Tuesday, May 1, 2007

Interrogations should be taped

4/27/07
A milestone of justice was reached this week when officials reported the 200th case in the United States of DNA evidence used to overturn a criminal conviction. Two hundred cases of sketchy witnesses, missing evidence or questionable police tactics which nevertheless combined to send an innocent person to jail, adding up to hundreds of years wasted in prisons. It’s a good thing to see someone innocent set free, an old wrong righted, but it calls into question much that we take for granted about our legal system.
As bad as the innocent person’s lost years in prison is the scot-free escape of whoever is guilty — faulty convictions don’t just harm the convicted.
And among cases that led to wrongful convictions overturned by DNA evidence, a large number involve improper police interrogations, conducted behind closed doors, with who-knows-what tactics resulting in a signed confession. It’s time to open those doors.
It makes no sense for police interrogations not to be videotaped. Preserving a record of the questioning protects the police, who will have evidence to disprove claims of abuse. It also helps suspects, who will be less likely to experience problems (and, it should be noted, someone brought in for questioning is not necessarily guilty).
Detractors say the equipment is too expensive, but recordings will ultimately be a boon for town budgets, where millions of dollars can now be spent defending police from allegations of improper behavior.
Opponents further state that videotaping every interrogation would force questioners to change their tactics. If that’s true, all the better. If police are doing something they would be threatened by if it ever became public, we probably don’t want them doing it.
The state Legislature’s Appropriations Committee has approved $100,000 a year for a pilot videotaping project in the coming budget. It is time for Connecticut to join other states around the country and do what’s right for the police — and for justice.

No comments: