Public Arrests

@parados,

parados wrote:

Arrests and dropping of charges are both matters of public record.

That's true. But I believe that what Ceili was referring to was the large amount of publicity that can accompany an arrest and the comparative lack of any such publicity if charges are dropped. Granted, this is not the fault of the judicial branch of the government but reflects the fact that good news don't sell newpapers or increase viewer count on TV.

2 Replies

@Ceili,

I know. The responses get more and more absurd.

0 Replies

@firefly,

In other words, there is no benefit to the judicial system.

Buncha rubberneckers.

0 Replies

@Lustig Andrei,

Quote:

But I believe that what Ceili was referring to was the large amount of publicity that can accompany an arrest and the comparative lack of any such publicity if charges are dropped. Granted, this is not the fault of the judicial branch of the government but reflects the fact that good news don't sell newpapers or increase viewer count on TV

I think that when you do get a tremendous amount of publicity accompanying an arrest there is also considerable publicity when charges are dropped, it's just that the media generally has less to cover and talk about when there are no longer criminal charges pending, unless something, like a possible civil action, is still in the works.

That was certainly the case with the Dominique Strauss-Kahn matter. There was massive international publicity over his arrest, bail hearings, house arrest, and every court appearance, because there was a continuing story the media could report on, with speculations about conspiracies, legal strategies, his past behaviors, and all sorts of other tidbits the media could feed on. Then the focus shifted to the complaining witness and problems with her credibility, and, once the charges were finally dropped, the U.S. media wasn't left with much to feed on--he packed his bags and went home to France where he faced other investigations. But, the fact the charges were dropped, received wide-spread international publicity, just as his arrest did, it's just that there was no continuing story in the U.S. .

The same was true with Kobe Bryant, there was considerable publicity over the rape charges against him being dropped, and it was definitely true in the case of the Duke lacrosse players who had been accused of rape, as well as other charges, because, when those charges were dropped, there was a major scandal that resulted in the D.A. being disbarred, so that garnered a great deal of publicity.

So, if the media can continue to milk the story of charges being dropped, or they have some follow-up story to keep it going, they will do that, but generally they don't.

I don't think it's just that good news isn't interesting. It's also that, when charges are dropped, the media may have the rug pulled out from under them in terms of having a continuing story or side issues to talk about, but off-hand I can't think of cases where the dropping of charges didn't receive a lot of publicity if the arrest had received a lot of publicity, it's just that the story doesn't keep going on as long.

1 Reply

@firefly,

Yea, having the rugs pulled from a headline can be concluded with a sentence or two in the back pages.

1 Reply

@cicerone imposter,

How many people know who was arrested in the case of the murder of Natalie Holloway? How many know he was let go and not put on trial? Now, how many know he was just convicted (pled guilty) to murder in Peru?

All of that happened outside the US, yet we saw the perp walk in that one.

This really has little to do with the U.S. It's all about the news media trying to fill too much time.

2 Replies

@parados,

There are many unsolved crimes.

1 Reply

@cicerone imposter,

But we are talking about people arrested publically, and then let go.

0 Replies

@Lustig Andrei,

Exactly. The sensational is page 1A. The correction ends up on 7C - two pages before the comics.

0 Replies

@parados,

Quote:

All of that happened outside the US, yet we saw the perp walk in that one.

This really has little to do with the U.S. It's all about the news media trying to fill too much time.

We saw the perp walk with Amanda Knox also.

And we'll see the perp walk with the Captain of the Italian cruise ship as well.
There was an absolute frenzy trying to get pictures of him earlier today when he was going home to be under house arrest--it looked like they were even trying to get pictures of him from above from a helicopter.

It has nothing to do with the U.S., it has nothing to do with the justice system, it is all about the media.

1 Reply

@firefly,

Okay, I'm waiting for all of you who have been squawking about how awful the U.S. is for releasing the names and photos of those arrested, and how barbaric it is that we show "perp walks", to start complaining about the fact that this man's identity and perp walk has been shown across the world--and he hasn't even been charged with any crimes yet.

The perp walk is the first thing shown on the video...notice the police officers, the handcuffs...just like in the big bad U.S.

And the news reports and commentary, in all parts of the globe, are hardly affording him "the presumption of innocence".

I'm waiting to hear the outrage from all of you about the public exposure and humiliation of this man by showing him in handcuffs. Was it really necessary for anyone to reveal his name and photo? Was it necessary to see his "perp walk" in handcuffs? Does he really need all those police officers around him? Is any of this fair to him?

