Tag Recording

Go to the Tape

Michael 4 Comments

Do you ever wonder why? Just – Why, Huh, Really, Yeah, Unbelievable I’ve been doing that a lot lately. Lately there have been a lot of news reports about the charges being filed against the people who attacked the Capitol. In case you are wondering, yes, I did think about that word choice and that is the one I settled on. All you need to do is look at the tape. And that’s where I’m going.

For years, hundreds of years, we’ve settled on a system of innocent until proven guilty. It’s a good system.  The Presumption of Innocence is so good most people assume it’s a guaranteed right. Actually, it isn’t. Due process is. Due process requires certain procedures are followed before a person can be charged with, tried for, or convicted of any illegal act. The Fifth Amendment of the Constitution demands due process in federal cases and the Fourteenth Amendment extends that protection to those accused in state and local cases. Part of due process at the level of conviction is that the accuser meet a “standard of proof.” That’s where things enter the “Really?” realm for me. Stick with me for another minute please.

Because the accuser has to meet a burden of proof is it assumed the accused is innocent until that proof is met. I prefer to think of it as the accused has not been proven guilty. In fact, if you have served on a jury you might recall before deliberations began the judge instructed you and the other jury members that you were to determine if the accused is guilty or not guilty. Nobody voted for innocent.

Eagle eyed wordsmiths will have noticed in the previous paragraph’s opening sentence I used the word “assume” instead of “presume.” If we have to call the current system something it really should be call an Assumption of Innocence, rather than the Presumption of Innocence.  To “presume” supposes there is some unspecified evidence to reach a conclusion; ‘assume’ takes for granted that whatever is supposed is true. That’s really what we have, we are assuming these people are not guilty. If we were to presume anything it would be the other way around. Why? As another great phrase we’ve all heard goes, let’s go to the tape.*

With cameras so ubiquitous you can certainly presume, darn near assume, that nothing happens without a record of it happening, often by those doing what’s happening, I am utterly amazed at what people say they did not do within days of proudly sharing videos of what they just did. That some rebel can grab a battering ram, slug his and/or her way through a locked door, smash through inner doors, steal items out of offices, take pictures of himself and or herself while battering, slugging, smashing, and stealing, and then plead not guilty of all charges just does not compute. “Yes, I went to Washington but I didn’t go inside.” Let’s go to the tape.

This is all happening at the same time news outlets are publishing security camera video of attacks against Asian Americans including a violent assault of an Asian woman on a street right in front of a police car. Let’s go to the tape.

This all got stirred up in my head over the weekend listening to the reports of the trial of that cop who killed George Floyd. (I don’t want to call it the Floyd trial because he isn’t being tried for anything, and I don’t want to call it that cop’s name trial because I don’t want to give him any extra recognition.) Let’s go to the tape.

With few exceptions all of those so far charged have pled not guilty, certainly that’s their right. They can say whatever they want and the system is built that they don’t have to prove they are not lying when they say it. Let’s go to the tape.

ReplayOne of the standards of proof is “Clear and Convincing Evidence,” that it is highly probably to suppose what is presented is how the elements of the action had occurred. On the legal ladder of liability this standard lands on the rung below “Beyond a Reasonable Doubt,” that is the elements of the action had occurred as presented (which although is greater than to suppose the elements are present it does not mean “beyond all doubt” or “beyond a shadow of a doubt” or any other such absolute).

Call me an old fuddy duddy but I’m still of the school that if I see something happening with my eyes, I can pretty much suppose that’s how it went down and those actions did occur. Whether it is breaking door the doors to the Capitol, lifting a pack of gum, pushing an elderly Asian woman into a busy street, or kneeling on somebody until their life is snuffed out, I say we change the standard to “Let’s Go To The Tape.” It’s not just for sports anymore.

*The phrase “Let’s go to the video tape,” sometimes “Let’s go to the audio tape” is attributed to sportscaster Warner Wolf. Wolf published his memoir, Let’s Go to the Videotape: All the Plays and Replays from My Life in Sports, (Grand Central Publishing) with Larry Weisman in 2020.

