HONOLULU (HawaiiNewsNow) –
“In the last few days we have seen huge developments in the ongoing investigation of Police Chief Louis Kealoha and his wife, Katherine, a supervising Deputy in the office of Prosecutor Keith Kaneshiro.
For the first time, the code of silence was broken when a former officer admitted he lied, under oath, and was directed by other officers as part of a conspiracy to frame an innocent man.
It was also the first time we heard the FBI and prosecutor’s overall theory of the case. Even though the court documents don’t name names, the facts are truly shocking.
And finally, on Monday we learned that the Chief has received a letter saying he is a target of the investigation – facing felony indictment.
The federal government believes that Katherine Kealoha and the officers faked the theft of her mailbox, and staged the surveillance video as evidence to frame her uncle. This is the first time we know for sure that the FBI’s evidence supports that accusation enough to get this first guilty plea and that the conspirators face federal felonies. The officers allegedly involved work for an elite unit that reports directly to the chief.
Of course, we presume all are innocent until proven guilty. But IF true this amounts not only to a violation of the law, but a tremendous abuse of the power of law enforcement and of taxpayer resources.
Also shocking is the apparent lack of concern about this by Honolulu’s top law enforcement agencies. Prosecutor Kaneshiro issued a statement supporting Mrs. Kealoha and belittling the investigation. The police department at least expressed concern and disappointment but said it would take action only if allegations were “confirmed.” The police chief also remained defiant – and stopped short of putting himself on leave”
Copyright 2016 Hawaii News Now. All rights reserved.
Psychopaths know right from wrong but don’t care
“The behavior of psychopaths is, without doubt, morally inappropriate, including murder, sexual molestation, fraud, and arson. Further, clinical analyses show that they present abnormal emotional profiles, as well as problems with inhibitory control, often leading to both reactive and instrumental aggression (Blair, 1995, 1997, 2008; Blair and Cipolotti, 2000; Blair et al., 1995; Glenn and Raine, 2008; Kiehl, 2006; Kiehl et al., 2001; Raine and Yang, 2006). What is unclear is the extent to which psychopaths suffer from damage to morally-specific knowledge that, in healthy individuals, guides intuitive judgments of right and wrong independently of their moral actions. On the one hand, studies indicate that psychopaths, both adults and juveniles, show a diminished capacity to distinguish between conventional and moral transgressions (Blair, 1995, 1997, 2008; Smetana, 2005; Turiel, 1998, 2005). For example, unlike healthy adults, adult psychopaths will typically judge as equally forbidden transgressions in which a person wears pyjamas to a restaurant (conventional) and a person who gratuitously hits a waiter in the restaurant (moral). Psychopaths also show diminished inhibitory control, a deficit that may contribute to their impulsive behavior, especially in the context of violence (Blair, 2008; Blair and Cipolotti, 2000; Kiehl, 2006). This research has led to the view that because of their emotional deficits, psychopaths have corresponding deficits in moral knowledge which, coupled with poor inhibitory control, leads to morally inappropriate behavior (Blair, Mitchell, and Blair, 2005; Nichols, 2002; Prinz, 2008).
Further support for the idea that the deficit in moral psychology seen among psychopaths is due to the deficit in emotional processing, comes from the wealth of research showing a significant relationship between emotional experience and moral judgment. For example, dozens of studies now show that you can prime people’s emotional state, and as a result, change their judgment of particular moral scenarios. For instance, putting people in a happy state is associated with a greater tendency to allow someone to be used as a means to some greater good (Valdesolo and DeSteno, 2006); associating a neutral word with disgust under hypnosis is associated with more severe moral condemnation (Wheatley and Haidt, 2006); inducing disgust is associated with more severe moral judgments (Schnall et al., 2008).”