Editorial “Puzzling explanation for delay in releasing police officers’ names” starts out:
“DA Stedman said he plans to release the names of both the wounded officer and the second officer who shot and killed Gomez, but he placed a condition on that release — and made an odd and unconvincing case for the delay.
The reason cited? The ‘recent demonization of police officers,’ and the civil unrest in communities such as Baltimore and Ferguson.”
“To cite the righteous anger over the deaths of Freddie Gray, Eric Garner, Tamir Rice and others as a reason why we shouldn’t know the names of the police involved in this incident was bizarre.
“If Stedman and Sadler have real concerns about the safety of officers as a result of Tuesday’s incident or any other, they should spell out those concerns.
“If some storm is brewing here against the police — and we see no evidence that this is the case — the community ought to know, so it can work on the issue, for the sake of everyone’s safety.”
Well said as far as the editorial goes. But what is missing is a civics lesson about the bedrock of democracy: Defense of the public against government tyranny and oppression.
The protection of society from the rule of despots was first noted in the Magna Carta: “NO Freeman shall be taken or imprisoned, or be disseised of his Freehold, or Liberties, or free Customs, or be outlawed, or exiled, or any other wise destroyed; nor will We not pass upon him, nor condemn him, but by lawful judgment of his Peers, or by the Law of the land. We will sell to no man, we will not deny or defer to any man either Justice or Right.”
The spread of such protections from the nobility to all of the public was the essence of the United State Constitution.
“Article the eighth… In all criminal prosecutions, the accused shall enjoy the right to a speedy and public trial, by an impartial jury of the State and district wherein the crime shall have been committed, which district shall have been previously ascertained by law, and to be informed of the nature and cause of the accusation; to be confronted with the witnesses against him; to have compulsory process for obtaining witnesses in his favor, and to have the Assistance of Counsel for his defence.”
When an agent of the government kills someone, no matter how justified, it amounts to an arrest, indictment, trial, conviction and execution. If government can withhold vital information about an execution of a member of the public, then the most basic rights and protections of our citizenry are in serious danger. At that point the government, rather than our protector, becomes our threat.
Three cheers for LNP. As for Stedman, whom we have not had cause to criticize in past memory, he needs to go back to school.
Excellent commentary by newslanc, but it, too, misses a point, one that LNP’s editors missed, as well, and do so on a regular basis: The purpose of an independent, objective news media (I will leave for another time the argument as to whether LNP IS one), is to keep government honest.
The questions posed by LNP in its editorial should have been brought up by reporters at the news conference, pointed questions should have been asked (regardless of whether or not they were met with a, “No comment”), and absent any answers from the D.A’s office, the media should be getting that information on its own. (It’s called “digging”.)
The purpose of a REAL journalist is to “comfort the afflicted and afflict the comfortable.” Instead, the only newspaper in Lancaster will just wait for the press release. Or drop the coverage altogether. For every door being slammed in a reporter’s face, they should be kicking open two.
But, no. The LNP editorial was just lip service, and I wouldn’t be at all surprised if they sent it to Mr. Stedman for his approval before running it. I know all this because I used to be a journalist. Now, though, I’m just a disgusted taxpayer. And voter.