“In the Dark” shines brilliant light on bungled Jacob Wetterling case

Long-dormant case spawned today's sex offender registries. But would these laws have made a difference? 

Twenty-seven years ago, a perfect storm struck a small town in central Minnesota, when a stranger jumped out of the shadows and snatched an 11-year-old boy out bicycle-riding with friends.

It was the rarest of crimes. But the Oct. 22, 1989 abduction of Jacob Wetterling struck at a pivotal moment in U.S. history, igniting a conflagration that still burns today. Stranger-danger hysteria was sweeping the nation. Day care providers were being rounded up and accused of Satanic ritual abuse of children. And in that potent milieu, an unprecedented national manhunt came up empty.

Embarrassed by their failure, law enforcement spokesmen claimed they were hamstrung by lax tracking of known sex offenders. Jacob’s distraught mother, Patty Wetterling, led a successful crusade that culminated in the Wetterling Act of 1994, requiring all U.S. states to collect and publicly disseminate information on convicted sex offenders.

But 27 years later, with an estimated 850,000 Americans on public sex offender databases, Patty Wetterling is no longer enamored of the opportunistic missing-child movement and its crass media stars, who used her to promote their own agendas. In an interview with award-winning investigative reporter Madeleine Baran, she said she regrets her role in creating a public registry that is counterproductive, in shaming and ostracizing individuals rather than helping them reintegrate into society.

That interview is just one of many remarkable segments in the serial In the Dark, a nine-part podcast from American Public Media that forces us to rethink everything we thought we knew about both the Wetterling abduction and the broader landscape of how police investigate serious crimes.

Danny Heinrich today and sketch of abductor in 1989

Coincidentally, Episode One of the meticulously researched series was just set to premiere when police announced last month that they had finally cracked the case. Daniel Heinrich, who lived about half an hour down the road from his victim, had confessed and led police to Jacob’s remains, in exchange for a plea deal in an unrelated child pornography case and an admission that he abducted and assaulted another boy nine months before killing Jacob.

Baran set out to answer the question of why it took the local police more than a quarter of a century to catch a small-town pervert who was right under their noses the whole time. But in the process, she learned something far more troubling: that police across the country lack any meaningful oversight, and inept agencies with crime-solving rates as low as zero percent face no accountability.

Baran reached this shocking conclusion after more than nine months of painstaking digging. In a monument to investigative reporting, she and her colleagues delved deep into archival records, conducted contemporary interviews with dozens of witnesses and experts, and reconstructed events to determine what went wrong.

What Baran found was missteps at every turn. Police didn’t thoroughly canvass the neighborhood immediately after the crime. They glossed over a rash of stranger molests of preteen boys in the nearby hamlet of Paynesville where killer Danny Heinrich – already known to police – resided. Ultimately, in the type of tunnel vision that we see all too often in cases of wrongful conviction, they set their sights on the wrong guy altogether, a quirky local music teacher, and hunkered down to build a case against him – destroying his life in the process.

Diving deeper, Baran found more systemic problems.

At the time of Jacob’s abduction, the media portrayed Stearns County, Minnesota, as an idyllic place where crimes like this didn’t happen: indeed, went the narrative, that’s why the local sheriff’s department was caught off guard.

But that wasn’t true. The Stearns County Sheriff’s Department had investigated crimes even more heinous, and had botched it every time.

There was the case of the Reker sisters, ages 12 and 15, who disappeared one day in 1974. Police shrugged it off as girls on a lark, until the bodies were found in a quarry a month later with multiple stab wounds. The case was never solved. And there was the mass murder of a woman and three children, shotgunned to death in their beds in 1978. Police questioned the killer, Joseph Ture, but released him to wreak carnage across Minnesota; he ended up raping numerous women and killing at least two before he was finally apprehended by Minneapolis police.

Baran’s delivery is masterful. In a pleasant and measured cadence, she methodically weaves together the micro strands of the flawed Wetterling investigation with the macro threads of an entire police system gone wrong, to create an eye-opening tapestry with profound implications for all Americans.

* * * * *

It’s hard not to be dubious about the prospects for any expose, even the most brilliant, to produce genuine systemic change. On the other hand, there is no question that podcasts can change the fates of those lucky few whom they spotlight.

Take Adnan Syed. Many will remember the viral popularity of Serial's debut season in 2014, with host Sarah Koenig recounting Syed's prosecution in the killing of his former high school girlfriend. Syed’s conviction was subsequently overturned and he was granted a new trial, much to the dismay of Maryland state attorneys, who are protesting that the appeal is "meritless" and a product of "sensationalized attention" that gave a legitimately convicted murderer the status of international superstar.

That was certainly the case for convicted killer Steven Avery after Netflix’s Making a Murderer, which spawned a large and vocal fan base insisting that he is innocent despite substantial evidence to the contrary. As I noted in my critical review of that spectacle, by cherry-picking which facts to air, a producer can energize an ignorant populism fueled by illusory knowledge. 

So, podcasters walk a fine line between educating the public about the realities of the criminal justice system -- as In the Dark does so well -- and pandering to the prurient, devolving into true-crime entertainment spectacles like “48 Hours Mystery." Or worse. The dangers of true-crime populism were perhaps best illustrated by the 2013 murder trial of Jodi Arias, where media corporations intent on audience titillation fomented a digital lynch mob.

Hewing to the educational function is Breakdown, an Atlanta Journal Constitution podcast that unabashedly acknowledges itself as a Serial knockoff. In Season One, “Railroad Justice in a Railroad Town,” reporter Bill Rankin plays on his experience as a senior legal affairs reporter, using the case of a small-town meth-head convicted of arson to illustrate how an underfunded public defense system is set up to fail poor Americans.

Season Two of Breakdown, Death in a Hot Car -- Mistake or Murder?, swings more toward the sensationalist side, presenting the case of a man who was so distracted by his sexting obsession that he left his toddler son strapped into a car seat on a hot June day in Georgia. The boy died. Justin Harris's case is generating major media interest, with the Atlanta Journal-Constitution hosting a dedicated web page with "minute-by-minute updates," and another site live-streaming the trial.

