Originally Posted by
Asturias56
I'm afraid you can't trust the police to tell the truth all the time
My experience once was that you cannot always trust the AAIB to do the same, either. I attended an inquest many years ago, where the evidence given by the AAIB contradicted that in their report, significantly so, despite their witness being the author of the report. I spoke with the Coroner's Officer at the end of the end and pointed this out, to be told that the Coroner had disallowed the AAIB report from being used as evidence. I have no idea why, or whether the disparity between the report and the evidence given made any difference to the findings by the jury, but it's stuck in my mind as being an example of how bias, perhaps unconscious bias, may change with time and impact the weight applied to events. Not suggesting this is wrong, it may well be that there was additional evidence found after the report was issued, but it did puzzle me as to why the report hadn't been amended, and why the Coroner chose to make the report inadmissible as evidence. I'm not a lawyer though, so it may be that this is normal.
This was pre-internet, so I don't think anyone picked up on it and the media didn't seem to spot it, either. Nowadays "trial be media", or by discussion on the internet, seems to be the way everything is judged. I am not convinced this is commensurate with real justice, and I am equally sure that it is of no comfort to the unfortunate victims.