Team 5 Investigates is reporting that fired crime lab employee Robert Pino has morphed into a “whistle blower”. Is this sour grapes or signs of bigger problems? Seems like a transparent investigation and hearings are called for. Excerpts from the report:
“I’ve never been negligent in all my career at the crime lab. This is all a sham, they’re using me to cover up something else,” said Pino.
Inquiring minds will want to know more.
According to the state’s investigation, Pino’s “haphazard style” in managing this database is the reason why time ran out and prosecutors couldn’t go after criminals in fourteen sexual assault cases.
Pino says that’s hoohee.
Another problem Team 5 Investigates found at the Massachusetts state police crime lab is an increased workload, and inadequate staff to get it all done. Pino’s workload tripled in 2004 when the size of the CODIS database expanded to include DNA samples from all felons, but his staff size did not.
There is more.
…the state also claims Pino deliberately misused the DNA database to search for criminals through their family members who are already in the system. But according to an e-mail obtained by Team 5 Investigates, it appears that the state had actually given Pino permission to do that type of searching.
And a lawyer weighs in.
…attorney Joan Griffin says scientists, not cops, should be in charge of crime labs. “In my mind, there’s no question that if this could be separated from the police, we would be better off…”
Sounds like sound advice.
But seriously, if Pino is right that the state gave him permission to do so-called “familial searches” that is a very serious matter than needs to be investigated in a transparent manner. As BMG readers know, I have written here about the connections between the LaGuer case and the crime lab scandal (and also here). Those must be part of a thorough airing of how the lab operated during the Weld/Cellucci/Swift administrations as well as the Romney/Healey administration.
…that arrested Edmund F. Burke on murder charges after they knew of his innocence? If I needed any convincing about the integrity of the State Police, they showed it to me then. I have no idea of the validity of Mr. Pino’s complaint, however, the Massachusetts State Police are today a far cry from a crime fighting organization. The low quality of the organization reflects that of other state agencies. There seems to be nothing in the way of discipline. (Any discipline for incarcerating and innocent Mr. Burke? Invading a house without a warrant?) They can’t clean up their own act. Attacks on the innocent! No respect for law! Who are the thugs?
<
p>
I understand that the State of Maine is now doing the lab work. Maybe this is a good alternative to having a lab under the control of people more interested in arrests of anyone than getting criminals off the street.
<
p>
Y’know your DNA looks pretty much like the stuff found at the Gardner Museum. You’re under arrest!
heard of the Burke case. Thanks to you I went to Google and found this. Interesting. Is there more information you can share or more links you can direct us to?
…this. Who do you turn to when the police turn rancid? Who stops them from arresting anyone for any crime? Entering anyone’s house, taking anything they want? What happens when the criminals wear uniforms? Their activities are as blatant as the police in any police state.
<
p>
Maybe a complaint can be filed with the Board of Bar Overseers about the Conte connection. Yes, I know, it is a fool’s errand as the court controls the BBO, but it would serve to warn people. There is nothing that can be done about the police problems.
<
p>
Who’s next? Your or me?
…Quis custodiet ipsos custodes?
Quis custodiet ipsos custodes? is a Latin phrase from the Roman poet Juvenal, variously translated as “Who will guard the guards?”, “Who watches the watchmen?”, “Who shall watch the watchers themselves?”, or similar.
<
p>
The essential problem was first posed by Plato in the Republic, his work on government and morality. The perfect society as described by Socrates, the main character of the work, relies on laborers, slaves, and tradesmen. The guardian class is to protect the city. The question is put to Socrates, who will guard the guardians? or, who will protect us against the protectors? Plato’s answer to this is: they will guard themselves against themselves. We must tell the guardians a noble lie. The noble lie will inform them that they are better than those they serve and it is, therefore, their responsibility to guard and protect those lesser than themselves. We will instill in them a distaste for power or privilege, they will rule because they believe it right, not because they desire it.
<
p>
The saying has since been used by many people to ponder the insoluble question of where ultimate power should reside. The answer in modern democracies was found in the separation of powers. Never give ultimate power to any one group; the executive, legislative, or judicial; have the interests of each compete and conflict. Each group will then find it in its best interest to impede the functioning of the rest and this will keep ultimate power under constant struggle and, thereby, out of any one group’s hands.
the courts, including the SJC, gave the police a pass in the Benjamin LaGuer case by in effect saying that it’s okay to ditch exculpatory evidence. Even something as crucial as fingerprints from the base of a phone used to bind the victim’s wrists. To hold that knowledge of this report would not have entered into the jury’s deliberations seems a stretch. From my point of view the judiciary in this case abdicated its power-balancing duty envisioned by the founding fathers.
I don’t have much trouble believing Pino’s charges that he took the brunt of blame that should have been more widely distributed. I do think that his whistle blowing, such as it is, deserves to be investigated. Sunshine, as they say, is the best disinfectant. What bothers me is that in a Chanel 5 web only supplement to their report, in which Pino talks about “How Major Crimes Were Solved”, he constantly uses the word “we” when referring to the police units on those cases. In one instance he practically boasts that he embarked on his forensic tasks with knowledge in the back of his mind that…
This is sloppy at best and in fact is a really dangerous way to conduct an investigation. The police need to do the police work and scientists need to do the CSI work. The suspect may very well have been guilty as sin. But if the lab person is working from the premise that a particular suspect is guilty that is just begging for a mistake to eventually happen. Pino comes right out and says
That’s called working the case backwards. How in heavens name is a defendant going to get a fair shake if the lab people approach a case as though they have a dog in the fight? It’s their job to develop the evidence based on what’s there. Not to prejudge what the evidence will turn out to be. Joan Griffin (see above) was spot on to say that scientists, not cops, should be in charge of crime labs.
Thirty years ago cops would do an investigation. Information that was accusatory as well as information that was exculpatory was included in the police report. It appears now, and it happens often, that cops will form a premise, and conduct an investigation around that premise, and tailor the investigation to conform to that premise. If the square peg doesn’t fit into the round hole, they’ll get a bigger hammer.
<
p>
The state police is a cauldron of incompetence. There are entirely too many people on the payroll doing too little or nothing.
<
p>
The state crime lab was a dumping ground for senior officers who were essentially useless in any other capacity.
If the taxpayers only knew, and the current governor I don’t belive really cares. The entire Dept of Public Safety is awash in incompetence and is about to founder.
I hope the news media listens to Mr. Pino rather than vilify him.
I feel sorry for the bright, intelligent, honest young officers that wish to serve in the State Police to make a difference. They are the ones forced out or compelled to join in the good ol’ boys activities.
<
p>
I had to laugh at your “dumping ground” observation. It seems all police departments take the ones least able to do anything right and put them in places where management doesn’t see them. They go to the evidence room (how many times have we read of an evidence room cleaned out of dope and cash evidence?) or the front desk (where they provide the public with the aura of corruption and incompetence) or special projects (where they can so all sorts of mischief).
<
p>
Didn’t the Boston Police have to shut down their fingerprint unit recently when they were producing “creative evidence”?
<
p>
Consider this:
<
p>