A review of my Christmas listening: the New Yorker’s "In The Dark" podcast presented by Heidi Blake. Season 6, Blood Relatives, is about the White House Farm murders.
I think your definition of noble cause corruption is a bit mistaken. It's when the police knowingly convince themselves "for the greater good" to pin a crime on someone who was a "wrong 'un" - "even if they didn't do this particular crime he will probably do something bad again so we should just lock them up for this one ".
It's not a case of "everyone knows who did it" but we can't prove it.
You can see this from the Guildford 4, Birmingham 6, Sally Clarke etc. etc. In all these cases the police thought they were doing a service in locking up who they "wanted to believe" did the crime to appease the press and public when instead they got it completely wrong.
Wikipedia -
"Noble cause corruption is corruption caused by the adherence to a teleological ethical system, suggesting that people will use unethical or illegal means to attain desirable goals, a result which appears to benefit the greater good. Where traditional corruption is defined by personal gain, noble cause corruption forms when someone is convinced of their righteousness, and will do anything within their powers to achieve the desired result."
Define innocent. If the police know the suspect didn’t commit this particular crime but committed lesser crimes in the past or “might” be innocent what’s the difference?
Look at Michael Steele and Rettendon.
1985. We don’t have all the evidence to prove he did it but Bamber’s not very nice. He robbed his family. He’s probably a homosexual. Riddled with AIDS. Better off locked up away from the decent folk of Tolleshunt D’arcy. You know. Just to be sure.
Does that make locking up Bamber more stomachable ?
I've found the Essex Boys on Sky. I'll watch it because I do remember the case but not the details. I'm sure one reason I was drawn to true crime was for the idea of clearing up a difficult mystery. But the more I learn, the less clear cut these cases seem to be. We spent this afternoon watching the whole of Murder at the Post Office and I'm less sure now than I was before.
I think your definition of noble cause corruption is a bit mistaken. It's when the police knowingly convince themselves "for the greater good" to pin a crime on someone who was a "wrong 'un" - "even if they didn't do this particular crime he will probably do something bad again so we should just lock them up for this one ".
It's not a case of "everyone knows who did it" but we can't prove it.
You can see this from the Guildford 4, Birmingham 6, Sally Clarke etc. etc. In all these cases the police thought they were doing a service in locking up who they "wanted to believe" did the crime to appease the press and public when instead they got it completely wrong.
Wikipedia -
"Noble cause corruption is corruption caused by the adherence to a teleological ethical system, suggesting that people will use unethical or illegal means to attain desirable goals, a result which appears to benefit the greater good. Where traditional corruption is defined by personal gain, noble cause corruption forms when someone is convinced of their righteousness, and will do anything within their powers to achieve the desired result."
Thank you! Yes this does help to clear it up. I didn't want to think they would knowingly pin it on an innocent...
Define innocent. If the police know the suspect didn’t commit this particular crime but committed lesser crimes in the past or “might” be innocent what’s the difference?
Look at Michael Steele and Rettendon.
1985. We don’t have all the evidence to prove he did it but Bamber’s not very nice. He robbed his family. He’s probably a homosexual. Riddled with AIDS. Better off locked up away from the decent folk of Tolleshunt D’arcy. You know. Just to be sure.
Does that make locking up Bamber more stomachable ?
I've found the Essex Boys on Sky. I'll watch it because I do remember the case but not the details. I'm sure one reason I was drawn to true crime was for the idea of clearing up a difficult mystery. But the more I learn, the less clear cut these cases seem to be. We spent this afternoon watching the whole of Murder at the Post Office and I'm less sure now than I was before.