1 Reply

@firefly,

Grow up! I don't think anyone's right to know is more important than your right to privacy. Keep showing high profile cases... They don't prove a thing. High profile cases get press everywhere, that's not going to change. It sells papers. It doesn't make this world a safer place. It doesn't make for a better justice system.
We all know that your bullshit claim that you go to court to make sure the prisoners aren't beaten if pure bunk. You can't even distinguish between presumed innocence and found guilty.
Face it, the ONLY reason you like to know what's going on with complete strangers is that you are an incurable gossip. Nothing more, nothing less...
You still haven't come to grips with the fact that you alone are the queen of conjecture. See Thom Swift.
So show me all the Nathalie Hollaway and Nancy Grace crap you want. It still doesn't prove that your need to know is any greater than a perp's right to privacy.

2 Replies

@Ceili,

Quote:

Grow up! I don't think anyone's right to know is more important than your right to privacy.

An arrest isn't private. There is no right to privacy there. It is public!! And for a very real reason.

2 Replies

@parados,

An arrest may not be, but publishing it along side a perp walk is more than a little invasive. Especially if it turns out to be a false arrest, or dropped in the future. I just think it's more about gossip than it is about justice. Convictions - no problem, but an arrest is not proven guilt, not by a long shot.

1 Reply

@Ceili,

Quote:

It still doesn't prove that your need to know is any greater than a perp's right to privacy.

That's exactly why I posted the example of the ship Captain. It contains the exact elements you and others have been complaining about--his name and photo have been revealed, he's been shown doing the "perp walk"--and he hasn't even been charged with crimes yet.

So, if it's not the U.S. doing it you don't want to complain about it? It's only unacceptable and awful if the U.S. is doing it?

Quote:

You still haven't come to grips with the fact that you alone are the queen of conjecture. See Thom Swift.

I don't suppose you've noticed the similarity of the charges in the case of the Captain and Thom Swift--manslaughter, failure to give assistance, leaving the scene....except the Captain hasn't even been charged before being publicly pilloried in the press, and, even in the thread I posted about the cruise disaster, people are convicting him.

I really suggest that you get off your high horse, and stop insulting me, and take a long look at your own hypocrisy in your standards--if the U.S. does something of this nature, it's wrong, but, if other countries do it it's because it's a "high profile case" and "they don't prove a thing". Why don't they prove a thing? Because you'd rather ignore those cases? So issues of justice and fairness don't apply in high profile cases?
Other countries clearly aren't guarding the identities of those who are only suspects--people who haven't even been charged yet.
And it is the media who want those shots of the "perp walks"--they sell papers, make for good TV coverage--even when it isn't a high profile case, as long as it is at all newsworthy the media wants those photos.

1 Reply

@parados,

Spot on!

0 Replies

@firefly,

I have a problem with this kind of crap where ever it is, even in Canada.. This question was about the US, thus I answered it accordingly. The US has though, made it about entertainment. Take a look at COPS or whatever show Steven Segal was on and various other shows of the same ilk. Pure Entertainment.
If this thread had been about the Italian justice system, we would be discussing the Italian justice system. Since it wasn't, we weren't.
Should we foreigners stop discussing the States? Do you have a problem defending your system to people who are only observers? If so, perhaps you should state that at the beginning of every thread so we can tell if we are stepping on sensitive toes.
My high horse...
Pulhalease...
Go back and read all the shite you've written on Thom Swift. You've tried and convicted him. The system you are defending is more like mob mentality than I can scarcely believe. And black and white threats are just as stupid. Just because i disagree with perp walks doesn't mean anyone is ignoring the issues. We are just not tied down to the gossip section. The media prints this stuff cause people like you buy it and read it. If you weren't interested in peering over fences, they wouldn't have a market to sell it.
So, you and your ilk are obviously not alone, however, it STILL does not make for a better justice system.

1 Reply

@Ceili,

Quote:

Go back and read all the shite you've written on Thom Swift. You've tried and convicted him.

No, I haven't convicted him. Go back and read all of my posts in that thread. I do believe in a DUI arrest that there is likely an objective measure of intoxication, like a BAC level, that was taken and that is part of the criminal complaint against him, and, from the news report, he did not stop his car and remain at the scene because he was arrested at his home, and he did know he hit someone with his car. So, I believe there is evidence to support the charges against him, and a judge concurred with that, but that doesn't mean the state can prove every element of the charges at trial, or that a good defense attorney can't get the state's evidence thrown out, or exculpatory evidence admitted, and I have repeatedly said that in that thread.
So, I don't know whether he'd be convicted at trial, or would even want a trial, and I certainly have not convicted him. But I'm also not ignoring the fact that there was reason to make an arrest and bring charges.

