Dispatches from the Culture Wars

The New York State Police's supervision of a major crime laboratory was so poor that it overlooked evidence of pervasively shoddy forensics work, allowing an analyst to go undetected for 15 years as he falsified test results and compromised nearly one-third of his cases, an investigation by the state's inspector general has found.

The analyst's training was so substandard that at one point last year, investigators discovered he could not properly operate a microscope essential to performing his job, the report released on Thursday said.

And when the State Police became aware of the analyst's misconduct, an internal review by superiors in the Albany lab deliberately omitted information implicating other analysts and suggesting systemic problems with the way evidence was handled, the report said. Instead, the review focused blame mostly on the analyst, Garry Veeder, who committed suicide in May 2008 during the internal inquiry.

"Cutting corners in a crime lab is serious and intolerable," said the state's inspector general, Joseph Fisch. "Forensic laboratories must adhere to the highest standards of competence, independence and integrity. Anything less undermines public confidence in our criminal justice system."

And if you believe this, I've got a bridge to sell you:

The State Police superintendent, Harry J. Corbitt, said that the agency planned to hire an outside consultant. "Appropriate remedial measures will be taken with respect to any conduct falling below the highest standards," said Mr. Corbitt, whose nomination last year by Gov. David A. Paterson was meant to help rehabilitate the scandal-tainted agency.

After the State Police began its internal investigation last year, it notified district attorneys across the state that evidence in criminal cases examined by Mr. Veeder might have been compromised. Mr. Veeder worked in the crime lab analyzing so-called trace evidence, like fibers, hair, impressions and other physical material found at scenes of crimes, including homicides.

But on Thursday, police officials said that none of the district attorneys had found that Mr. Veeder's work had cast doubt on any of their convictions.

"We are satisfied that there were no wrongful convictions, nor any miscarriages of justice which resulted from these improper procedures," Mr. Corbitt said, stating a viewpoint also shared by Mr. Fisch.

Imagine that, the prosecutors don't think a crime lab analyst who spent 15 years faking results ever had any effect on any actual trial in which that evidence was introduced. I'm shocked that prosecutors, most of whom continue to argue that once someone is convicted they shouldn't even have access to evidence that could conclusively prove their innocence (or guilt!), don't think any of their convictions could possibly be wrong.

Let me make a prediction: There are a whole bunch of innocent people in prison in New York right now who are not going to find those confident assurances by the prosecutors to be terribly convincing. And they're going to file motions to reopen their cases. And the prosecutors are going to fight tooth and nail to prevent that because, quite frankly, they couldn't care less about justice; they only care about being reelected.