The PTA mom who was framed

Again going for the high road, some reporters are also adapting the popular serial format to the quaint, endangered medium of print journalism. A nice example is the recent L.A. Times series Framed: A Mystery in Six Parts, in which award-winning reporter and author Christopher Goffard tells the fascinating story of a PTA mother who was framed by a high-powered professional couple. Whereas most such series aim to expose justice gone wrong, Framed does the opposite, showcasing a refreshing example of a police investigation that went above and beyond the call of duty to get it right.

As you can see, there’s a lot out there to sample. But if you’ve only got time to check out one podcast series, I recommend In the Dark. It’s the cream of the crop, an edge-of-your-seat thriller and a compelling cautionary tale that deserves the ear of every American.

Militarization: When the extraordinary becomes ordinary

In line with the human rights theme of this year's Blog Action Day (it's exciting to be coordinating with 2,000+ other bloggers from around the world!),* let me share four brief anecdotes. They may seem unrelated but, ultimately, they do connect. I promise.

#1: Cheye Calvo, mayor of the small town of Berwyn Heights, Maryland, was in his bedroom one night, changing clothes for a meeting. His mother-in-law was in the kitchen, cooking a tomato-artichoke sauce. Suddenly, Calvo heard an explosion and the sound of gunfire. Heavily armed men clad in black burst into the house. He saw his mother-in-law lying face-down on the kitchen floor at gunpoint. His two beloved black Labradors lay dead in pools of blood. Clad only his boxer shorts, the mayor was bound and forced to kneel on the floor. This was it, he thought. He was about to be executed, but he knew not why.

* * * * *

#2: In the Washington Heights neighborhood of New York City, an alert neighbor observed a man forcing a woman into her apartment. Police were called. They burst in and found the woman in handcuffs, a man hiding in her closet with rope and two pairs of women's panties in his backpack. Daryl Thomas was a resident of the neighborhood, a husband and a father, and a computer system manager for a Manhattan law firm. When questioned by Senior Detective Harold Hernandez, he was forthcoming. No, this was not his first sexual assault; he had committed seven or eight similar attacks in the neighborhood in recent months. Yes, he was willing to show police the precise locations. The detective had one major problem: He was unaware of any serial rape spree in the 33rd precinct. If the victims had reported the crimes, the Manhattan Special Victims Unit would have notified the precinct of the pattern, so police could be on the lookout for a suspect matching Thomas’s description.

* * * * * 

Police prepare to enter Carey apartment

#3: After dental hygienist Miriam Carey attempted to ram a barricade near the White House and was shot to death on Oct. 3, her one-year-old baby in the car, police descended upon her home town of Stamford, Connecticut, armed with helicopters, bomb trucks, Hazardous Materials trucks and machine guns. The 100-odd personnel from the U.S. Secret Service, the FBI and state and local police sealed off the area and evacuated nearby residents before donning Haz-Mat suits with self-contained breathing apparatuses and entering Carey’s apartment. Rather than bombs, guns or Al Qaeda literature, they reportedly found prescriptions for the antipsychotic risperidone and the antidepressant escitalopram, medications consistent with Carey's diagnosis of postpartum depression with psychosis.

* * * * * 

Ohio State University's MRAP

#4: Ohio State University has just obtained a military surplus Mine-Resistant, Ambush-Protected (MRAP) armored personnel carrier. Explaining the acquisition, the campus police chief points out that stadiums are at risk for terrorist attacks, according to the Department of Homeland Security. The MRAP may also be used for crowd control at football games. The vehicle cost about half a million dollars to produce and is designed to withstand "ballistic arms fire, mine fields, IED's, and Nuclear, Biological and Chemical environments." To make its appearance less ominous, its desert tan is being repainted black and its roof-mounted machine gun being removed. The university joins the ranks of cities across America -- from Preston, Idaho to Cullman, Alabama to Boulder, Colorado and Murrieta, California -- that are cashing in on Department of Homeland Security grant money to buy such intimidating vehicles. In Dallas County, Texas, for example, the sheriff’s department plans to use its new MRAP to serve drug warrants. 

So what's the connection?

All four anecdotes relate to an insiduous shift in U.S. policing over the past few decades, toward greater and greater militarization.

The emergence of SWAT

Young people born in the 1980s may find it hard to believe that back in 1970, there was only one SWAT team in the entire United States -- in Los Angeles, California. Today, SWAT teams are a cultural icon. Almost all cities and most small towns have these paramilitary forces. By and large, the role of SWAT teams is far removed from the Hollywood image of hostage rescue or mass shooting intervention. Rather, they are being deployed – tens of thousands of times per year – in drug raids and to serve routine warrants, according to a new book by award-winning in investigative journalist Radley Balko. 

Cheye Calvo, the mayor of Berwyn Heights, Maryland (Anecdote 1), was a victim of one such raid. Mistaken drug raids are far from rare. The judiciary's progressive weakening of checks and balances in regard to warrants and searches has fostered a police culture in which "extraordinary violence" is meted out with impunity. The shooting of dogs "at the slightest provocation," Balko writes, is part of a larger problem of an us-against-them "battlefield mentality" in which many police see the citizenry as the enemy.

Allure of the techno-warrior

"Why serve an arrest warrant to some crack dealer with a .38?" asked one U.S. military officer who trained police SWAT teams in the 1990s. "With full armor, the right shit, and training, you can kick ass and have fun."

As this quote implies, SWAT raids -- conducted hundreds of times per year in cities large and small -- foster a masculine culture of violence and a worship of a "techno-warrior" image of policing. SWAT raids are the ultimate in power, an adrenaline rush that is quickly habit-forming. Recruitment videos that emphasize this culture may, in turn, be changing the type of individual who seeks to become a police officer.

