Home -> Law Blog Directory -> Bad Cops & Prosecutors Blogs -> Injustice in Seattle

Bad Cops & Prosecutors

: Injustice in Seattle

When An Advocate Turns Against A Victim Of Police Misconduct

By David Packman

Whenever a case of mistreatment by police occurs it is, in its most simplistic form, a matter of vigilantism. That is, it's a matter of a police officer exceeding his role within the justice system and inflicting harm upon a citizen that he or she has presumed guilty and worthy of punishment.

This said, it's also true that anyone, cop or not, can also practice vigilantism when we presume that we are qualified to judge others when we don't have all the facts at hand and then punish them as a result of that presumption.

This, sadly, happens all the time to victims of police misconduct. The police have already abused them once and then abuse them some more by spreading rumor and presumptions in the media and to the public in an effort to both justify their extrajudicial actions and to deflect repercussions that might come from that act of abuse.

The public also does it whenever someone says "oh, that criminal probably deserved a beating" or any similar and oft heard excusism is ignorantly uttered. Too often, sadly, the victim is denied a voice with which to challenge such accusations and slander due to gag orders, advice from their attorneys, or a media reluctant to criticize government while they await trial... which victimizes the victim even further.

It's an intolerable feeling, I know it, I've been there, and it's an incredibly difficult feeling to be prejudged in the media while you can't respond... ultimately it is a torture heaped upon torture, it is truly a continuation of the abuse that merely started when an officer steps outside the bounds of his duty and inflicts punishment when it was not warranted.

...But what happens when those who are supposed to advocate for, and give victims of police abuse the voice they lack, practice the same prejudicial jumps of judgment that drives us nuts when the police practice it?

We have what Carlos Miller did in the case of Duane Kerzic.

Miller broke the Kerzic story on his Photography Is Not A Crime blog  in a number of well written posts that covered the original story as well as some follow-up that occurred when the story was aired on The Colbert Report... and truth be told I generally find his blog informative and well-written, as do most people.

Yet, I was appalled when I read his attack piece on Kerzic after Kerzic had gone silent about what happened and removed the information he had posted about his encounter with Amtrack police officers at Penn Station in New York in December of last year when he was arrested for photographing trains for a contest sponsored by Amtrack asking for... photos of trains.

Miller attempted to contact Kerzic after his page was reset to merely say "No Comment" and got the same in reply from both Kerzic and his attorney, "No Comment."

Others were also concerned though, like Karl Mansoor from the Blue Must Be True site, that focuses on police misconduct issues from the perspective of an officer and Law Enforcement instructor, who expressed his concern in a reply to that post... Some of my readers were concerned as well so I also contacted Miller and his lawyer.

While the response I received was essentially same, no comment, I did not get the feeling that it was because some payoff had been received. Instead, it seems to me that this is the typical case of attorney's caution to a client to let the case be tried in court, not in the town square... and there are several reasons to believe the silence is due to pending litigation, criminal and/or civil, instead of any sort of payout in exchange for silence.

Indeed, Carlos Miller should understand that lawyers advise clients to not comment on a pending case after he was criticized by a judge in his own case for blogging about how he was arrested for photographing a police officer. Instead Miller defenestrated Kerzic with a scathing post that accuses him of selling out.

Even if he did accept a gag order in exchange for a settlement, so what? If that's what he feels he needs to move on with his life and forgive what was done to him, so be it. The information is already out there about what happened to him, his being silenced only puts us in the dark as to the final conclusion, or at least until that final conclusion is reached in his case.

Sure, transparency is the goal here, the public would be better served to know how this case of misconduct was handled, but most of the blame here remains with the government within which frameworks have been established to permit the hiding of the truth, the framework anyone who settles a case with the government has to abide by... We should criticize that system of secrecy, not the victims who are forced to abide by it, if that was indeed the reason for silence this time.

Indeed, it could be that Kerzic is still facing criminal charges in that case. Is it right for any of us, especially those of us who advocate for victims of police excesses, to expect a victim of wrongful arrest and physical abuse to risk jail just to keep talking about a story that is already out there?

...no, it puts us on the same playing field as the police officers who abuse their authority that we criticize. Worse, it makes victims of misconduct feel as though they have nobody to turn to since those who are supposed to be supportive are also so critical of them at the same time.

I, of course, still support Miller's attempts to deal with the issue of officers arresting people who photograph them. I just hope that next time Miller thinks about the possible repercussions his presumptions can cause to a person who was victimized in a way that was similar to himself.

Full post as published by Injustice in Seattle on February 14, 2009 (boomark / email).