I have been following two news stories. One is the Sacramento shooting, the other a well-publicized rape trial in Ireland. These stories have similar resonance, and coalesce around similar issues.
In Sacramento, a young black man was shot by police. They had received a call about a person breaking windshields. They spotted a man, who ran from police. When finally stopped he was ordered to show his hands, but reached and produced a black object. He was shot. The object was a cell phone. There is video of the chase on the internet so you can judge the chase and incident for yourself.
In Ireland, a young woman had a sexual encounter with 4 rugby players. She asserts it was rape; they assert it was consensual. There are some damning text messages that followed the encounter, also on the internet, that can be readily read in their entirety there.
In the Sacramento shooting the police felt the man was drawing a gun. In the chase video an officer is clearly heard shouting 'gun gun gun!', promptly followed by multiple shots. Police are justified in using deadly force when in fear for their lives. As in many 'bang bang' plays in football, on replay nuances are present that are not clear to the participants in real time. If a subject does draw a weapon an officer has less than a second to react, only a little longer than the reaction needed to hit a curve ball. The wrong choice may be made, and was in this case. An independent autopsy suggests at least 6 shots were into the subject's back, although the reason is not clear.
In Ireland, a jury returned a 'not guilty' verdict on the four men. There was testimony in private whose content and nature have not been disclosed. Given the nature of the allegation, it may have included photos of the accused men's bodies or genitalia, if accusation of certain distinctive markings was made. Some may recall the lurid testimony about the curvature of Bill Clinton's penis in this regard.
The cases are linked by the reaction to them. In both, there is a demand for guilt. One FB post after the Irish verdict was labeled '#BelieveHer', while other written opinions condemned the men even before trial. In Sacramento, a local minister is calling for justice for the community, specifically a guilty verdict for the officers.
The Irish case had a trial. The alleged rape victim WAS listened to, and a jury returned a not guilty verdict. In rape cases that go to trial, most result in a conviction, so a not guilty verdict carries all the more weight. The Sacramento case has not even had a trial, and may never have, if the police are ruled to have acted with appropriate force and circumstance. A large number of shots were fired. Why some hit in the back is unclear; the suspect may have turned away.
It disturbs me that justice is being perceived as condemnation, that people are being thought guilty unless they can prove their innocence. This is a complete inversion of American (and Irish) justice. The defendant is presumed innocent. Scott Turow's novel of the same name has a powerful passages about this. When instructing potential jurors, the judge says "The defendant is innocent. I am the judge. I am telling you that. When you look at him, you are to think 'there sits an innocent man'. If you cannot do that he cannot receive the protection of our laws". That is a powerful summary of how our criminal justice system views those accused of crime.
Vengeance is not justice. We are not a vigilante society, and video games and movies are no better a representation of justice than they are of sex or human relations. The defendants in a rape trial were found not guilty. The police used deadly force against a suspect who ran and did not follow orders. That seems reasonable on the surface to me, certainly not a reason for condemnation by society. Perhaps we ought to be spending more time not running from authority and not placing ourselves in a setting where assault is more likely. To say these things brings down the rage of minority communities and women, but its' still true.
Maybe we condemn others to avoid judging ourselves.....
TT
In Sacramento, a young black man was shot by police. They had received a call about a person breaking windshields. They spotted a man, who ran from police. When finally stopped he was ordered to show his hands, but reached and produced a black object. He was shot. The object was a cell phone. There is video of the chase on the internet so you can judge the chase and incident for yourself.
In Ireland, a young woman had a sexual encounter with 4 rugby players. She asserts it was rape; they assert it was consensual. There are some damning text messages that followed the encounter, also on the internet, that can be readily read in their entirety there.
In the Sacramento shooting the police felt the man was drawing a gun. In the chase video an officer is clearly heard shouting 'gun gun gun!', promptly followed by multiple shots. Police are justified in using deadly force when in fear for their lives. As in many 'bang bang' plays in football, on replay nuances are present that are not clear to the participants in real time. If a subject does draw a weapon an officer has less than a second to react, only a little longer than the reaction needed to hit a curve ball. The wrong choice may be made, and was in this case. An independent autopsy suggests at least 6 shots were into the subject's back, although the reason is not clear.
In Ireland, a jury returned a 'not guilty' verdict on the four men. There was testimony in private whose content and nature have not been disclosed. Given the nature of the allegation, it may have included photos of the accused men's bodies or genitalia, if accusation of certain distinctive markings was made. Some may recall the lurid testimony about the curvature of Bill Clinton's penis in this regard.
The cases are linked by the reaction to them. In both, there is a demand for guilt. One FB post after the Irish verdict was labeled '#BelieveHer', while other written opinions condemned the men even before trial. In Sacramento, a local minister is calling for justice for the community, specifically a guilty verdict for the officers.
The Irish case had a trial. The alleged rape victim WAS listened to, and a jury returned a not guilty verdict. In rape cases that go to trial, most result in a conviction, so a not guilty verdict carries all the more weight. The Sacramento case has not even had a trial, and may never have, if the police are ruled to have acted with appropriate force and circumstance. A large number of shots were fired. Why some hit in the back is unclear; the suspect may have turned away.
It disturbs me that justice is being perceived as condemnation, that people are being thought guilty unless they can prove their innocence. This is a complete inversion of American (and Irish) justice. The defendant is presumed innocent. Scott Turow's novel of the same name has a powerful passages about this. When instructing potential jurors, the judge says "The defendant is innocent. I am the judge. I am telling you that. When you look at him, you are to think 'there sits an innocent man'. If you cannot do that he cannot receive the protection of our laws". That is a powerful summary of how our criminal justice system views those accused of crime.
Vengeance is not justice. We are not a vigilante society, and video games and movies are no better a representation of justice than they are of sex or human relations. The defendants in a rape trial were found not guilty. The police used deadly force against a suspect who ran and did not follow orders. That seems reasonable on the surface to me, certainly not a reason for condemnation by society. Perhaps we ought to be spending more time not running from authority and not placing ourselves in a setting where assault is more likely. To say these things brings down the rage of minority communities and women, but its' still true.
Maybe we condemn others to avoid judging ourselves.....
TT
Comments
Post a Comment