
$2 Test Identified Bird Shit as Cocaine. Cops Keep Using It to Arrest People - kyleblarson
https://www.vice.com/en_us/article/evj89n/this-dollar2-test-identified-bird-shit-as-cocaine-cops-keep-using-it-to-arrest-people
======
Simulacra
There should be penalties for false arrests; mandatory payouts to victims for
starters. If the state suddenly has to start paying out $150,000 a pop every
time someone is falsely arrested, then they will fix these tests.

~~~
shalmanese
In America, there really isn't a concept of false arrests. There is a "not
guilty" verdict but not an "innocent" verdict. If you're forcing states to pay
out in the case of not guilty verdicts, then you're introducing a whole new
host of bizarre incentives.

~~~
snagglegaggle
There are already incentives to arrest as many people as possible.

~~~
squarefoot
Exactly. Prisons are just like hotels: keep them constantly full and money
will keep coming, no matter from where.

------
notlukesky
Law enforcement has incentives to arrest as they are then seen to be doing
their job. There are incentives for false positives and no penalties for
wrongful imprisonment. Also related:

[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Base_rate_fallacy](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Base_rate_fallacy)

------
cannonedhamster
If the tests are so inconclusive wouldn't that mean police officers are
depriving people of their constitutional rights to freedom of movement? There
have to be counter suits and either this company or the police force are
liable for false imprisonment.

~~~
pstuart
Cops are, with rare exception, ever held liable for their abuses of power.
Lawsuits are payed by the taxpayers, so they have zero incentive to behave
legally.

~~~
ceejayoz
Yup. A particularly egregious case:

[https://www.techdirt.com/articles/20190909/12232742945/ninth...](https://www.techdirt.com/articles/20190909/12232742945/ninth-
circuit-upholds-previous-declaration-that-cops-stealing-your-stuff-doesnt-
violate-constitution.shtml)

The Ninth Circuit:

"We recognize that the allegation of any theft by police officers - most
certainly the theft of over $225,000 - is deeply disturbing. Whether that
conduct violates the Fourth Amendment's prohibition on unreasonable searches
and seizures, however, would not "be 'clear to a reasonable officer.'""

Note: Theft! Not asset forfeiture, but actual theft!

~~~
pytester
It gets worse than stealing:

[https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2019/oct/06/witness-
in-a...](https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2019/oct/06/witness-in-amber-
guyger-case-found-shot-dead-in-dallas)

"authorities have not identified a suspect or determined a motive."

Internal affairs clearly isn't a thing in the US. Or, if it is, it's a thing
that doesn't work, coz when the witness of somebody getting murdered by a cop
gets murdered in suspicious circumstances then it's _not all that hard_ to
identify a motive.

------
bilbo0s
Well, they let that one, _particular_ , suspect off when the test was caught
failing in that very public fashion.

So, I mean, in they're view, they probably figure that they, well,

"Fixed the Glitch":

[https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BUE0PPQI3is](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BUE0PPQI3is)

Other people's constitutional rights will likely be violated, but hey, "these
things work themselves out" right?

/end sarcasm

How do people live with themselves when they _knowingly_ implement shoddy
products and processes like these that literally ruin peoples' lives? It's
crazy.

~~~
buckminster
They might think, well, it's not as bad as a fake bomb detector.

[https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/ADE_651](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/ADE_651)

~~~
OrgNet
It's not as bad as police dogs that 'find' things on-command, by the real
police officer, to give him/her probable cause to search your car/etc...

------
adolph
Not to defend policing in general, but shouldn’t this community recognize the
recursive set of tradeoffs here?

Tests can rarely be both sensitive and specific. This test might have more
Type I errors so it doesn’t commit Type II.

Likewise, a police officer is in the same dilemma. Are you really not going to
arrest even though the test you were told to use came up positive?

[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sensitivity_and_specificity](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sensitivity_and_specificity)

[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Type_I_and_type_II_errors](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Type_I_and_type_II_errors)

~~~
HarryHirsch
You need to be arrested for birdshit or sugar doughnuts (that happened, too),
and then we can talk again.

~~~
adolph
Or cat litter, or detergent or any other pretext, but wouldn’t my experience
bias me?

If a society is to accept false positives then it follows that the arrest
process would be less difficult and stigmatizing than it is in most places.
Unfortunately, “the law is an ass” as they say.

[https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/the_law_is_an_ass](https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/the_law_is_an_ass)

------
dogma1138
Most forensic tests are quite broad including GSR and blood residue.

It’s not about what else they trigger on but how likely that this would be the
case in a set of controlled circumstances.

A cocaine test that triggers on bird poop is still completely acceptable
unless carrying bags of powdered guano is the new rage these days.

Same thing with a GSR test that may be triggered with certain other chemicals,
you only get reasonable doubt when there is a good explanation why would
you’ve been exposed to those chemicals nominally.

BTW medical tests aren’t that different, it’s up to the doctors to make sure
they exclude all other possible explanations besides what they are testing for
and we don’t really complain.

------
edoo
"They’re often not admissible in court, which is why police have to order
follow-up testing from a lab." \- whoa so you can be arrested based on
evidence that is known to be inadmissible in the first place.

~~~
Fjolsvith
The test shows reasonable doubt of your innocence.

~~~
edoo
But there is reasonable doubt of the test. That logic could have you arrested
for being the false positive from an algorithm.

~~~
ceejayoz
There's a "beyond a reasonable doubt" requirement for conviction, not arrests.

------
oi-pilot
Haven't seen much people with bird shit in their pockets.

~~~
tbyehl
Plenty of people drive around with bird shit on their car tho.

[https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/2019/08/09/young-
bla...](https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/2019/08/09/young-black-
football-player-was-arrested-after-claiming-cocaine-his-car-was-bird-poop-it-
was-bird-poop/)

~~~
adjkant
How this doesn't get these cops fired for trying to falsely arrest someone
using a test they likely know is flawed is insane (who would ever look at a
white spot on the top of a car and think "yep that's cocaine"??). If there was
any sense and lack of lobbying by police unions in the US it would be an easy
priority to draft better laws on actions of cops.

~~~
tbyehl
In this instance, it's hard not to question the intelligence of a police
officer thinking a white spot on the outside of a car might be drugs.

But overall, in the War on Some Substances, anything goes. Blame needs to
start at the top. It's not like the cop purchased these widely-discredited
field tests on their own.

------
kd3
To understand why cops get away with this crap look up the origin of the
police AKA slave patrol.