Texas SWAT team terrorizes organic farmers in August

Balko traces the militarization of police to the "drug war" ideology that began under President Nixon and escalated under Ronald Reagan. One specific clause in an omnibus crime bill of 1984, not considered particularly controversial at the time, ultimately produced a seismic shift in American policing. The asset forfeiture law allowed police to seize property, auction it off, and divide up the bounty, just so long as federal agents were even remotely involved in the investigation.

Asset forfeiture created a huge incentive for police to go after people in order to seize their property. Drug enforcement brought in boatloads of cash, much of which was reinvested into more battle gear. Police departments competed with each other for drug revenue, to the neglect of investigating violent crimes such as rape, robbery and murder. So, we end up with situations like the one a few years back in Oakland, California, in which a lack of investigative prioritization allowed a serial rapist on parole to remain free to prey on young African American girls until he finally made the mistake of gunning down four police officers.

Detective work is no fun

Many police officers are appalled by the insidious militarization of police. Betty Taylor, police chief of a small Missouri town, recalled how she became troubled by the economic disparity between the "drug guys," flush with property seizures and endless federal grants, and the struggling sex crimes unit that she had established.

"When you think about the collateral effects of a sex crime, of how it can affect an entire family, an entire community, it just didn’t make sense," she told Balko. "The drug users weren't really harming anyone but themselves. Even the dealers, I found much of the time they were just people with little money, just trying to get by." Her opinion solidified when she was recruited onto a SWAT team, and witnessed first-hand the lasting terror that the raids produced in vulnerable children.

"I thought, how can we be the good guys when we come into the house looking like this, screaming and pointing guns at the people they love? ... Good police work has nothing to do with dressing up in black and breaking into houses in the middle of the night…. When you get into that [us-versus-them] mentality, there are no innocent people. There's us and there's the enemy. Children and dogs are always the easiest casualties."

Downgrading crime

The case of Daryl Thomas (Anecdote 2) involved more than neglect of violent crimes. As Detective Hernandez discovered, police brass in his precinct -- and throughout New York City -- were systematically downgrading crimes from serious felonies to minor misdemeanors, in order to improve their CompStat crime statistics. A model that has been adopted throughout the United States as well as in England and Australia, CompStat had the unintended consequence of fostering competition among precincts for lower statistics. Only seven categories of major crime are counted in crime statistics and made publicly available, so police can reduce crime rates by, for example, reclassifying attempted rape as criminal trespass.

The Thomas case was handled quietly, with no media attention. Thomas was convicted and sentenced to 50 years in prison. But Hernandez, frustrated by the constant battles with his own superiors, took an early retirement. "Unfortunately, this is the culture for the young cop coming into the department. He doesn't see the bigger picture," he said. "If it's going to allow him to have a day off, and they won't ride him or harass him, he'll go along with it. And New Yorkers are being victimized, and no one responds to their complaints."

While major crimes were being downgraded to misdemeanors, Manhattan police were also being encouraged to trump up minor cases -- drinking in public or driving without a seatbelt -- in order to bolster their statistics. Police officer Adrian Schoolcraft surreptitiously recorded his superiors giving these directives; with the collusion of a department psychologist, he eventually found himself drummed out of the force on trumped-up psychiatric grounds. (You can hear excerpts from his secret tapes on This American Life.)

Culture of fear

Putting the case of dental hygienist Miriam Carey (Anecdote 3) in historical context illustrates just how much has changed in the past few decades. 

Back in 1976, Chester M. Plummer became the first person shot to death by White House guards. Plummer and Carey were similar in some respects. Both were African American. Both were described as apolitical. And both manifested signs of psychiatric decompensation. With her postpartum psychosis, Carey had apparently incorporated President Obama into a delusional belief system. Plummer, a decorated Army veteran, former high school football star and part-time cabbie, had been examined by a psychiatrist after being arrested for indecent exposure; the doctor thought Plummer's recent divorce had triggered a psychiatric crisis. On July 25, 1976, Plummer scaled a fence while holding a three-foot pipe. He was shot to death after ignoring the guards’ orders to stop.

What happened -- or didn't happen -- next is where the difference in culture emerges. Blogging at The Nation, Rick Perlstein compares the two cases to highlight the extreme overreaction of police today to any threat, however contained.

"There’s terrorism now, they say. But there was terrorism then, nearly every month -- 89 bombings attributed by the FBI to terrorism in 1975, culminating in that awful LaGuardia bomb; and a veritable wave in the winter and spring 1976, much of it around the trial of Patty Hearst: of an FBI office in Berkeley, Standard Oil of California headquarters in San Francisco. Americans didn’t freak out, or shut down, or exhibit symptoms of PTSD. They had a massive outdoor national 200th birthday party."

Writing in The Baffler, Chris Bray makes a similar point in regard to the shutdown of Boston after the explosion at the marathon that killed three people.

Police outside Carey residence in Stamford, CT

In the aftermath of the 1993 World Trade Center bombing, the 1995 Oklahoma City bombing, the 1996 bombing at the Atlanta Olympics, and the paired 2001 attacks on the World Trade Center and the Pentagon, here’s what didn’t happen: whole cities weren’t locked down, armored personnel carriers with police logos didn’t rumble in, and SWAT teams in combat uniforms and body armor didn’t storm through the suburbs for a loosely ordered set of (ultimately hapless) house-to-house searches. Somehow, though, 2013 was the year it became appropriate to close cities, turning off taxis, buses, and trains and telling residents that the governor was suggesting -- okay, strongly suggesting -- that they not leave their homes until the police said so. One of those familiar moments in which officials ask the public to be on the lookout turned into a remarkable new moment in which officials ask the public to cease to exist in its public form so that the police can have the streets.

That leaves Anecdote 4, about armored personnel carriers, which pretty much speaks for itself.

