From the Left....
by Robin Farkas
YOUR NAME - YOUR PHOTO - YOU'RE BAD!
By Robin Farkas, From the Left...
If I put YOUR photo and name here – on-line – and
if I told the world I think you committed some crime, and that
you might be dangerous... If I implied YOU are a bad person,
but you haven't actually been convicted of anything – would
that be ok with you? Or would you be looking up the elements
of libel by now?
Uncle Sam does it all the time. There are plenty of situations
where publicizing a private person is appropriate. For instance,
a missing child – publicity is a good thing when a missing
child's photo is broadcast across the nation; on the evening
news, on posters, distributed among police officers, on milk
cartons, through flyers in the mail. Most would concur no harm
is done by distributing the child's name and photo in this circumstance.
Parents of missing children are normally grateful for all the
publicity they can get during those desperate times.
What about escaped convicts? If you live near a prison, you
don't want to hear, "Three prisoners escaped last night...
all convicted of murder... believed to be armed and dangerous...
may still be in the neighborhood..." That's just not what
you want to wake up to in the morning. But, luckily, prisons
keep good current photos, so you can see the enemy and know whom
is on the run. Here, too, not many would oppose the bad publicity
raining down on escaped convicts.
Have you seen a one-armed man anywhere?
O.K. How about people the police think might have committed
some horrible crime. You know the sort – long rap sheets,
prior felonies, lots of evidence... Sure, they haven't been convicted
of this crime yet, but odds are, they will be, if only we can
find them. These are the guys and gals on the wall in the post
office. Or, for a better picture, sometimes in color, go to www.fbi.gov/mostwanted.htm
– that's right, the FBI's Most Wanted List – on-line.
I love technology! Now, it's possible these fugitives didn't
really do it, and are not showing up at their local friendly
FBI branch office because they're too busy trying to find the
one-armed man. But I still think it would be a stretch to say
the violation of their civil rights (the bad publicity) outweighs
public policy here. After all, if these are considered the baddest
of the bad, they ought to be found sooner rather than later.
Putting them in jail isn't bad enough for these scoundrels
- let's embarrass them too!!
And then there are drug dealers. If someone is arrested on
a drug charge, should their picture be plastered all over? If
they are a big-time drug dealer? If they are buying drugs for
personal consumption? If they are with someone who is buying
some dope? What about if they aren't trying to buy drugs at all,
but were in the wrong place at the wrong time? You have to be
careful about whom you hang out with today. Anyway, should localities
publish the names and photos of those arrested for drugs? Mind
you – not convicted of a drug offense, just arrested! Some
towns do.
But who is it really embarrassing?
In Boston, not only do they promote the cable-access TV broadcasting
of the names and photos of those arrested for drugs, but also
those arrested for soliciting a prostitute! Wow! That must be
embarrassing... It's bad enough you are driven by a need now
humiliatingly public. But your wife, mother, boss, children,
neighbors, and friends all now know: YOU ARE A BAD PERSON!! Imagine
how embarrassed your mother is! You say you haven't been convicted
yet? The ACLU calls this the "Alice In Wonderland approach
to criminal justice: first the punishment and then the trial."
And they are right!!
The flip side of this is "warning the neighborhood of
a pedophile living in their midst." Since Megan's Law was
passed, convicts have been sentenced to X number of years, and
then once they have served their time, they are released and
must register with the local police. The police then have a variety
of policies for disseminating the information to the public.
Some states, including Kansas, Florida, Alaska, and Indiana provide
on-line details of their sex offenders; some include photos –
just go to the state's government home page, click on law enforcement,
then sex offenders registry. So what is the citizen at large
to do with this information? Keep their kids inside or with guards
at all times? If that's the only option – they would at
least be safer. Sometimes the neighborhood doesn't like that
option, and the offender is harassed, assaulted, or otherwise
forced to flee the area. Why not just keep them in jail?
Have you ever had a relationship with someone who plays "no-so-fast?"
You know, you try to please your mother/boyfriend/boss by doing
what they want, doing it their way, and then when you've fulfilled
your part of the bargain, they say, "Wait a minute, not
so fast – now you have to do x-y-z too!!" You just
can't win; you will never catch up with the additional demands..
While it is nearly impossible to feel any sympathy for a pedophile
(a person who is seemingly beyond any control) the government
is guilty of playing no-so-fast with them. When they finish their
sentence and get out of jail, that should be it! There should
be finality. If they are hopelessly lost from any redemption,
beyond rehabilitation, and are deemed too dangerous to live amongst
civilized people – then we should make the punishment life
without parole!! But we should NOT play head games with them!
Oh - and depending on local policy, these sex offenders may
include those guilty of such minor offenses as mooning your professor
one evening when you had a few too many at the frat house party.
That's indecent exposure. But, once you've been labeled ‘SEX
OFFENDER' how many people ask, "What type?"
Terrorizing the Locals For Fun & Profit
Finally, we come to my favorite: COPS. You know, the TV show?
