Videotapes record the whole truth
The following is a Counterpoint column:
By Calvert Stewart
It is not surprising that the law-enforcement leaders in Guilford County and Greensboro are opposed to videotaping interrogations. What are they afraid of?
We know that the sheriff doesn't want any other law-enforcement agency to look over his shoulder. He keeps all of his internal investigations within his department. What is he afraid of? Will they find something he wants to keep hidden? Maybe the city police are afraid some of their tactics may be uncovered.
The statement, "If it ain't broken, don't fix it," made by the district attorney, shows he is not comfortable with moving into the 21st century. Here in Guilford County, the justice system is very much broken if the top law-enforcement officers are afraid or just don't want to use the available technology to administer fair and equal justice. If there is proven technology, and there is, the departments should be eager to embrace change that will make their jobs easier and cases less challenging in the courts.
Taping the complete interrogations, not portions, should make it easier for both parties in the cases. It should not be done like the cameras in police cars, turned on when they feel it convenient. I think all cars should have cameras that should be used at all times during a stop. The patrol officer should not be able to turn them off.
Interrogations should be recorded from beginning to end. With the available technology today, fewer mistakes will be made in the courtroom. At this time, another problem will arise. Has the tape been edited or tampered with in any way? Whom can you trust?
I am elated that some citizens are beginning to realize that just because a cop says something, it isn't always the truth.
We all know that all cops don't always tell the absolute truth, just as the suspected criminals don't. Some jurists are beginning to question their testimony and tactics.
The writer lives in Greensboro.
Comments (15)
To report abuse of the comment feature on this site, please use the feedback form at the bottom of any page.
In 1990, I was driving to the mountains with three others. Driving through I-40 in Winston, I noticed all the cars in the west-bound lanes were going very slow. A state patrolman was in the right lane going the exact speed limit. The cars in his lane had me choked out and kept me from getting in behind them so as not to pass the patrolman. I didn't want to drive beside him for an obnoxious amount of conformity, so I passed him at 56 miles per hour. His blue lights came on and I pulled over immediately. Of all the times not to be carrying my license, I chose a bad one. I gave him the driver license number and it all checked out when he radioed it in. I figured all was well.
When officer T. A. MORGAN returned to my car, he said "everything checked out, but I still don't know who you are". I responded, respectfully, that I had just told him who I was. He asked me to step out of the car. I was in shock that he turned me around against the car and put me in handcuffs. He strapped me in his front seat, with the cuffs behind my back . As we drove to the jail, he flippantly stated that "we get these "types" who think they are above the law". Once in the magistrates office, he told a 100% lie as to the reason he pulled me over. He said my brights were on and he had gotten behind me and saw the indicator light on. I was given a ticket for 50.00. I was careless not to have carried my license, but I don't think being kidnapped by a lie to increase the coffers of Winston-Salem was the appropriate course of action in my case.
I hope that legislation is passed to make the video-taping of all traffic stops and interrogation mandatory.
Posted on May 6, 2005 7:33 AM
A wise lesson can be learned here. NEVER, EVER pass a police officer. I've actually been on 220 before and a cop tried to slow down and get behind me. I slowed down to about 10 miles an hour and finally pulled off the road behind him. He got pissed and drove away. Guess he didn't want to look like an idiot. There wasn't a chance in the world he was getting behind me. I'll never run from a cop, but I am definitely going to make it as inconvenient as possible for them to stop me. It hasn't failed me yet.
Posted on May 6, 2005 9:20 AM
Often, something that looks benignly simple on the outside is really a can of worms once the lid is off.
Videotaping or recording interviews is one of those things. I've seen an entire day devoted to tearing down an audio recorded statement in a murder trial in court. It often causes more problems than it solves, it's just another aspect of an investigation that can be attacked by the defense. The more ingredients one throws in the pot, the more there is that can go wrong. Common sense does not always prevail during a trial in court.
I can see why some departments don't care to record interviews.
Just my $.02 worth.
Posted on May 6, 2005 9:21 AM
"I've seen an entire day devoted to tearing down an audio recorded statement in a murder trial in court."
SO? It is the burden of the state to PROVE their case. Every accused is entitled to a FAIR trial. If that means taking 100 entire days, then thats what it should take.
If you can't stand the heat, get out tha kitchen ossifers. Oh, I see that YOU may have already. :)
Posted on May 6, 2005 9:50 AM
Sorry for the slurried typing...(ossifers) I've already got into the Boone's Farm strawberry wine this morning while I was watching a Jerry Spring video.
Posted on May 6, 2005 10:12 AM
Lilly Oakwood,
I don't think Yvonne dug my idea too much. Ribbit . . .
Posted on May 6, 2005 10:17 AM
steve, I loved it!
Lilly Oakwood.. LMAO
Posted on May 6, 2005 10:30 AM
Um Calvert you might better watch your back for awhile ole sheriff Bubba might be gunnin' for you.
Posted on May 6, 2005 10:32 AM
Bigmouth,
He probably noticed the little Mexican Jesus figurine on your dash.
Posted on May 6, 2005 10:52 AM
Steve and Lilly, We'll have to take a vote when we're not so mellowed out and the name with the mostest wins. But you won't charge me royalties iffin yours wins out, will you Lilly?
I can see right now it would be in my best interest to avoid getting in the car with AB or you, Steve. Gots enough trouble with this lead foot 'o mine.
Can you believe I was stopped once and the officer told me he stopped me cause he thought I wasn't going to stop. Been years ago and I'm still puzzling on that one.
Posted on May 6, 2005 11:07 AM
Yosemite,
Maybe he was referring to you picking your nose.
Posted on May 6, 2005 11:26 AM
No, I won't charge royalties Yvonne. I would be so overwhelmed with honor if the name Lilly Pond wins. There are some things you know, that you just cannot put a price tag on. :)
steve, Yvonne does not pick her nose.
Do you Yvonne? LOL
Posted on May 6, 2005 11:47 AM
Only in the privacy of my own home and then I uses a napkin, er, tissue. Can't be breathing with clogged pipes.
Posted on May 6, 2005 12:25 PM
"Only in the privacy of my own home and then I uses a napkin, er, tissue."
I thought that's what the bottom of chairs and car seats were for.
Oh, btw, that little mexican jesus guy works way better than the radar detector. cops see that and immediately do the sign of the cross and get back in their cars.
Posted on May 6, 2005 12:47 PM
What I want to know, AB. is the little guy on your dash of the documented or undocumented variety?
Posted on May 6, 2005 9:09 PM