With Six You Get a Recording of Eggroll

Michael Leave a comment

“Why not?” the ads for Verison’s Fios ask when the requisite adorable kid wants to know why he can’t record all of the cartoons at one time and save them all to watch in whatever room he wants to.  Almost the same question that the Comcast Xfinity and Dish TV Hopper ad actors come up with before somebody voices over that they too can record 8, 12, or 15 programs at once (depending on which premium package you buy into), keeping up to 2,000 hours of recorded content (they all seem to agree on that number), with the ability to start watching in one room and finishing off in another (that’s no big deal but they all want you to believe that it is).

What none of them tell you is that all of their basic DVR package allows you to record only 2 to 4 programs at once and save a mere 50 to 90 hours.  We’d like to tell you how much the basic packages are compared to the upgraded packages but none of the sites had a clear price of the DVR service and equipment rental.  They all had disclaimers that the promotional bundled pricing of the DVR plus other services was good for 6, 12, or 24 months with a 24 month commitment and with additional activation, installation, equipment rental, and regional sports network fees.  Not all providers charged all fees but all providers charged enough fees.

Not being able to determine if we’d want any of these premium packages based on how much they cost (why would anybody want to decide on what, or if, to buy based on price?), we can pretty much say without hesitation that we don’t want any of these premium packages based on principle.  There aren’t 8, 12, or Heaven forbid 15 programs airing at the same time that we’d want to record.  We can’t imagine that it is too often when there are two programs airing at the same time worthy of a quick view let alone a recording.  And who came up with 2,000 hours of savable programming?  That’s over sixteen 2-hour movies – or 66 cartoon episodes for the requisite adorable ad kid that started this discussion.  Wouldn’t he be better off spending 2,000 hours at the neighborhood playground on the monkey bars with some friends?  It seems to be another example of “just because it can be done doesn’t mean that it should be done” except this time someone is charging the American public for the right to excess.

Perhaps that’s what is meant by the “pursuit of happiness.”  If we had to pursue 2,000 hours of quality programming to find happiness that might be a quest that’s never satisfied.

Now that’s what we think. Really. How ‘bout you.

Smile, You’re Protected From Candid Camera

Michael Leave a comment

Before we begin please let us assure you that we are all for the presumption of innocence, civil rights, and the protection of privacy. But every now and then something comes up that makes us go more than hmm. Something that we’re certain Tom, John, Ben, and the gang in Philadelphia in 1776 really hadn’t had in mind.

Somewhere in Pennsylvania there is a young high school sophomore who has been the target of bullying. The school district in which he is currently a sophomore claims it takes all manner of precautions and discipline to provide a safe environment for its students, including protection from physical, verbal, and psychological abuse dealt by bullies, not unlike the rest of the country.

This young man had claimed to be the victim of a bully since the school year began. He brought his concerns to his mother who in turn brought them to the school per the district policy. Yet the bullying continued. The young man’s mother couldn’t even confirm if her concerns were ever addressed with the “alleged” bully and/or the “alleged” parents of said “alleged” bully. The district claimed that would be an infringement on the “alleged” bully’s “alleged” privacy if they were to disclose if they spoke with him or his parents about the “alleged” conduct.

Let’s fast forward to this spring. Young man has had enough of the bully and not having any positive response form the school decides the best way to convince them that he is being victimized is to show them the victimization. And so, with his cell phone, he records the bully bullying him. He takes this recording to his mother who takes it to the school who promptly has the young man arrested and charged with wiretapping for recording the “alleged” bully without his consent.   About a week later the young victim is actually convicted under the wiretapping statutes of Pennsylvania and ordered to pay a fine and court costs, hopefully unlike the rest of the country. At least he didn’t get jail time.

Fast forward again a few weeks. There is discussion over this. The district attorney’s office gets involved and decides that perhaps this wasn’t the best outcome and asks for the conviction to be vacated. However, it will stay on his record until he requests, and pays the attending court and legal costs, to have his record expunged. The school district is not in any hurry to apologize and actually stands by its decision to have the young man charged since it wants to provide a safe environment for its students including the expectation of the right to privacy, apparently the “alleged” privacy of the “alleged” bully. And public opinion is pretty much split 50/50 on who is right and who is righter.

So we suppose the next time you’re walking through a store, or a parking lot, or used car establishment, or perhaps a bank or post office and you see the sign, “Smile, You’re on Camera,” you have the right to say, “No, I’m not.” Of all his inventions, it’s a shame the camera wasn’t one of Ben Franklin’s. Then we’d know for sure.

Now, that’s what we think. Really. How ‘bout you?