A while back, a colleague had a suppression hearing. The cop was trying to explain why he had reasonable suspicion for a Terry stop. What's he say? Well, the suspect was making furtive movements.
That's all he'd say. Finally, the lawyer took a risk and asked him to define using words what a "furtive movement" is. Cop couldn't. Motion to suppress granted.
There's a common set of lies. They must get this in training, or from each other, because they show up in every case. "Oh, the car passenger had one shoulder down and in my training/experience, that means he's hiding something under the seat", or "they were looking around a lot" as consciousness of guilt, or "he was walking with one arm stiff" to suggest he had a gun. Etc. But there's never any other proof. The judge/jury almost always believes the cops, so they always tell the same lies in the same words.
And, hey, the suspect did have whatever it was (unless planted, which is rather rarer) or else there wouldn't be a case. So people don't really worry about it.
Body cams on all cops would sure help clear some of that up.
