I Smell Bacon, Freshly Bitch-Slapped Bacon, unless I Miss My Guess

A judge threw out a murder suspect's confessions Monday, saying that police broke the law when they used deception to coax him into saying he killed a missing woman.

"I cannot say I am surprised by the ruling. I looked at the case law, and I knew there was a 50-50 chance he was going to rule against the state in this case," Fox said. "You cannot make end runs around [a suspect's rights]. The court won't tolerate it."

Or read another way, if you make an end run around a suspect's rights, the court will tolerate it 50% of the time, which, as scary as that is to think about, isn't even the frightening part of this story. The frightening part of it all is the police's response to the ruling.

They maintain that they did nothing wrong:

Lt. John Lau, who was the architect of the interrogation of Dalzell, said he did not think police violated any laws in getting Dalzell to confess.

Guess what, John? You're wrong. That's what the court is trying to tell you.

You enforce the law, not interpret it. You're within the confines of the law, not outside of them. It frightens the citizens to think you believe you're not. It frightens us to think you believe you
re a judge as well as an arresting officer. You're a police officer: you enforce the interpretation of law of the courts; you operate within the constitutional confines given to you by them.

Perhaps, this ruling wasn't bitch-slap enough for you. Maybe, you need a some actual punishment, perhaps even a civil suit brought against you for violating Mr. Dalzell's rights, because, obviously, we're not getting through to you.