If the DA really knows who the bad cops are, the DA should prosecute them. DAs blaming cops are hoping that the public don't realize the DAs themselves are dropping the ball and letting cops get away with it.
Unreliable testimony isn't a crime (in fact, on these lists, it often originates from officers having committed and been convicted of and served sentences for other crimes). Broadly speaking, protection of police officers from criminal prosecution is broad in such a way that it is difficult to prosecute police for even clear cut violations. For example, the Graham factors used to assess criminal culpability in the use of deadly force are appreciably more generous than most department policies and DoJ recommendations, meaning that there's a broad range of use of force that is in violation of department orders (including severe violations) but not criminal. Use of force on a fleeing individual is a common example. While there is definitely room for prosecutors to be more aggressive on police misconduct, the reality is that there is a huge spectrum of things for which officers ought to be fired but cannot be prosecuted for. Simple incompetence or lack of care is far from the least significant and common.
> While there is definitely room for prosecutors to be more aggressive on police misconduct
That's severely underselling it. Unless somebody dies, a prosecutor is more likely to give up before they even try. Even when somebody dies, that's still a common outcome. Prosecutors even let cops off for crimes committed off duty, wholly unrelated to any conceivable work matter.
reply