By Jim Leach –
Jim Leach began his law enforcement career in 1975, and as a Criminal Justice Consultant for Golden Media Group, he shares his insights. He is a former Special Agent with the Tennessee Bureau of Investigation.
There is something I have learned over many years of following high – profile crime stories through the media.
The first story will be inaccurate in many areas. The second release is going to be better, and usually, by the third time they the tale is told, it will be close to right!
Two recent cases, the Brown University tragedy and the murder of Charlie Kirk, illustrate the point. In the Brown case, police announced they had a suspect in custody, only to release him a short time later. A quick arrest was indicated in Kirk’s murder and officials left Washington and flew to Utah to assist with the press conference. Only to stand of to the side and letting others speak to the press. Once again, after a short investigation, the suspect was released from custody.
Does this mean that the police are trying to deceive us, or that they are incompetent?
It means neither.
A criminal investigation, especially at the beginning, is a dynamic process. An unexpected piece of evidence may surface, or a witness can give a statement that changes the investigative theory of the case. Maybe the person, who appears to be a prime suspect, comes up with an air-tight alibi. These are normal occurrences and instead of showing incompetence, it indicates the opposite. The police are doing a thorough investigation, not succumbing to confirmation bias.
We (police) didn’t have this problem years ago, because we didn’t talk to the media. As we became better educated, it was discovered that it was in everybody’s best interest for law enforcement and the media to work together.
I think everybody wins when police and the public understand each other better, but I fear the emphasis has shifted too much toward police transparency.
Society should not lose sight of the proposal that the police are in place to keep the peace. Often to solve a case, prevent evidence from being destroyed, or conduct an operation effectively, certain facts must be kept on a need-to-know basis.