"We are in the midst of a historic transformation," wrote Eastern Kentucky University professor Peter B. Kraska in 2007 in regard to police militarization. "Attempting to control the crime problem by routinely conducting police special-operations raids on people’s private residences is strong evidence that the U.S. police, and crime-control efforts in general, have moved significantly down the militarization continuum." 

The irony is that this militarization is occurring simultaneously with a great diminution in violent crime in the United States. In particular, despite the public's perception of police work as dangerous, the job of law enforcement is getting safer all the time.

The American Civil Liberties Union is looking into the broader implications of the spread of military culture into domestic policing in the United States. The agency believes that militarization has come at the cost of trampled human rights and a greater risk of violence, according to a report in the Columbus (Ohio) Dispatch. The study is due out next year.

That strikes me as a bit too late. Pandora's box has long been opened, and there's no going back.

So, don’t be too surprised if you happen to spy a mine-resistant, ambush-protected, armored personnel carrier rolling down your street in the near future. It's only a matter of time.

Sources and recommended resources:

Radley Balko (2013), Rise of the Warrior Cop: The Militarization of America’s Police Forces 

Peter Kraska (2007), Militarizing the American Criminal Justice System: The Changing Roles of the Armed Forces and the Police

Graham Rayman (June 8, 2010), Village Voice, NYPD Tapes 3: A Detective Comes Forward about Downgraded Sexual Assaults: When even attempted rapes are being downgraded to misdemeanors, is the public safe?

Rick Perlstein (Oct. 3, 2013), Nation, Culture of Fear: Miriam Carey’s Tragedy, and Our Own

Ira Glass, This American Life, “Right to Remain Silent” (well worth a look or, better yet, a listen)

Sarah Stillman (August 12, 2013), New Yorker, Taken: Under civil forfeiture, Americans who haven’t been charged with wrongdoing can be stripped of their cash, cars, and even homes. Is that all we’re losing? 

* * * * *

*Blog Action Day is an international event in which thousands of bloggers around the world pledge to participate. This year's theme, in coordination with Amnesty International, is human rights. If you want to see a true smorgasbord of human rights topics streaming in live, check out the web page.

Dallas bans 6-packs

No, not beer.
Or soda.
Or abs.

Six-pack photo lineups -- perhaps the single largest cause of wrongful convictions.

Frustrated with a string of wrongful convictions, the Dallas police department is now the nation's largest force to use sequential blind photo lineups -- a widely praised technique designed to reduce mistakes made by witnesses trying to identify suspects.

Dallas is not the first department to use the pioneering method. But experts hope that by using it in the county that leads the nation in exonerating wrongly convicted inmates, Dallas will inspire other departments to follow suit.

"If Dallas can do it ... then others are going to rise to the occasion," said Iowa State psychology professor Gary Wells, a national expert on police lineups.

The department switched to sequential blind lineups in April. Before that, Dallas police administered most lineups using the traditional six-pack -- law-enforcement lingo for mounting six photos onto a folder and showing them to a witness or victim at the same time. In sequential blind lineups, mug shots are shown one at a time. Detectives displaying the photos also don't know who the suspect is, which means they can't purposely or accidentally tip off witnesses.

Showing possible suspects all at once tends to make a witness compare the mug shots to one another, Wells said. But if they are shown sequentially, "witnesses have to dig deeper, compare each person to their memory and make more of an absolute decision."

An analysis of 26 recent studies shows that presenting mug shots sequentially instead of simultaneously produces fewer identifications but more accurate ones, Wells said.

Nationally, more than 75 percent of DNA exonerees who have been released since 1989 were sent to prison based on witness misidentification, according to The Innocence Project.

Here is the complete AP story: Dallas police pioneering new photo lineup approach.

Hat tip: Sol Fulero

Don’t Tase Me, Bro!

Have you ever:

• Drawn a picture of an SUV?
• Worn a hoodie?
• Refused an order to sod your lawn?
• Given the wrong account of history?

These are among dozens of acts for which people have been arrested, suspended from school, gone to jail, or faced other sanctions in just the past few months. No kidding.

It's all documented by Phil Leggiere on the new civil libertarian blog, "Don’t Tase Me, Bro!"

Check it out here. If you like it, you can add it to your feeds.

Movie recommendation: The Changeling

The Changeling is a powerful film. It tells the long-forgotten story of a working-class woman who brought down the corrupt establishment of Los Angeles 80 years ago.

Angelina Jolie gives a strong, Oscar-worthy performance as Christine Collins, a single mother and one of the first female supervisors at the phone company who refuses to bow down to corrupt police when her son vanished without a trace in 1928.

Los Angeles on the brink of the Great Depression was an epitome of corruption. The police chief, James "Two Guns" Davis, had an officially sanctioned "gun squad" that terrorized opponents with impunity. When Collins' son Walter vanished, the L.A. police were embarrassed by their inability to find him. To squelch public criticism, they tried to convince Collins that a young drifter was her son. When Collins protested, police Captain J.J. Jones labeled her as histrionic and delusional and had her locked in a "psychopathic ward."

Luckily for Collins, her plight came to the attention of Gustav A. Briegleb, a Presbyterian minister and community organizer who regularly lambasted police corruption on his radio show. It was through Briegleb's help that Collins was able to get a lawyer and tell her story. Indeed, although it is not mentioned in the movie, Collins' case led to passage of a law that prohibited police from incarcerating people in psychiatric facilities absent due process.

My review continues here (click to the Amazon page and then scroll down to the customer reviews; please click on "yes" if you find the review helpful).

Pseudoscience in policing

The October issue of Criminal Justice and Behavior is a special issue on Pseudoscientific Policing Practices and Beliefs. There are some great articles and, best of all, Sage is offering free access to those of you without access to academic databases through the end of this month.

As those of you who have been reading my blog for a while know, criminal profiling is one of my pet peeves (See last year's post, "Of profiling, astrology, and magic.") So, my favorite article in the current issue is "The Criminal Profiling Illusion: What's Behind the Smoke and Mirrors?"