Quote:

The system you are defending is more like mob mentality than I can scarcely believe

The system I am defending is one that does not allow people to be arrested in secret, and that requires that, once in police custody, the whereabouts of the person detained must be made known, and the charges against them, and the reason for those charges, must be revealed to a judge in a public courtroom, where anyone can observe what is taking place.
I gladly defend that system.

You don't understand what the "presumption of innocence" means legally. That's one reason I posted a definition previously in this thread--to illuminate you.

Let me re-post it for your benefit.

Quote:

The Presumption of Innocence

A principle that requires the government to prove the guilt of a criminal defendant and relieves the defendant of any burden to prove his or her innocence.

The presumption of innocence, an ancient tenet of Criminal Law, is actually a misnomer. According to the U.S. Supreme Court, the presumption of the innocence of a criminal defendant is best described as an assumption of innocence that is indulged in the absence of contrary evidence (Taylor v. Kentucky, 436 U.S. 478, 98 S. Ct. 1930, 56 L. Ed. 2d 468 [1978]). It is not considered evidence of the defendant's innocence, and it does not require that a mandatory inference favorable to the defendant be drawn from any facts in evidence.

In practice the presumption of innocence is animated by the requirement that the government prove the charges against the defendant Beyond a Reasonable Doubt. This due process requirement, a fundamental tenet of criminal law, is contained in statutes and judicial opinions. The requirement that a person suspected of a crime be presumed innocent also is mandated in statutes and court opinions. The two principles go together, but they can be separated.

The Supreme Court has ruled that, under some circumstances, a court should issue jury instructions on the presumption of innocence in addition to instructions on the requirement of proof beyond a reasonable doubt (Taylor v. Kentucky). A presumption of innocence instruction may be required if the jury is in danger of convicting the defendant on the basis of extraneous considerations rather than the facts of the case.

The presumption of innocence principle supports the practice of releasing criminal defendants from jail prior to trial. However, the government may detain some criminal defendants without bail through the end of trial. The Eighth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution states that excessive bail shall not be required, but it is widely accepted that governments have the right to detain through trial a defendant of a serious crime who is a flight risk or poses a danger to the public. In such cases the presumption of innocence is largely theoretical.

Aside from the related requirement of proof beyond a reasonable doubt, the presumption of innocence is largely symbolic. The reality is that no defendant would face trial unless somebody—the crime victim, the prosecutor, a police officer—believed that the defendant was guilty of a crime. After the government has presented enough evidence to constitute Probable Cause to believe that the defendant has committed a crime, the accused need not be treated as if he or she was innocent of a crime, and the defendant may be jailed with the approval of the court.

Nevertheless, the presumption of innocence is essential to the criminal process. The mere mention of the phrase presumed innocent keeps judges and juries focused on the ultimate issue at hand in a criminal case: whether the prosecution has proven beyond a reasonable doubt that the defendant committed the alleged acts. The people of the United States have rejected the alternative to a presumption of innocence—a presumption of guilt—as being inquisitorial and contrary to the principles of a free society.
http://legal-dictionary.thefreedictionary.com/presumption+of+innocence

What do you mean by, "you and your ilk"? My ilk?

Why is the world media showing those pictures of the ship's Captain doing the "perp walk"?

0 Replies

@Ceili,

Quote:

An arrest may not be, but publishing it along side a perp walk is more than a little invasive.

That is all about the media. It has nothing to do with the police or prosecutors.

If I get a speeding ticket, anyone can go down to public records and find it. It doesn't matter if I fight it and beat it. It's still a matter of public record that I got the ticket.

Quote:

I just think it's more about gossip than it is about justice.

Which is why for the most part, the justice system ignores it. It's the media that is the problem. They WANT to cover it. They WANT to sensationalize it. The justice system has to prove it in court. The justice system also allows for sanctions if the government misuses publicity in a case.

1 Reply

@parados,

Quote:

That is all about the media. It has nothing to do with the police or prosecutors.

I agree. These "perp walks" merely show police doing their job, which is transporting the person in custody from one place to another, something that is done with all people in police custody, and those people are always handcuffed to protect the officers and public safety. If the person, or the crime, is newsworthy, the media is standing there to get their photos.

The "perp walk" has nothing to do with the criminal justice system. The media are the ones who turn it into a "photo op". The police are just doing their job in those photos.

0 Replies

Public Arrests

Related Topics

Quick Links

My Account

able2know