> and someone finally bothered to look at the proof and it was a blank page.
I think I agree more than not with your worldview, but it seems like in this case this was the first time the person tried to improperly use the system... and he was caught and is now being sentenced. So I would say this is an example of the system "working".
I'm sure there are civil rights abuses that happen much more frequently, which we don't here about, but this specific incident seems like something that should be cheered.
According to the second sentence of the article, the officer tracked multiple people and their locations. He clearly wasn't caught the first time he used the tool inappropriately because he was found guilty of using it illegally multiple times.
The officer very clearly was not forthcoming with the investigation, judging from him falsifying documents after the investigation started. So he may have other undetected crimes.
In fact, the only fair conclusion I think you can draw is that some officer(s) use the tool inappropriately. Because it's not clear if all uses are audited, or this officer was found on a random check. But in my opinion saying "the system worked" is inappropriate given the lack of data.
Is this some kind of parody? He got caught because it was a literal blank piece of paper. Anyone with any sense would write some bullshit paragraph and I'm sure plenty did and got away with it.
I think I agree more than not with your worldview, but it seems like in this case this was the first time the person tried to improperly use the system... and he was caught and is now being sentenced. So I would say this is an example of the system "working".
I'm sure there are civil rights abuses that happen much more frequently, which we don't here about, but this specific incident seems like something that should be cheered.