首页
登录
职称英语
Citing Ohio ordinances that allow individuals to seek charges against someone
Citing Ohio ordinances that allow individuals to seek charges against someone
游客
2025-01-19
2
管理
问题
Citing Ohio ordinances that allow individuals to seek charges against someone they’ve seen commit a crime, seven Euclid residents claim to have "witnessed" the encounter between Officer Michael Amiott and driver Richard Hubbard III by virtue of viewing a four-minute video on Facebook. Their unique argument has triggered discussion in the legal community about the role that "social media witnesses" could play in such cases.
"It used to just be the police officer’s word against the victim’s word," notes lead petitioner Richard T. Montgomery II. "Now, in the age of cellphone videos and social media, we as a community have the opportunity to participate in ensuring police accountability."
The racially and economically diverse group scored its first victory in late December when a municipal judge responded to its request by requiring the Cuyahoga County prosecutor to investigate Amiott for felonious assault during the August 2017 traffic stop.
The cellphone video, which has more than 11 million views on Facebook, shows the officer repeatedly punching Hubbard’s head as the 25-year-old man lay in the street. Separate video from a police cruiser’s dash cam shows Amiott wrestling Hubbard to the ground moments after he was ordered out of his car for a suspended driver’s license.
Amiott was fired two months later for excessive force. But in the majority-black city, emotions flared anew this October when he was rehired following an arbitrator’s ruling in his favor. The ensuing outcry included the NAACP announcing a travel advisory to people of color who might be driving through Euclid.
The legal issues raised by the citizens’ petition and the prospect of witnesses via social media are largely untested.
Cleveland attorney Rebecca Maurer, who wrote a popular blog about the "Serial" podcast’s recent focus on Cuyahoga County’s criminal justice system, expects such witnesses might have to first establish that they were somehow personally affected before being allowed to initiate charges.
"The judicial system relies on the idea of ’standing’ to regulate the type of cases that go to court," she said. "A judge who borrows from standing theory will want to know exactly why social media witnesses should initiate the case. Perhaps it’s enough if the petitioners are local residents claiming a personal stake in the security of their community."
In his ruling referring the matter to the county prosecutor, Euclid Municipal Judge Patrick Gallagher did point out that the petitioners fail to claim any "personal knowledge of Mr. Hubbard’s injuries." Had they done so, he could have taken more
drastic
action, the judge seemed to imply. Under Ohio law, Gallagher also could have used the citizens’ petition to circumvent the prosecutor’s office and issue an arrest warrant for Amiott.
Nearly a dozen other states also allow private citizens to initiate criminal charges — including Pennsylvania, New Hampshire, Maryland, Virginia, North Carolina, South Carolina, Georgia, Texas and Idaho.
In all but one, however, the decision to actually file criminal charges is left to a prosecutor or grand jury. The exception is South Carolina, where police also have that power.
Testimony from people claiming to have witnessed something via social media can be problematic, cautions Seth Stoughton, a University of South Carolina law professor and former officer, since video posted online, even unedited, often provides limited information about an event.
"Beyond what they see directly in front of them, officers also rely on peripheral, aural and tactile information ... That doesn’t always come across accurately, or at all, on video," said Stoughton, who writes extensively about police regulation and use of force. By definition, he added, social media witnesses will always have such limitations.
Some attorneys worry that the very community such individuals hope to protect could instead be negatively affected. Civil rights lawyer Maya Wiley, a former board chair of the NYC Civilian Complaint Review Board, an independent police oversight agency, warns of implicit bias in the criminal justice system that could favor a white social media witness over one of color. [br] The most proper title for this passage is______.
选项
A、Citizen’s Petition Against a White Policeman
B、The Power of Social Media Over Legal Community
C、Social Media "Witnesses" Raise Questions for Legal System
D、Social Media "Witnesses" Are Not Acceptable
答案
C
解析
主旨题。全文从社交媒体证人提起诉讼的事件说起,讨论了该行为给司法系统带来的问题,故正确答案为C。
转载请注明原文地址:https://tihaiku.com/zcyy/3920025.html
相关试题推荐
CitingOhioordinancesthatallowindividualstoseekchargesagainstsomeone
CitingOhioordinancesthatallowindividualstoseekchargesagainstsomeone
CitingOhioordinancesthatallowindividualstoseekchargesagainstsomeone
CitingOhioordinancesthatallowindividualstoseekchargesagainstsomeone
CitingOhioordinancesthatallowindividualstoseekchargesagainstsomeone
IntheopeningsceneofStepUp2:TheStreets,someonevibratesunderneathasu
Amanwhopubliclysayssomethingdefamatoryaboutsomeoneisrefferedtoasad
Canweforgeagainsttheseenemiesagrandandglobalalliance?A、dodgeB、create
Manystudentsagreedtocome,butsomestudentsagainstbecausetheysaidtheyd
CitingOhioordinancesthatallowindividualstoseekchargesagainstsomeon
随机试题
Thedeclineofcivilityandgoodmannersmaybeworryingpeoplemorethancr
Personaltrainersandfitnesscoachesaretothenarcissistic1980’sjustlikea
Theholidaysareatimeforeating:piesatThanksgiving,chocolatesforAdv
[originaltext]W:Excuseme,wherecanIfindtheseriesHairyPotter?Ihavebe
下图所示为两个有限自动机Ml和M2(A是初态、C是终态),( )。 A.M1
采用发起设立方式的股份有限公司,发起人缴付全部出资后,应当召开全体发起人大会,选
下列哪些情形行为人具有"非法占有目的"?A.甲盗用他人汽车,到达目的地后将其抛弃
(2019年真题)位于某市郊区的物流公司占地面积共计20000平方米,其中:
(2013年)根据《声环境质量标准》,下列关于标准适用范围的说法,正确的是()。
一段较长的土质路堑纵向开挖,采用沿路堑全宽,以深度不大的纵向分层进行挖掘作业,这
最新回复
(
0
)