The idea that police can deduce a suspect's characteristics from the crime scene has no strong empirical support and may indeed be an illusion, say the authors, Brent Snook, Richard M. Cullen, Craig Bennell, Paul J. Taylor, and Paul Gendreau, who go on to argue that the technique should not be used as an investigative tool:

There is a belief that criminal profilers can predict a criminal's characteristics from crime scene evidence. In this article, the authors argue that this belief may be an illusion and explain how people may have been misled into believing that criminal profiling (CP) works despite no sound theoretical grounding and no strong empirical support for this possibility. Potentially responsible for this illusory belief is the information that people acquire about CP, which is heavily influenced by anecdotes, repetition of the message that profiling works, the expert profiler label, and a disproportionate emphasis on correct predictions. Also potentially responsible are aspects of information processing such as reasoning errors, creating meaning out of ambiguous information, imitating good ideas, and inferring fact from fiction. The authors conclude that CP should not be used as an investigative tool because it lacks scientific support.

There's quite a lineup of scholarly experts behind the other articles in the special issue, too:

• Introduction to the Special Issue: Pseudoscientific Policing Practices and Beliefs by Brent Snook

• Science and Pseudoscience in Law Enforcement: A User-Friendly Primer by Scott O. Lilienfeld and Kristin Landfield

• Reducing Misconceptions and False Beliefs in Police and Criminal Psychology by Michael G. Aamodt

• Logic and Research Versus Intuition and Past Practice as Guides to Gathering and Evaluating Eyewitness Evidence by John Turtle and Stephen C. Want

• Hypnosis and the Law: Examining the Stereotypes by Graham F. Wagstaff

• Effective Policing: Understanding How Polygraph Tests Work and Are Used by William G. Iacono

• Confession Evidence: Commonsense Myths and Misconceptions by Saul M. Kassin

• Nonverbal Dominance Versus Verbal Accuracy in Lie Detection: A Plea to Change Police Practice by Aldert Vrij

• Apprehended Without Warrant: Issues of Evidentiary Warrant for Critical Incident Services and Related Trauma Interventions in a Federal Law Enforcement Agency by Katherine M. Newbold, Jeffrey M. Lohr, and Richard Gist

• Commentary: Sense, Common Sense, and Nonsense by David C. Flagel and Paul Gendreau

Check it all out here.

Photo credit: Troy & Patrice

Convention crackdown redux

Domestic espionage and arrests get little attention

I try to steer away from electoral politics on this blog, despite the abundance of tantalizing fodder. But the federal law enforcement crackdown on convention protestors - which has gotten little mainstream media attention - is worth noting, harkening back as it does to the bygone era of Cointelpro and the Chicago 7.

Marjorie Cohn, a prominent law professor at the Thomas Jefferson School of Law and the author of a new book called Cowboy Republic, has written an eye-opening piece on the "preemptive tactics" to contain protests surrounding the Republican Convention in Minnesota. Salon.com is also giving the issue some press.

Cohn's report, online here, documents FBI-led infiltration of leftists including - in a modern-day twist on the infamous old Cointelpro snooping - a group of vegans, as well as preemptive searches, seizures and arrests by teams of 25-30 officers in full riot gear with weapons drawn.

The raids targeted members of "Food Not Bombs," an anti-war protest group that provides free vegetarian meals every week in hundreds of cities all over the world. The group fed rescue workers at the World Trade Center after 9/11 and Gulf Coast evacuees after Hurricane Katrina. Also targeted was I-Witness Video, a civil libertarian police watchdog group.

City council members in St. Paul, Minnesota have expressed outrage over law enforcement actions "that appear excessive and create an atmosphere of fear and intimidation for those who wish to exercise their first amendment rights," according to Cohn's article.

Analyzing the legal basis for the crackdown, Cohn states:

Preventive detention violates the Fourth Amendment, which requires that warrants be supported by probable cause. Protestors were charged with "conspiracy to commit riot," a rarely-used statute that is so vague, it is probably unconstitutional. [Bruce Nestor, president of the Minnesota chapter of the National Lawyers Guild] said it "basically criminalizes political advocacy."

Glenn Greenwald over at Salon.com says the most extraordinary thing about the heavy-handed crackdown is how little media attention or outcry it has provoked:

So here we have a massive assault led by Federal Government law enforcement agencies on left-wing dissidents and protesters who have committed no acts of violence or illegality whatsoever, preceded by months-long espionage efforts to track what they do. And as extraordinary as that conduct is, more extraordinary is the fact that they have received virtually no attention from the national media and little outcry from anyone. And it's not difficult to see why. As the recent "overhaul" of the 30-year-old FISA law illustrated -- preceded by the endless expansion of surveillance state powers, justified first by the War on Drugs and then the War on Terror -- we've essentially decided that we want our Government to spy on us without limits. There is literally no police power that the state can exercise that will cause much protest from the political and media class and, therefore, from the citizenry.

Perhaps the lack of attention was because everyone was too busy parodying surprise vice presidential candidate Sarah Palin? (See that more entertaining story over at Newsweek.)

The Salon article, online here, has links to other coverage. Cohn's column, "Preemptive strike against protest at RNC," is online here. The sketch above (in case you are too young to remember it!) is of Bobby Seale, the Black Panther who was shackled and gagged during the "Chicago Seven Conspiracy Trial" stemming from the antiwar protests outside the Democratic National Convention exactly 40 years ago.

Hat tip: Jane

NPR series on confidential informants

Confidential informants are the lifeblood of law enforcement's effort to fight crime. But the best informants are generally very bad people - ruthless criminals - and while their information helps the FBI crack cases, the practice of using these informants is fraught with risk.

So begins an interesting 3-part NPR series by Dina Temple-Raston on the pitfalls of law enforcement reliance on informants.

Part One, "Bulger Case Changed FBI's Role With Informants," features the infamous case of Whitey Bulger, the Irish godfather who corrupted two FBI agents back in the 1970s.

