My wife told me the other day that she was glad I had avoided writing about the issues in Ferguson, Missouri. Basically, any story that includes Al Sharpton and the Black Panthers in its chapters is generally a story we switch off in our house. Unfortunately, the coverage is unavoidable and, sadly, most analysts have just fanned the flames. Here is what I know.
1. We have a judicial system specifically set up to handle these issues - without prejudice.
There is no American that has all the facts here. We don't know whether the police officer who shot Michael Brown was acting in self defense or not. We don't know whether he is a racist or not. We don't know what his true motivations were. We only know that he shot a man dead. Likewise, we don't know what Michael Brown was doing or why. We just know that he is dead.
This is why we have a system of laws. Our laws, ideally, protect the citizenry from criminals, protect black men from the unjustified use of force, and protect the police when they have to use deadly force. All of this will be flushed out as part of the criminal justice process. If the police officer acted inappropriately, he will be charged. Then a jury will determine whether the use of force was justified. It does nothing to bring Michael Brown back, but we are a nation of laws, and we do not work outside the system to bring justice to wrongdoers.
That said, and as discussed more fully below, our system is imperfect and substantial justice is often denied to those who are most vulnerable. I am not a young black man, and I do not pretend to have any experience to mirror that of the young black men in our cities who grow up suspicious of police and government. I can say, having litigated many civil rights cases, that justice is usually imperfect and often eludes everyone, including minorities. My thought on the matter is that we simply have too many laws in this country and we need to reform the way sentences are meted out. That is a topic for another post, however.
2. "Statements" from police, politicians and prosecutors need to stop.
I am deeply offended as a lawyer when I see overzealous prosecutors give press conferences that sound more like sermons, passionately demonizing the accused and exalting the virtues of the victim. Very few people are demons and even fewer are angels. The prosecutor represents the people and the justice system - not the victim. When prosecutors politicize these types of tragedies, they do nothing but bring shame to the system, the victim, and themselves.
Likewise, the President of the United States does not need to ever make any comment on an ongoing criminal investigation that will almost certainly lead to indictments. Mr. Obama doesn't have all the facts either. Neither does Eric Holder. Statements made about a case that has not yet been brought will do nothing but poison the jury pool, interfere with the investigation, and will ultimately do more to corrupt the process than it will do to ensure justice.
Finally, the police do not need to be putting evidence into the public view while the investigation is ongoing. Of course the media wants it, but that's simply too bad. Selectively releasing evidence to the public does more to harm the process than just about anything else. It also creates suspicion and sullies the integrity of the legal process.
3. Police do not need grenade launchers.
This entire debacle has, thankfully, started a dialogue that is long overdue. As one commentator put it, police do a bad job soldiering and soldiers do a bad job policing. We live in a free society. Curfews, like the one imposed last night, restrict our movements as free people and are, in my opinion, unacceptable. However, it can be even worse. When you place SWAT teams armed with MRAPS and machine guns in the streets to enforce the curfew, it is no longer about restoring civil order, it is about implementing martial law. Again, this is totally unacceptable. It should be resisted and condemned by all free people, without regard to race, color or creed.
As two wars have wound down, Police have been purchasing used military equipment at deep discounts. The New York Times had an excellent article last week on the militarization of our police, including a run down of the types of weaponry being used. Some police forces deploy grenade launchers. Let me say that again, grenade launchers. What we are witnessing is a classic case of "use it or lose it" when it comes to funding for these militarized police units. Quite simply, in order to justify the extraordinary expenditures required to buy, for example, an MRAP armored vehicle, the police must show that it is being utilized. This leads to the indiscriminate use of militarized police units in situations where a couple of guys in a cruiser would do the job.
Certainly, there is a need for SWAT teams, especially in our large cities. However, police captains and "law and order" politicians justify the overuse of these teams under the guise of officer safety, which is just wrong. It is argued, that police need to use "overwhelming force" to ensure officer safety, and the safety of the targets of the police raid. The problem is, in the vast majority of cases, "overwhelming force" is not necessary and when it is used, it quickly morphs into "excessive force." Throwing a flash-bang grenade into a toddler's bed while raiding a couple of marijuana users, for example, is excessive. Sending 30 police officers dressed like Spetznatz to bust through the door of a frat house where underage drinking is taking place, in another example, is excessive. I challenge anyone to disagree with me on that. The ubiquitous use of overwhelming and excessive force terrifies the very citizens the police are there to protect. This leads to further distrust, especially in minority communities, creating a vicious cycle: more distrust equals more violence, which in turn justifies more force, which requires larger weapons, which leads to more distrust. Then the cycle starts over, escalating each time.
Just like anything else with government, if you let them have it, they will use it and sometimes abuse it. Let's just hope that when that grenade launcher is used, there are no kids in the way.
No comments:
Post a Comment