The reason cops shouldn’t abuse suspects

ARCHIVES 2013

By admin-s On Jun 19, 2013

We expect the police to be like the Lotus plant which lives, stands upright and displays its beauty even in filthy ponds – we each have to excel at what we do. Yet, the police have to deal with bad folks more frequently than the rest of us. Period. It’s not easy to remain different from the bad folks. And therein lies the challenge: bad folks taunt us; bad folks mock us; bad folks hurt us.

write2rest

In my last post about the police, I asked why cops shouldn’t abuse “almost certainly” reprehensible prisoners.

Some suggested I should ask how I would wish to be treated if I were the suspect. Some said there’s a chance the person “looks like, but is not” the guilty person. Some reminded me of the axiom “innocent until proven guilty.”

There’s truth in all those statements, but we can go deeper.

It’s often difficult to gather evidence or find sufficient, reliable witnesses to prove a crime. Rapists in particular benefit from this difficulty. And, many witnesses will not testify for fear of reprisals by friends of the accused.

Yet, we insist that the burden of proof must be satisfied: we insist that the police must not only apprehend criminals, they must produce evidence that the suspects did indeed commit the crimes they are accused of. We insist the police must obtain the evidence quickly, without harming suspects. We insist that the police must protect those who testify about what happened.

The reason even a suspect is entitled to due process, entitled to be treated as innocent until proven guilty, entitled to be punished only by a duly appointed court of law, lies in civility. Being civil means treating each other politely and courteously, as fellow citizens with equal rights and responsibilities. [Seehere my post about the UN, Malaysia and civilization.]

Civility is a response to dignity, seeing “worth” in people because they are people.

On the 10th of December 1948 the General Assembly of the United Nations passed The Universal Declaration of Human Rights. The Declaration begins with the word “dignity:”

“Whereas recognition of the inherent dignity and of the equal and inalienable rights of all members of the human family is the foundation of freedom, justice and peace in the world,”

The Declaration was issued after the end of World War II, after atrocity upon atrocity had been committed upon citizens both by their own fellow-citizens and by citizens of other nations. The Declaration was one of several responses to the brutal treatment of civilians and Prisoners of War.

This is the first part of Article 11:

“Everyone charged with a penal offence has the right to be presumed innocent until proved guilty according to law in a public trial at which he has had all the guarantees necessary for his defence.”

So, why shouldn’t the police – or anyone else for that matter – abuse even “almost certainly reprehensible prisoners”?

It’s because what I do to others is a reflection of who I am.

And that, I believe, is the primary reason why some of us feel so angry about the abuse of even “almost certainly reprehensible prisoners.”

As I write this, I have in my mind’s eye a short video of a number of young men who robbed a liquor store of a bottle of whisky and the contents of a cash register, threatening the cashier and a couple of others with a parang. In the previous paragraph, I said “some of us” because I saw comments on FB by others who basically said “the police should beat/shoot them.”