Why Prosecutors Lie (analyzing a subset of sociopathic sadists)

I watched for several years how criminal prosecutors sadistically use lies to torture people. After observing a series of anecdotal examples of their behaviour, I believe I finally recognized a prevailing psychological pattern. Prosecutors have no moral impulse themselves, and seek to amuse themselves by making a mockery of those who do.

The first time I saw a prosecutor try to lock someone up for something that was not supported by facts, I assumed what is probably a popular explanation: The prosecutor was simply doing his job zealously. The defense is expected to cheat without hesitation. And the dead also need representation without hesitation. Lawyers play games with no moral dimension.

But I actually observed prosecutors’ fascination with misery in court. When a defendant would cry, a prosecutor would perk up with a sort of blank fascination. As if prosecutors were simply sadists. And as if being a prosecutor was a good opportunity to channel sadistic impulses into an accepted use for the public good.

But then I saw prosecutors loved plea bargains as a goal themselves, beyond any rational or just use. They loved letting people out of prison, as a reward for lying about other people. They would let guiltier more hedonistic people out, to lock up less dangerous more boring people. This seemed like a social fetish for coercion.

But then I finally put together what the deepest impulse is. Prosecutors are fascinated with the moral impulses of public lynch mobs, and of jurors, because they have no such impulses for right or wrong themselves. This is kind of like how sociopaths like to put on a show of petting dogs, because they are fascinated with empathy.

A prosecutor likes seeing the silly moral outrage on an innocent person’s face, the moment that person is convicted using lies and sent to prison. It is like a young serial killer sticking an ice pick in a cat, fascinated with its screaming. And the prosecutor loves watching the jury get on their moral high horse and unknowingly condemn an innocent person.

As a child, the prosecutor was repeatedly beat up and lectured over two things that made no sense to him: morals and justice. By tricking the jury to convict an innocent person, he proves their moral impulses are trash. He gets his revenge, by playing their self-important impulses, and proving they are actually false and nonsensical.