Re: Corruption in DA's Office

From: charlie
Date: 21 Jun 2000
Time: 08:01:41

Comments

Jasper,

I recently posted on our discussion group that the LA Times Archieves were filled with stories of LAPD corruption and stories of a large amount of hired hits in LA.

I was asked why this wasn't mentioned in the OJ trial or why the press etc. acted like they didn't know it.

I answered because the trial was directed to a national audience. Regardless of what they knew personally to be true =--they went with the Adam 12 and Dragnet mentality.

I learned in To Protect and To Serve by Joe Domanick that since television began (and many movies) there was a physical presence on these sets of someone from the LAPD acting as a consultant but in fact this consultant was there to see that only POSITIVE info about the LAPD was ever put on the television shows. They were there to put forth and support the "myth" that the LAPD was the best law enforcement agency in the US. When in fact, this was far from the truth. However, this is what the general US population believed due to decades of exposure to the shows highlighting the LAPD MYTH of Excellence.

This helped tremendously in the LAPD/DA efforts in the OJ case. The Myth that the LAPD was uncorruptable. That it was excellent in its work. That its officers were shining examples. In general, this was a false impression that allowed the DA's and LAPD to claim that their cops "wouldn't do that".

YOu state that if they did it in the OJ case, it is no surprise that they did it in the cases of the nobodys. This is very true.

However, what they GOT BY WITH was that they DIDN"T DO IT IN THE CASES OF THE NOBODYS so why would they do it in the case of OJ. Just the opposite of what you said.

This helped them to get by with it. The myth that they didn't do it in the cases of nobodys---when in fact they did and did it daily for decades hiding behind the National Reputation that they themselves promoted on national tv and in the movies.

Perhaps now that the nation is learning that they did this --for decades--with relative ease--fooling every investigative body there was --or getting a pass from them--some will rethink the OJ case.

But never forget the media could have "blown their cover" at any time during the OJ case and failed to do so. charlie