Guilty until proven innocent
Faux mug shot of Brian Wilson.
January 28, 2010 • Brian Wilson, Layout Manager
Filed under Columns, Opinion
There’s a fine line between what is legal and what is right and, all too often, that line is blurry. Chicagoland’s very own Chicago Tribune exercises this right regularly with its feature, “Mugs in the News”. “Mugs in the News” is a photo gallery of anyone and everyone arrested in the Chicagoland area. When someone is arrested in Chicago or any of its suburbs, the person’s mug shot is uploaded to the Tribune’s website, along with a list of what the person was charged with, the time and location of arrest, the person’s name, and a full story on the arrest that took place featuring statements from the alleged criminals themselves.
A message is displayed at the top of the page, reading: “These arrest and booking photos are provided by law enforcement officials. Arrest does not imply guilt, and criminal charges are merely accusations. A defendant is presumed innocent unless proven guilty and convicted.” However, the damage done by simply being on the web site can prove to be problematic for innocent people.
Although many Americans may not be aware that the phrase “innocent until proven guilty” actually doesn’t appear anywhere in the Constitution, presumption of innocence in the court of law is generally inferred through the 5th, 6th, and 14th amendments. Most democratic governments specifically cite the phrase; this is the case in France, Canada, Brazil, and many other countries. The Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union includes the presumption of innocence for all countries included in the union. The United States government, however, does not specifically imply the presumption of innocence; this is because such a statement would interfere with procedures such as pre-employment drug testing, which is seen as implied guilt on the person being tested.
What the Tribune and the police departments are doing is slandering the public. Granted, the information is public information, however the way it is displayed on the feature immediately makes the people look guilty of a crime, which in many cases is not true. There are numerous cases each year of people simply being in the wrong place at the wrong time and getting arrested. The feature does include the police departments of the RB school district, so anyone reading this could be the next face of “Mugs in the News”.
When someone is found not guilty of a crime, the person’s worries should be over, but this is no longer true in America. Simply being arrested can prevent one from being hired or getting accepted to a school, which can ruin careers and permanently damage a person’s image. A question found on most, if not every job application, reads, “Have you ever been arrested or convicted of a crime?” Even when not convicted, being arrested could mean a dramatic impact on one’s life.
“Mugs in the News” displays faces on a photo gallery and basically shouts: these people are criminals; everyone point and laugh! Also, when these people are being arrested and are trying to explain their situation, I highly doubt that they are aware that their statements will be on the Tribune’s website with a big picture of them next to it.
Similar features are appearing on news websites across the world. In Orlando, a newspaper titled JAIL was released, which features nothing but mug shots, page after page. Apparently there is a fascination with mug shots in America, as the papers sell out each week. MSNBC quoted a woman saying “You need to know who your neighbors are. Somebody might be living next to you and they may be a killer or a child predator.” I think this is a pretty ridiculous justification for reading the paper, because once again, it implies guilt on someone who very well could be innocent. So what if I saw my neighbor in “Mug in the News”? Unless they have been convicted of anything, I wouldn’t assume they did anything wrong.
Of course there are a few exceptions. If someone skips bail, then it’s probable that they are guilty, and their mug shot should be posted to help find the person. I am not even totally opposed to having mug shots of people arrested in a news story about a particular crime. If the story is about the crime and they are the alleged perpetrators, then it is acceptable, because it is relevant to the story. The people reading have a choice to believe whether the people in the picture are or are not guilty. I am opposed to having a database type feature that people can use to simply browse through mug shots, and say, “Oh look at this child molester and this murderer over here”, as an entertainment purpose.
In short, the information is public, and so can legally be used in the Tribune’s feature “Mugs in the news”. While it may be legal, the question that begs to be asked is: is this practice ethical? I would not think so. As this type of practice becomes more common in the journalistic world, we must ask ourselves; are we comfortable with this? Is this really something we want to become a norm, or do we look down on this sort of thing? I agree with the latter.
Loading ...
Comments
Feel free to leave a comment...
and oh, if you want a pic to show with your comment, go get a gravatar!