Part Two is entitled, "Some FBI Agents Pay High Price For Using Snitches."

And in Part Three, "Legislator Aims To Regulate FBI Behavior," we hear about the controversial proposal by Rep. William Delahunt (D-MA) to subject FBI agents to criminal prosecution if they don't alert local law enforcement when one of their informants commits a crime.

Illustration: Popular Science August 1958; credit to Radio River (Creative Commons license).

UK forensic psych honored

Pioneer in study of police interrogation tactics

A British forensic psychologist who pioneered in the study of police interrogation tactics and helped to reform such practices in the UK and elsewhere has been honored with an international award.

The European Association of Psychology and Law honored Professor Ray Bull of the University of Leicester with a Lifetime contribution to Psychology and Law award.

In 1991, Dr. Bull was commissioned by the British Home Office to co-author the first draft of the Memorandum of Good Practice on Video Recorded Interviews with Child Witnesses for Criminal Proceedings. He went on to write the government's 2002 Achieving Best Evidence in Criminal Proceedings: Guidance for Vulnerable or Intimidated Witnesses, Including Children. He has advised police forces in several countries on the interviewing of witnesses and suspects, and he has testified as an expert witness on this topic at a number of trials.

More information is online here.

Sex offender news roundup

Florida sex offenders may possess porn

Florida sex offenders on probation can possess pornography so long as it does not relate to their ''particular deviant behavior pattern,'' the state's Supreme Court has ruled.

The case involved Donald Kasischke, a 61-year-old Miami man with a doctoral degree in gerontology. He was on probation following a year in prison in the sexual molestation of a 15-year-old boy. Probation officers had searched his home and found pornographic photos of young males having sex, but it could not be determined that any were underage.

The ruling involved a condition of Kasischke's release stating that:

"Unless otherwise indicated in the treatment plan provided by the sexual offender treatment program, a prohibition on viewing, accessing, owning or possessing any obscene, pornographic or sexually stimulating visual or auditory material, including telephone, electronic media, computer programs or computer services that are relevant to the offender's deviant behavior pattern.''

The Miami Herald story is here.

Part of national registry ruled unconstitutional

The law making it a federal crime for a sex offender to travel to another state and fail to re-register in that jurisdiction is unconstitional, a federal judge in Montana has ruled. The Montana Attorney General will now appeal the ruling to the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals.

The case involved 58-year-old Bernard Waybright, who was convicted of a misdemeanor sex crime in West Virginia. Waybright traveled to Montana several times without registering there, a violating of the federal Sexual Offender Registration and Notification Act.

The complete ruling in US v. Waybright is here. The news report in the (Montana) Missoulian is here. Analysis and news roundup of the case is here.

Coming soon: Instant sex offender alerts

Want to find out when a sex offender moves into your neighborhood. In Washington, a new system will allow you to get instant "real-time updates" and email alerts. Whoopee!

(Too bad that 90 percent of people arrested for sex offenses do not have a prior record. But these laws presumably make people feel safer.)

It's all part of the Sex Offender Sentencing, Monitoring, Apprehending, Registering, and Tracking (SMART) program, established by the U.S. Department of Justice under the Adam Walsh Child Protection and Safety Act of 2006. SMART has just issued its final guidelines for implementation, available online here.

Under the new guidelines, all 50 states, plus the District of Columbia, Puerto Rico, and Guam, are required to establish online sex offender databases that are easily searchable by name, zip code, and geographical radius. All states and U.S. territories must also participate in a similar one-stop-shopping federal database, the National Sex Offender Public Website (NSOPW).

Jurisdictions are also "permitted and encouraged" to provide public access to sex offenders' email addresses, by allowing members of the public to query whether a specific email address belongs to a sex offender.

All adult sex offenders and some juveniles as young as 14 are included in the national and state databases. (See this fact sheet for more information on juvenile registration requirements.) Registration is for life for offenders designed as “Tier III,” and for minimum periods of 15 to 25 years for Tier I and II offenders, respectively.

The FBI, which maintains the National Sex Offender Registry (NSOR) database, may freely share registrants' information with "other appropriate databases."

Who Killed Chandra Levy?

A new DNA technique has exonerated the father, but the passage of time makes the mystery of who killed JonBenet Ramsey in 1996 unlikely to be solved. Likewise for the 2001 murder of Chandra Levy, Washington's most famous unsolved crime. In both cases, premature certainty about one suspect (in the latter case a congressman) led police to ignore critical leads and commit a chain of errors that spiraled out of control.

The Levy case became overshadowed by September 11. But now, six years later, Washington Post reporters Sari Horwitz and Scott Higham have conducted an in-depth exploration of the case. The 12-part reconstruction illustrates how far off track a police investigation can go when it is overwhelmed by "white-hot media coverage," in this case fueled by the possible involvement of California congressman Gary Condit. (As part of their extensive interviews, the reporters got Condit to talk for the first time about the case.)

The Post series provides a rare look at an unsolved homicide case from the inside, following the twists and turns of an investigation that was filled with false hopes, false leads and false suspects. It would tarnish a police department and wreck a reputation. It would move with tremendous energy and purpose in one direction and end up in another. It would be marked by an enormous effort by police - and a chain of mistakes that got longer and longer.

The 12-part series starts here.

"Misfeasance not malfeasance"

Detective won't face charges in Tim Masters case

A special prosecutor has decided not to file criminal charges for perjury or illegal eavesdropping against the Colorado detective who spearheaded the investigation of 15-year-old Timothy Masters for the murder of Peggy Hettrick, a case about which I have blogged extensively (click here for my past posts).

You will recall that Lt. James Broderick was convinced of the boy's guilt despite the absence of any physical evidence linking young Masters to the crime. He continued to pursue him for years, finally hiring prominent forensic psychologist Reid Meloy to render an opinion based on Masters' personal sketches. That opinion helped garner a conviction; after a decade in prison, Masters was recently freed based on DNA evidence.

