[Steve_American]

LEOs are required by their jobs to testify in court under oath to convict the criminals they arrest. Defense lawyers could question the testimony of every LEO who has lied under oath in the past.

Therefore, there should be a law that a finding that a LEO who has lied under oath be sufficient grounds for them to be fired and the reason be required to be put into their file so that they can't get a LEO job anywhere else.

Then all questioning of LEOs in an investigation MUST be done under oath. In fact, their initial retorts *might* be included as being under oath.

In fact a group of enterprising citizens could compile a data base of a list of LEOs who have obviously lied in a police report and/or when under oath, along with the video evidence that they lied. Then put this list out on line so defense lawyers could question the reliability of specific LEOs every time they are called to testify.

BTW -- I can't be 1st one to compare the current situation to the problem the NFL had decades ago when the instant replay became common. The NFL changed the rules to let teams demand the the instant reply be the deciding factor when it is obvious the official made the wrong call.
.