The Journal Star, apparently trying to give police chief Settingsgaard a taste of his own “shaming” medicine, slapped the word “GUILTY” in bold red letters across his face in today’s editorial. His crime? “[W]anton disregard for basic fairness by continuing to post the name and photo of a Bloomington man on the city’s prostitution Web site, even though he was acquitted of sex solicitation by a jury of his peers.”
In contrast, the Bloomington man, whose name is Samuel T. Clay, has printed next to his name on the Peoria PD’s website in bold red letters, “Not Guilty.” You see, as has been pointed out by others already, the pictures on the PD website are pictures of those arrested for solicitation, not those convicted.
This is something the Journal Star itself does regularly. For instance, just today they printed the names of several individuals who were arrested for driving under the influence of alcohol. Even if the charges are dismissed, they still print the person’s name and state that the charges were dismissed. What’s the difference between that and what the Peoria PD is doing on their website?
Here’s another example. When DOT Rail owner Donny Lee Gibson was arrested for allegedly trying to hire someone to kill his wife, the Journal Star didn’t have any qualms about printing that arrest, even though he was never convicted of that charge.
Apparently the only arrests that are verboten by the Journal Star are solicitation arrests. Why should these be treated differently than every other arrest? Stigma? I think murder-for-hire carries a pretty bad stigma, too. I wouldn’t want to be accused of either.
In my opinion, the Journal Star should get off Settingsgaard’s back. If those prostitutes were anywhere near where the editors of the PJS live, they’d be singing Settingsgaard’s praises for cracking down hard on them and their customers instead of boldly holding up a double-standard.
A couple of things bother me about this.
1. You ask (paraphrased) what is the difference between what the PPD is doing than the PJS. The PJS isn’t posting pictures. Personally, I think if they are arrested for solicitation, the name should appear. If guilty, post the picture. If innocent, remove the name\picture altogether. If I were this Clay gentleman, I’d be pissed because I would be still “guilty” in some people’s eyes due to association with those who really are. If you were in his position, for any crime, and found innocent, would you want your name and photo still posted with the arrested\guilty crowd?
2. If this is to deter crime, then they need to do this with drug offenders. I’d like to know who are all the “druggies” wandering around my neighborhood. If the PPD website contains ALL the pictures of those arrested for prostitution in the last year (photos are there for a year), they aren’t arresting too many people. If it’s a partial list, then I’d be screaming discrimination. While it is a crime, I think the drug situation and issues derived from it in various parts of this city are a far more detriment to society than spending all the the man hours on prostitution. While neighbors may not like prostitutes and those soliciting them in their neighborhood, I don’t want gangs of foot traffic, repeated passes of automobiles, honking, the “hanging out”, garbage and other issues that happen in my neighborhood all hours of the night and day. Don’t think the police haven’t been called. I think they need a website posting every picture of every person, their address, etc. of every person arrested for anything having to do with drugs just like they are with sex solictitors.
Bill, the Journal Star absolutely does post pictures of those who have been arrested and not yet tried or convicted. In fact, just pick up today’s copy of the Journal Star and look at the local section. Right there in print they have a picture of Maurice Wallace, who is on trial for murder. Why is it okay to print pictures of those arrested for murder, but not those arrested for solicitation?
And, I agree with you about drug dealers. I’d like to see their pictures on the website, too.
Maybe so about the picture in the JS. I rarely read it. But where do you draw the line? Whose picture goes in and for what crime? Solicitation, DUI, murder, dealing crack, jaywalking, child molestors, driving without a seat belt, rape, tax fraud……
I think it would work with some of the crimes you listed, but not others. It works with something like prostitution because of the stigma and shame involved. I doubt there would be any change in behavior if the same tactic were used on seat-belt-use violators. You have to use what works for the situation.
The difference here is that the Journal Star is a PRIVATE enterprise… they are pretty much free to do what they want, and will pay for something really stupid by, perhaps, lower readership. The Police Chief and the website are PUBLICLY funded. The weight is particularly heavy on the PUBLIC BODY to treat folks as INNOCENT until PROVEN GUILTY. The expectations for the Journal Star and the City of Peoria are radically different… as they SHOULD be.
I personally do not care for the Chief’s religious beliefs to play a hand in his heavy-handed approach to the “horrific” crime of prostitution. Does it appeal to low-lifes? Yes. Does it appeal to social outcasts and drug users? Yes. Does it draw gun-play and other crimes to it like a crack house does? No. Bust down on the REAL crime in the city, Chief… and honor the pledge that the CITY should keep… INNOCENT until PROVEN Guilty.
In my own opinion, the Journal Star avoids this mess because of the people that are picked up for the crime. In the past, we have had the city manager for a local community get picked up, a well connected family man, and local business owners. If they highlighted these crimes too much, they could risk losing advertisers as well as customers. Not to mention, they are afraid of most real news to begin with.