Attacking the Accuracy of the Police Officers Observations in a Los Angeles or Criminal Case

The credibility or believability of an officer saw summations and statements should never be considered totally accurate or correct. It is essential that all statements declare fully scrutinized and challenge by her attorney in a DUI or other criminal case.

Very often when our attorneys are reviewing police reports with our clients, major and minor factual discrepancies appear with no rational explanation. Although it’s easy to assume that the clients, or person being charged with the offense is lying or fabricating to make themselves look better. There is often another reasonable explanation.

Although police officers are employed to protect and serve the community, and hold themselves out as neutral and unbiased people, that is not always the case. Police officers also have an agenda… that is to build a criminal case against a suspect who he has determined to be guilty.

Unfortunately, that is often not true. Officers frequently make errors in judgment, make flawed observations, as well as mistakes in identification. Officers are subject like anyone else to make the same kind of errors, and their conduct should always be carefully scrutinize by the same standard any other witnes

For example, in a DUI case, once a police officer suspects someone as a DUI driver, he rarely considers any other alternative explanation for their impairment. Sickness or other physical disabilities are rarely considered as an explanation for their conduct or unsatisfactory performance.

Police officers are goal oriented, and strive to build a case against a suspected drunk driver, often making errors in observations, as well as interpretations of what they see. In truth, they are not unbiased, or neutral observers. This is critical when your face with a serious ramifications of arrests. We feel that a drivers recollection of the events are just as valuable, as that of any officer. It is critical that you consult an experienced Los Angeles DUI lawyer who can challenge the truth of any observations or conclusions, and fight for truth to prevail.