drooL*

[leeroysphitz]

3. Why would Officer Friendly lie? What would he have to gain?

:sarcasm:

[TreasonousBastard]

4. Years ago i remember a number of judges discussing just that...

at a roundtable.

They pretty much agreed that everyone lies at a trial, cops included, but you had to pretend believe the cops or the whole system falls apart.

Technically, the burden of proof is on the atate to prove its case, but in practice the burden is on the defendant to prove the cops lied, or at least made major mistakes.

[benddem]

5. I don't understand the correlation

of your statement to the article. The judge put the cops in jail.

[karlrschneider]

6. Uh, the judge sentenced them...so apparently he didn't.

:eyes:

[lynnertic]

7. waitaminute this story isn't about officers getting away with lying, but going to prison for it.

your excerpt from the article doesn't support the claim you make about how judges treat cops.

[karlrschneider]

8. I have several friends who are judges and I haven't found them to be especially

deferential to cops...and certainly not 'automatically'. One of them started out AS a cop years ago - during the same period I was working my way through college as a policeman...and if anything he is extra careful to NOT give them any undeserved benefit of doubt.