Prosecutor Ken Buck said that although he uncovered "several flaws" during his "limited investigation," he did not believe that Broderick engaged in deliberate criminal conduct, nor was there a "reasonable likelihood" that a jury would convict the detective at trial.

A separate investigation into whether prosecutors in the case violated professional standards is due to conclude soon. That investigation is by the Colorado Supreme Court's Office of Attorney Regulation. The former prosecutors, Terry Gilmore and Jolene Blair, are both now judges.

The Colorodoan quotes one former police investigator in the case, Linda Wheeler-Holloway, as saying that the prosecutor's decision is no surprise.

"People didn't play fair. By not telling the whole story, leaving things incomplete, that kind of skewed things in their favor…. There was a lot of faults committed in a lot of arenas that led to the wrongful conviction of Tim Masters."

Writer Pat Hartman, who has an extensive blog on the case entitled "Free Tim Masters Because," has a scathing denunciation of the prosecutor’s decision.

"This wrapup of Broderick's involvement is inadequate and unsatisfactory. It's like watching an elephant be pregnant for months and then give birth to a mouse. Now there's supposed to be an internal [police] investigation…. With this tepid whitewash as precedent, it’s not difficult to foresee the results of that investigation.”

The prosecutor's 11-page report is here. The Coloradoan and the Denver Post have news coverage.

"Police Interrogation and American Justice"

Richard A. Leo, a law professor at the University of San Francisco and one of the top scholars in his field, has just published what promises to be an excellent analysis of modern police interrogation techniques.

Here’s the book blurb:

"Read him his rights." We all recognize this line from cop dramas. But what happens afterward? In this book, Richard Leo sheds light on a little-known corner of our criminal justice system--the police interrogation.

Incriminating statements are necessary to solve crimes, but suspects almost never have reason to provide them. Therefore, as Leo shows, crime units have developed sophisticated interrogation methods that rely on persuasion, manipulation, and deception to move a subject from denial to admission, serving to shore up the case against him. Ostensibly aimed at uncovering truth, the structure of interrogation requires that officers act as an arm of the prosecution.

Skillful and fair interrogation allows authorities to capture criminals and deter future crime. But Leo draws on extensive research to argue that confessions are inherently suspect and that coercive interrogation has led to false confession and wrongful conviction. He looks at police evidence in the court, the nature and disappearance of the brutal "third degree," the reforms of the mid-twentieth century, and how police can persuade suspects to waive their Miranda rights.

An important study of the criminal justice system, Police Interrogation and American Justice raises unsettling questions. How should police be permitted to interrogate when society needs both crime control and due process? How can order be maintained yet justice served?

See more at the Harvard University Press website, where you can browse the table of contents or bibliography and read the introduction online before deciding whether to buy it.

Top criminologists take public policy stances

In a special "gala" issue of Criminology & Public Policy, 27 of the most influential criminologists alive take policy policy stances on issues ranging from juvenile curfews and the death penalty to sex offender residency restrictions and police gang units. The goal of each invited essay was to suggest that enough empirical evidence exists on the topic to support one specific recommendation, and to provide a summary of that evidence. Unfortunately, the essays are not available online, but I'm sure that if you are interested in a topic you can Google the author and obtain a reprint.

The recommendations include:

IMPOSE AN IMMEDIATE MORATORIUM ON EXECUTIONS
JAMES R. ACKER

ABOLISH JUVENILE CURFEWS
KENNETH ADAMS

ABOLISH LIFETIME BANS FOR EX-FELONS
SHAWN D. BUSHWAY & GARY SWEETEN

ABANDON FELON DISENFRANCHISEMENT POLICIES
ROBERT D. CRUTCHFIELD

MAKE REHABILITATION CORRECTIONS' GUIDING PARADIGM
FRANCIS T. CULLEN

EXPAND THE USE OF POLICE GANG UNITS
SCOTT H. DECKER

END NATURAL LIFE SENTENCES FOR JUVENILES
JEFFREY FAGAN

MAKE POLICE OVERSIGHT INDEPENDENT AND TRANSPARENT
JACK R. GREENE

BAN THE BOX TO PROMOTE EX-OFFENDER EMPLOYMENT
JESSICA S. HENRY, JAMES B. JACOBS

TARGET JUVENILE NEEDS TO REDUCE DELINQUENCY
PETER R. JONES, BRIAN R. WYANT

COLLECT AND RELEASE DATA ON COERCIVE POLICE ACTIONS
ROBERT J. KANE

MANDATE THE ELECTRONIC RECORDING OF POLICE INTERROGATIONS
RICHARD A. LEO, KIMBERLY D. RICHMAN

IMPLEMENT AND USE COURT PERFORMANCE MEASURES
BRIAN J. OSTROM, ROGER A. HANSON

JUST SAY NO TO D.A.R.E.
DENNIS P. ROSENBAUM
(One of my personal favoritess; it's high time to abolish harmful "Just Say No" messages targeting children.)

TRANSFER THE UNIFORM CRIME REPORTING PROGRAM FROM THE FBI TO THE BUREAU OF JUSTICE STATISTICS
RICHARD ROSENFELD

USE PROBATION TO PREVENT MURDER
LAWRENCE W. SHERMAN
(This is a provocative essay on forecasting homicide.)

REVISE POLICIES MANDATING OFFENDER DNA COLLECTION
RALPH B. TAYLOR, JOHN S. GOLDKAMP, DORIS WEILAND, CLAIRISSA BREEN, R. MARIE GARCIA, LAWRENCE A. PRESLEY, BRIAN R. WYANT

ELIMINATE RESIDENCY RESTRICTIONS FOR SEX OFFENDERS
JEFFERY T. WALKER

PROTECT INDIVIDUAL PUNISHMENT DECISIONS FROM MANDATORY PENALTIES
FRANKLIN E. ZIMRING

New police manual on sting operations

The U.S. Department of Justice's Office of Community Oriented Policing Services (COPS) publishes a series of empirically based manuals for police. The latest, Sting Operations, describes the pros and cons of such undercover operations, and explains the various deceptive techniques and how they can be adapted to different types of crimes.

