Go to the Tape

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.

Another One Bites the Dust

Another era has come to an end. Surely you’ve heard the news by now that the last VHS tape player has been manufactured. The consumer video cassette recorder market is no more.

It seems amazing that the VHS player/recorder was still being produced. The last studio release in VHS format was in 2006 and the last blank cassettes were sold two years later. But its longevity shouldn’t surprise you. JVC’s VHS format’s biggest competition in video tape, Sony’s Betamax, saw its machines cease production in 2002 but still manufactured blank Betamax format tapes until March of this year!

If you thought VHS and Beta were the only two choices in home video tape you are wrong. At one point there were 13 different tape formats. In the late seventies while the early tape formats bid war against each other, the LaserDisc format was also vying for space in home theaters claiming, and providing, superior video and audio than the available tape formats but not able to record. The maker of the last VHS player, Funai Electric (you might know as Sanyo) entered the video market making players in its own format, the Compact Video Cassette (CVC) in 1983.

Today everybody can take movies with their phones. Fifty years ago, handheld 8mm film cameras captured cherished family moving memories. In between them, young fathers exercised their arm and back muscles as they hoisted bulky VHS format cameras, basically video recorder/players with lenses, onto their shoulders. The advantage was that you could go home from the football game, dance recital, high school musical, or family reunion volley ball tournament and watch the proceedings on your television right then. A true modern miracle.

Various compact formats (Video8, MiniDV, MicroMV) made for smaller handheld cameras and the miniDVD format brought disc recording to the amateur videographer. Phones and digital cameras take DVD or better quality movies. But the proliferation of video streaming services may make any in home “movie player” obsolete before too long.

Until then, I better start looking for DVD or BluRay versions of my personal favorites that I still have in VHS. Casablanca, Singing in the Rain, and Breakfast at Tiffany’s are all available on disk. But where will I ever find a digital copy of the 1935 version of Scrooge starring Sir Seymour Hicks? (Great version, really. Look it up.) Well, that’s what flea markets and garage sales are for.

That’s what I think. Really. How ‘bout you?

 

Smile, You’re Protected From Candid Camera

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?