A false sense of security
Wednesday, July 20, 2011
By JOE PHALON
COLUMNIST
COLUMNIST
I would like to propose "Joe's Law." Actually it's self-extinguishing law, because Joe's Law would mandate that there be no more laws named after people.
The latest example is "Caylee's Law."
No one was more thunderstruck than I when the not-guilty verdict came down from the jury. The mob that staked out the courthouse for weeks called for the head of Casey Anthony, the mother accused in the death of her daughter Caylee. Failing that, they wanted a pound of flesh from the jury.
As likely as it is that a guilty person is walking free in this incident, the jury made the right call. The evidence presented to them clearly did not meet the guilty by a reasonable doubt threshold. Just as with O.J. Simpson in the 1990s, the jury felt that the prosecution did not prove its case.
It's easy to blame a jury when the prosecutors present a case with weak. As with Casey Anthony, it appears more than a few of her jurors "knew" she was guilty, but they wanted proof, and there was none. For Caylee, it may have been a lack of justice, but it would be wrong to call this a travesty of justice.
Within hours, Caylee's Law was proposed, which would require that missing children be reported within a defined time period. It make sense on the surface, but those requirements may not always be realistic.
Laws named after people are usually a bad idea. They are also understandable. But more often than not, such proposals are an emotional and visceral reaction to a horrible event, especially when a child is involved.
"Megan's Law" was probably the first and best known of the recent wave of eponymous laws. Born of frustration and anger that a convicted high-risk sex offender lived in under the radar in a residential area and then raped and murder a neighborhood child, it became the model for similar laws across the country, and a blueprint for laws that also originated with a horrific incident.
Because of its high profile, Megan's Law was subject to much legal scrutiny and emerged largely passing Constitutional muster. The lynch mobs that were predicted did not materialize. But there were some unintended consequences.
The law requires that a person found to have trafficked in child pornography be placed on the list. Last year in Passaic County prosecutors seemed to have no choice but to prosecute under Megan's Law a teenage girl who sent inappropriate photos she took of herself via her cell phone.
Really dumb thing for this girl to do? Of course. A crime on the level sexual assault? Hardly. And fortunately cooler heads prevailed.
And cooler heads should prevail in this case. Already a New Jersey version of Caylee's Law has been proposed. It's hard to say no to a law passed in response to a tragedy, but ramming through legislation without seriously thinking it through can have unexpected complications.
And too often they turn out to be "feel-good" laws, that in the end accomplish little. A false sense of security is as bad as no security.
E-mail: joe@jphalon.com.
The latest example is "Caylee's Law."
No one was more thunderstruck than I when the not-guilty verdict came down from the jury. The mob that staked out the courthouse for weeks called for the head of Casey Anthony, the mother accused in the death of her daughter Caylee. Failing that, they wanted a pound of flesh from the jury.
As likely as it is that a guilty person is walking free in this incident, the jury made the right call. The evidence presented to them clearly did not meet the guilty by a reasonable doubt threshold. Just as with O.J. Simpson in the 1990s, the jury felt that the prosecution did not prove its case.
It's easy to blame a jury when the prosecutors present a case with weak. As with Casey Anthony, it appears more than a few of her jurors "knew" she was guilty, but they wanted proof, and there was none. For Caylee, it may have been a lack of justice, but it would be wrong to call this a travesty of justice.
Within hours, Caylee's Law was proposed, which would require that missing children be reported within a defined time period. It make sense on the surface, but those requirements may not always be realistic.
Laws named after people are usually a bad idea. They are also understandable. But more often than not, such proposals are an emotional and visceral reaction to a horrible event, especially when a child is involved.
"Megan's Law" was probably the first and best known of the recent wave of eponymous laws. Born of frustration and anger that a convicted high-risk sex offender lived in under the radar in a residential area and then raped and murder a neighborhood child, it became the model for similar laws across the country, and a blueprint for laws that also originated with a horrific incident.
Because of its high profile, Megan's Law was subject to much legal scrutiny and emerged largely passing Constitutional muster. The lynch mobs that were predicted did not materialize. But there were some unintended consequences.
The law requires that a person found to have trafficked in child pornography be placed on the list. Last year in Passaic County prosecutors seemed to have no choice but to prosecute under Megan's Law a teenage girl who sent inappropriate photos she took of herself via her cell phone.
Really dumb thing for this girl to do? Of course. A crime on the level sexual assault? Hardly. And fortunately cooler heads prevailed.
And cooler heads should prevail in this case. Already a New Jersey version of Caylee's Law has been proposed. It's hard to say no to a law passed in response to a tragedy, but ramming through legislation without seriously thinking it through can have unexpected complications.
And too often they turn out to be "feel-good" laws, that in the end accomplish little. A false sense of security is as bad as no security.
E-mail: joe@jphalon.com.
Joe, agreed, some people might get hurt, but laws in general based on a emotional event, does ger driven harder and get the community more involved. The result for the greater community and what is attended by the law in general does outweigh the few "mistakes" (though I agree, I would not like to be on the receiving end of such a "mistake" Excellent article - I am using it as reference in my MA Crim studies. Thank you!
ReplyDelete