The crew follows a patrol car around. (They rotate among cities
like Miami. Seattle, and Memphis.) Their speciality is filming
busts, chases and sting operations. Don't you love it when they
break down the door, and a dozen cops go flying in, guns drawn,
shouting, massively macho? And there's the family. The criminal
suspect son/husband/whatever may be long gone, but there's the
wife, in her housecoat and curlers. The kids are crying around
her knees. The neighbor/girlfriend is demanding an explanation
for why her friend is being harassed. One or more of them may
be drunk. The apartment is a pigsty. Yikes!! And COPS is capturing
it in living color for all the world's viewing pleasure. Was
that part in the search warrant? Look for contraband... Arrest
suspect... Interview witnesses to alleged crime... Harass suspect's
family... Terrify children... Preserve it on video for entertainment
purposes. I think not.
Have we no decency? There is a line between protecting the
public from crime and harassing citizens. We have crossed it.
It's simple, really. Ask the question: If I do this, will the
world be a safer place to live? If I broadcast the photo of the
guy arrested for allegedly soliciting a hooker, will the neighborhood
be better off? If I allow a TV show to make money filming a suspect's
family being terrorized, will the neighborhood be safer?
Here's a final thought: if it's ok to publicize those suspected
of crimes, why isn't it ok to publicize the names and photos
of those suspected of doing other bad things? Amy spanked her
child – Bill is wearing fur – Connie failed to teach
her child right from wrong – David was clocked doing 85
on the freeway – Elaine threw a heavy object at her husband
– Fred swore at a police officer – Gina gave her prescription
medication to her sister – Henry was treated at the emergency
room for an embarrassing condition – See you all on the
front page.
|
. . . From the Right
By Lewis Litsey
In the Preamble of the Constitution of the United States of
America, the founding fathers established a standard enumerated
in the words ". . . insure domestic Tranquility, provide
for the common defense, (and) promote the general Welfare . .
.." In those words are the promise that our Government will
protect us, the people. In order to accomplish this task, measures
must be taken to ensure those people who are or may be involved
in crimes are brought forth for questioning. This practice is
beneficial; it will and must continue.
Our government has the right and duty to protect the people of
the United States. The practice of posting pictures of suspects
is an enforcement of that promise. Some people who are wanted
for crimes have already been indicted, while others are convicted
criminals who have escaped. Some, however, have neither been
indicted nor have escaped after conviction, but are people suspected
of committing the crime. Entirely innocent persons are not chosen
at random, unlike people believed to have a connection with the
crime. Those people have been asked to come forth and give a
statement or testify to a grand jury before the court. But, for
one reason or another, those people have decided that it would
be in their best interest to flee.
True, the people whose pictures are put up for the public
to see may be embarrassed. Nevertheless, there is one obvious
way to end this harsh embarrassment. Those people, when notified
that law enforcement would like to speak to them, could speak
to law enforcement. Speaking to law enforcement would end the
search and presumably the pictures would be taken down. This
line of logic forgives any embarrassment the law enforcement
officials may place upon the person. The person would control
the situation. Come forth, testify or give a statement, and your
picture gets taken down. If an innocent person has their picture
up in the Post Office, why run?
Megan's Law
Some people in our society choose to steal the innocence of
our children. They are caught, sent to prison, and eventually
released. Pedophiles molest children to gratify their own selfish
needs. These people are obviously sick, twisted individuals with
serious emotional and psychological problems. When they are caught
they are given a penance they must pay to society in the form
of a prison term and when that penance is over they are allowed
back into our communities and society. In some states, laws have
been passed the allow the posting of a child molesters' name
and picture in the neighborhood in which they live.
Embarrassing? Yes. Unethical? I don't think so. The posting
of names and pictures is not a continuation of the penance, but
a warning to the neighborhood children and parents to beware
of the danger. Besides, the Correctional system of this country
does not do a great job of rehabilitation. Sexual offenders are
put back on the streets with the same mindset, the same urges,
and the same will to carry them out as they did when they originally
were incarcerated. Just because he/she went to prison does not
mean he/she no longer wants to molest children. They do and often
will continue molesting after they've paid their debt to society.
This is the principal reason behind Megan's Law protection for
our children. If the sex offender is embarrassed, so what, bottom
line is if they hadn't done the crime, they wouldn't be in this
predicament. Their embarrassment is a small
price to pay for the safety of our children.
So what we have here are two different reasons for different
postings of pictures and names. One is to inform the public of
a person wanted in connection with a crime. Here, the negative
aspect of the posting is embarrassment to the wanted party. However,
that party may come forward to end the embarrassment. In fact,
the party was probably notified well before the posting went
up that they were wanted by the police, giving them a chance
to talk to law enforcement. However, because they were guilty
or knew the guilty party, they fled and the posting was needed
to involve the community in capturing this person. Second, Megan's
Law's has been introduced in several states in order to protect
our children against child molesters and to warn parents of the
impending threat living in the neighborhood. In this case, the
embarrassment of the would-be pedophile is a small price to pay
for the continued safety of this nation's children. In short,
although embarrassing to those people unfortunate enough to have
their picture posted, this practice has been deemed necessary.
In fact, written in the Constitution is the reason for this mechanism
of justice which helps keep us all safe from harm: to inform,
protect, and provide tranquility for the people of this great
nation.
|
Previous Page
