Several recent items on the subject of "snitching" or criminal informants caught my eye recently.
FBI policy lets feds tolerate 'serious violent felonies' by informants: Drug War Chronicle has more coverage of the recent Congressional hearings on confidential informant use. Meanwhile, Radley Balko quotes from a trancript of the hearing where an FBI assistant director refused under questioning to assure Congress that the agency does not withhold information about their informants who commit "serious violent felonies" from state and local investigators! Feel safer, yet? Readers will recall the FBI got in trouble for that just recently. See Grits' earlier coverage of the Congressional hearing, including testimony from a Deputy Commander from the Texas DPS Narcotics division, or watch it online here.
Informant made up testimony: In Ohio, a DEA agent and an informant "made up testimony to get convictions in a wide-ranging investigation," reported AP.
Brits hid bill for informant payments: In England, Scotland Yard admitted to intentionally concealing how much it had been spending to pay criminal informants (5 million pounds between 2005 and 2007) from the public and parliament. A journalist ultimately pieced the information using public information requests. Political groups last month said the informant system in Britain was subject to abuse.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
.jpg)
3 comments:
It's Tulia on a national scale. This is just plian scary.
That Ohio case really is Tulia-esque, isn't it?
Yea, it is win at all cost. The government wins and we loose on every criminal justice. Due process is a fiction.
Money can buy justice for some but few - very few - can afford it.
Post a Comment