"Testilying" is American police slang for lying under oath. It is a combination of the words "testimony" and "lying." It is also an interesting and accurate way to describe the common situation of police lying in criminal trial courts both in the US and in Taiwan.
This lesson in American police slang comes to mind due to the recent conviction in Taipei District Court of police officer Chang Yao-sheng (張耀昇) (page 1, Aug. 31). Chang, who was a supervising officer, was found guilty by the court of having fabricated details of his involvement, or more correctly his non-involvement, with the capture of the defendants in the high profile Pai Hsiao-yen (白曉燕) kidnap murder case several years ago. In essence he filed false reports and then perjured himself in court. I would conjecture that the only reason he did not get away with it was because fellow officers testified against him. The reason for the unusual split in the "Blue Curtain" of police silence was the fact that everybody wanted to get their full and accurate credit and fame for their parts in the shootout. The cops that were there were disinclined to divide the fame with cops who weren't; even with supervisors who weren't.
The case is unusual in a sense and usual in another sense. It is unusual in that a senior police officer was convicted of perjury based on the testimony of fellow officers. It was usual in that cops routinely lie under oath.
Serious commentators from both a prosecution and criminal defense background acknowledge the specter of police perjury. Alan Dershowitz is a well known criminal defense attorney, law professor, popular author and legal commentator in the US. As Professor Dershowitz has pointed out: "Police perjury in criminal cases -- particularly in the context of searches and other exclusionary rule issues -- is so pervasive that the former police chief of San Jose and Kansas City has estimated that hundreds of thousands of law-enforcement officers commit felony perjury every year testifying about drug arrests alone." Professor Irving Younger who was professor of law at New York University echoes Professor Dershowitz's thoughts on police perjury. He was also a former federal prosecutor. He has written: "Every lawyer who practices in the criminal courts knows that police perjury is commonplace. The reason is not hard to find. Policemen see themselves as fighting a two-front war against, on the one hand, criminals in the street, and, on the other, against `liberal' rules of law in court. All's fair in this war, including the use of perjury to subvert `liberal' rules of law that might free those who `ought' to be jailed."
Although both of these law professors were referring to the situation in the American criminal justice system, many Taiwanese legal scholars and practitioners would assert that Taiwan's criminal justice system suffers from exactly the same malaise; that is, rampant police perjury and falsified reports.
All of this raises the question of why the police routinely lie under oath.
Professor Darryl Wood of the University of Alaska puts forward this "rationale" for police "testilying." He lists five core beliefs of the police subculture:
First, the police view themselves as the only real crime fighters.
Second, no one else understands them; non-police do not understand what police work is all about.
Third, loyalty to each other; police officers have to stick together because everyone is out to get the police and make the job of the police more difficult.
Fourth, you can't win the war against crime without bending rules; the courts have awarded criminals too many civil rights.
Fifth, the public is unsupportive and too demanding; people are quick to criticize the police unless they need help.
Taking these elements together it is easy to see how police, in their own subculture and in their own minds could justify the practice of "testilying." Simply put, the cops consider lying under oath to be either a "necessary evil to fighting crime" or "a convenient expedient" or both.
In Taiwan we have the added element of career advancement, which figured in the case of Officer Chang.
The first step to solving any problem is admitting it exists. It is time for the general public and the Taiwanese criminal justice system to face the corrosive impact of police lying and begin to remedy the situation. A cancer that is left untreated spreads.
Brian Kennedy is a member of the Board of Amnesty International Taiwan and of the Taiwan Association for Human Rights.
A response to my article (“Invite ‘will-bes,’ not has-beens,” Aug. 12, page 8) mischaracterizes my arguments, as well as a speech by former British prime minister Boris Johnson at the Ketagalan Forum in Taipei early last month. Tseng Yueh-ying (曾月英) in the response (“A misreading of Johnson’s speech,” Aug. 24, page 8) does not dispute that Johnson referred repeatedly to Taiwan as “a segment of the Chinese population,” but asserts that the phrase challenged Beijing by questioning whether parts of “the Chinese population” could be “differently Chinese.” This is essentially a confirmation of Beijing’s “one country, two systems” formulation, which says that
“History does not repeat itself, but it rhymes” (attributed to Mark Twain). The USSR was the international bully during the Cold War as it sought to make the world safe for Soviet-style Communism. China is now the global bully as it applies economic power and invests in Mao’s (毛澤東) magic weapons (the People’s Liberation Army [PLA], the United Front Work Department, and the Chinese Communist Party [CCP]) to achieve world domination. Freedom-loving countries must respond to the People’s Republic of China (PRC), especially in the Indo-Pacific (IP), as resolutely as they did against the USSR. In 1954, the US and its allies
Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi arrived in China yesterday, where he is to attend a summit of the Shanghai Cooperation Organization (SCO) with Chinese President Xi Jinping (習近平) and Russian President Vladimir Putin today. As this coincides with the 50 percent US tariff levied on Indian products, some Western news media have suggested that Modi is moving away from the US, and into the arms of China and Russia. Taiwan-Asia Exchange Foundation fellow Sana Hashmi in a Taipei Times article published yesterday titled “Myths around Modi’s China visit” said that those analyses have misrepresented India’s strategic calculations, and attempted to view
When Chinese President Xi Jinping (習近平) stood in front of the Potala Palace in Lhasa on Thursday last week, flanked by Chinese flags, synchronized schoolchildren and armed Chinese People’s Liberation Army (PLA) troops, he was not just celebrating the 60th anniversary of the establishment of the “Tibet Autonomous Region,” he was making a calculated declaration: Tibet is China. It always has been. Case closed. Except it has not. The case remains wide open — not just in the hearts of Tibetans, but in history records. For decades, Beijing has insisted that Tibet has “always been part of China.” It is a phrase
RSS