The manual's conclusion:

"Sting operations can be expensive, are demanding on personnel, and generally offer limited relief from recurring crime and disorder problems. This is not to say that they should never be used. They may be beneficial when used in concert with other police responses known to provide long-term solutions to the problem, such as a tool to collect information that will help in mounting other preventative operations. Clearly, they do provide some attractive benefits to police departments, particularly by facilitating investigation, increasing arrests, and fostering a cooperative spirit between prosecutors and police, all of which result in favorable publicity. However, you need to assess these benefits against the negative ethical and legal problems associated with sting operations, especially the finding that in some cases they increase crime, and in the long term, with some exceptions, generally do not reduce it."

The 72-page manual is available online.

Tasers face growing opposition

U.N. Committee calls it "torture"

In the wake of the deaths of six people in just one week and a videotaped incident at an airport in Canada in which a man died after being tased, calls for the restriction or ban of shock-inducing tasers are becoming increasingly urgent.

On Friday, the controversy grew when a United Nations Committee Against Torture called taser use a form of torture. The comment was embedded in a larger report on the committee’s activities, and focused on the use of tasers in Portugal.

Although public criticism focuses on taser use by police, much more out of sight the weapons are widely used as weapons of control in U.S. prisons and juvenile detention facilities. Such widespread tasering of prisoners is documented in the BBC documentary, "Torture: America's Brutal Prisons."

A CBS news report is online here. An Amnesty International report on taser use is here.

The Social Construction of Crime

Do you think that a crime is just, as Webster's would say, "an unlawful activity"? Think again. Yesterday, I was horrified to witness a prison guard brutalize a young man for the mere act of smiling, which the guard construed as a prison rules violation. In this essay, a sociology professor explains the complicated interpersonal negotiations that go into deciding whether a trivial act will be labeled a crime.

Guest essay by Bradley Wright*

What is a crime? This simple question turns out to have a variety of answers.

A simple answer would be that a crime is doing anything that is against the law. The problem with this, however, is that there are tens of thousands of laws, and who could possibly remember all of them? Did you know that here in Connecticut it is illegal to throw away used razor blades? In Massachusetts, it's illegal to use bullets as currency? In Arkansas, it is illegal to drive barefoot?

Some laws may be well-known but rarely or never enforced. For example, when was the last time you got a ticket for driving five miles over the speed limit? If a law is either not known or not enforced, does breaking it constitute a crime?

This raises the issue of which laws actually get enforced, and one answer uses the social psychological principle of social construction. Rooted in the sociological perspective of symbolic interactionism, social construction is the idea that social realities happens as people interact and come to an agreement about what a situation means.

Here’s an example that happens fairly regularly here at [the University of Connecticut]: A student walks around at night with a beer in their hand, and they see a police officer. Not only are they underage, but they are also not supposed to have an open container in public, so they drop the beer. The student defines the situation as one of avoiding an alcohol-related crime. The police officer sees the dropped bottle or cup, goes over to the student, and tells them to pick it up and dispose of it properly. The police officer defines the situation as one of littering. This situation is pretty straightforward—the student readily accepts the police officer’s definition and throws away the cup or bottle.

In other situations, however, there is protracted negotiation about what is happening and what is right and wrong.

Here's a video shot in St. George Missouri. Police Sergeant Sgt. James Kuehnlein confronts 20-year-old Brett Darrow for being stopped in a parking lot. It turns out that Brett had a video camera on in the back of his car, and so we are able to hear the whole interaction. Here's a snippet of the conversation:

Kuehnlein asks for identification. When Darrow asks whether he did anything wrong, the officer orders him out of the car and begins shouting.

"You want to try me? You want to try me tonight? You think you have a bad night? I will ruin your night. … Do you want to try me tonight, young boy?"

Darrow says no.

"Do you want to go to jail for some [expletive] reason I come up with?" the police officer says. Later, Darrow says, "I don't want any problems, officer."

"You're about to get it," Kuehnlein is heard saying, "You already started your [expletive] problems with your attitude."

[The police officer was ultimately fired.]

There are various implications of crime being socially negotiated. Most obviously, justice isn't a predetermined outcome based on what you actually do, instead it's sometimes what you can negotiate. This puts a premium on your ability to negotiate a successful outcome with police officers and other members of the criminal justice system. That's why it's such a good idea to be polite and deferential to the police when you interact with them. "Yes officer" and "no officer" are very good things to say, for a pleasant interaction paves the way for a more successful negotiation of what's going on.

The criminal justice system may not always enforce all written laws, but they do sometimes enforce unwritten laws. There are various norms of how to deal with the police and other officials, such as being polite, and even though these norms are not official laws, they are enforced as if they were.

For example, having a sarcastic tone with a police officer isn't illegal, but it can change the amount of punishment you get for a crime. Likewise, there is no law saying that defendants in court have to present themselves well and be apologetic, but it's quite possible that poor self-presentation in the courtroom will lead to a harsher sentence.

This social construction of crime can also be affected by individuals' place in society. The police and courtroom actors, like anyone, have their preconceptions about different types of people. That means that going into their interaction with somebody they might already have an idea as to whether that person is guilty or how that person will act.

These preconceptions, which we can also call stereotypes, can affect the interaction between the official and the person in question. In the video clip, the police officer clearly has some ideas about young people in fast cars, and he projected them onto the person he stopped. Not only age, but also race, gender, clothing, and general appearance can affect expectations of law enforcement officials which in turn, via social construction, can alter the way someone is treated by the police or the courts.

The next time that you get pulled over, maybe the real question is not what you did but rather what you can construct through social interaction.

*Reprinted with the written permission of Bradley Wright from the exceptionally high-quality blog Everyday Sociology. Dr. Wright is a sociology professor at the University of Connecticut.