Inside the most wiretapped place in the US; a look at whether it's time to rethink the Supreme Court case governing cops' use of force; and the casting of MLK Jr. adds a new, controversial twist to nontraditional casting
How much slack should we cut politicians when they embellish the truth?
Hillary Clinton and Ben Carson are just the two latest candidates who've had portions of their personal stories called into question.
Ben Carson's faced intense scrutiny and questioning over the truthfulness of childhood incidents he recounted in his books and public talks.
Now Hillary Clinton's veracity is being challenged, and not just by political opponents, over claims she once tried to join the Marines. No one's surprised when politicians exaggerate their accomplishments.
But what about when their stories about their early years can't be substantiated? Throughout history, candidates have been falsely accused, found to be exaggerating, or caught in outright lies.
How much slack will you cut a candidate you otherwise support when you suspect they're not being straight? Does it affect your voting?
Guest:
Glenn Kessler, reporter who writes “The Fact Checker” column for the Washington Post
Riverside County most wiretapped in the nation, but are the wiretaps legal?
A huge wiretapping operation aimed at curbing drug trafficking in Riverside County is being looked at by Department of Justice officials who say they’re concerned about the legality of the operation.
A USA Today investigation showed that Riverside County issues far more warrants for wiretap surveillance than any other jurisdiction in the United States. Even more interesting was the fact that most of these were signed off on by one particular state court judge. Federal agents often go to state courts instead of federal courts to obtain warrants for wiretaps because it’s faster and easier, and special protections offered by California state law give them even more latitude to protect the names and identities of the confidential informants used to help track the drug rings. Wiretaps are notoriously difficult to obtain warrants for, and the law states police may only resort to a wiretap when all other investigative tools have been exhausted.
Riverside County has become one of the busiest drug corridors in the U.S., according to the DEA, and they say the wiretapping operation has helped bring down suppliers and distributors across the county. However, the wiretaps are only supposed to be for crime in Riverside County, and information obtained from the taps has been used to make arrests on the East Coast.
Based on the evidence from the USA Today investigation, are the wiretaps in Riverside County legal? Does this story raise privacy concerns for you?
Guests:
Brad Heath, investigative reporter for USA Today covering law and justice, co-author of USA Today enterprise piece on Riverside Co. wiretaps
Brett Kelman, investigative reporter for The Desert Sun, USA Today correspondent, and co-author of USA Today enterprise piece on Riverside Co. wiretaps
Mike Hestrin, district attorney for Riverside County
Randy Sutton, retired police lieutenant with the Las Vegas Metropolitan Police Department. He was a narcotics detective for several years. He’s the author of multiple books on policing, including "A Cop’s Life" (St Martin’s Press, 2006)
Is it time to rethink the Supreme Court case that governs officers’ use of force?
Thirty-one years ago Thursday, citing something “amiss,” cops detained car maintenance worker Dethorne Graham as he rushed out of a convenience store in Charlotte, NC. Graham, a diabetic, had made a quick stop for orange juice when he felt an insulin reaction coming on, but abruptly left the store when he noticed a long line.
Cops detained him about a mile away and he later sued to recover damages for injuries sustained from the officers’ use of physical force, arguing they had violated his Constitutional rights. The case made its way to the United States’ Supreme Court and, even though it didn’t involve a shooting, Graham v. Connor has set the standard for evaluating officers’ use of force to this day.
The high court ruled that an objective reasonableness standard, known as the “Reasonable Person” defense should apply to a civilian's claim that law enforcement officials used excessive force in the course of making an arrest, stop, or other "seizure" of his or her person. In other words, would a reasonable cop have reacted in the same way as the cop did at that time and in that situation? Interpreting that case today, prosecutors find lethal force is justified if an officer’s fear is “reasonable,” even if the imminent threat could have been subdued through less lethal means, or turns out to be misperceived.
As long as an officer's perceptions and reactions can be viewed as common and typical, they are "reasonable," even if they made a bad shoot. So mistakenly thinking that an unarmed person has a gun and shooting him does not constitute a violation of his constitutional rights as long as a reasonable person in the same situation could have made the same mistake.
Proponents of the standard argue it prevents courts from playing so-called “Monday morning quarterback” when assessing a situation with the potential to escalate quickly. But critics say it is applied too liberally and is an overly flexible legal standard that allows jurors to excuse defendants they sympathize with.
How do ordinary judges and jurors use the Reasonable Person test to determine responsibility and liability? And is it time to challenge or reconsider the Reasonable Person standard as it applies to officers’ use of force?
Guests:
Steve Lurie, 20 year-long LA law enforcement veteran, attorney and adjunct professor of Law at Loyola and Pepperdine law schools
Jody Armour, Roy P. Crocker Professor of Law at the University of Southern California’s Gould School of Law and author of “Negrophobia and Reasonable Racism: The Hidden Costs of Being Black in America" (NYU Press)
Actors, artists react to casting white actor as Martin Luther King, Jr.
The playwright of "The Mountaintop," a play about Martin Luther King Jr. immediately preceding his assassination, is incensed that a Kent University amateur director intentionally included a white actor in the role of King.
Writing in the Root.com, Katori Hall who's African American, explains, "Black writers dedicated to using black bodies, who remain at the center of a devalued narrative, are committing a revolutionary act. We are using theater to demand a witnessing."
Hall reached out to the student director, Michael Oatman who's African American, who told her "I wanted to see if a white actor, or a light-skinned actor, had the same cultural buy-in and could portray Dr. King.”
How does this scenario fit in with "non-traditional casting" - a movement created for inclusion of performers of color?
Guest:
Joanna Merlin, Actor and Co-founder of The Alliance for Inclusion in the Arts (formerly the Non-Traditional Casting project created in 1986); Merlin also teaches in the graduate acting program of New York University; Her past roles include “The Good Wife,” “Law & Order,” “The Killing Fields,” “The Ten Commandments,” and more