Res Ipsa wrote:She should be charged with filing a false police report. If she lied under oath, she should be charged with perjury. Is this supposed to be a hard question?
I agree completely with this, Res. But I also think it's worth discussing how Ajax chose to frame the question in the OP because it gets at a bigger problem, in my opinion. Ajax approaches the question from the view point of a lynch mob, asking what kind of punishment she should face in order for justice to be served. I think you and I share the view that this is the domain of the justice system and for very good reasons. A society where justice is determined by popular opinion is not one that is functioning in accord with the principles I believe the founders of the western democratic way of government held as vital to the enterprise.
But we see this idea that the mechanisms of the justice system are broken precisely because people aren't being punished in ways various groups believe they should be across the political spectrum. And it is somewhat messy in that we don't have a perfect system in place so injustices do happen, and in democracy the response of the public to those injustices is a necessary part of the process. If corruption in the financial system leads to global economic catastrophies, I am certainly going to expect there be some form of investigation with real consequences for those who hurt so many people. And if that doesn't happen, hypothetically of course, I would consider it irresponsible to approach that result with a, "C'est la vie". That said, there is a line between wanting to see the system work better and provide justice for more people in more perfect ways, and judging specifically what justice should look like or assuming the system is completely corrupted because what I would demand didn't happen.
I worry about democracy. I worry not just because of people like Ajax, but also because the system is not perfect and gives imperfect results which probably leave people feeling frustrated. And that makes democracy vulnerable when a Rodrigo Duterte rises up and offers quick, immediate justice regarding issues towards which people have strong feelings. Shooting drug dealers in the streets, harassing people of Latin American heritage, destroying careers of people over allegations of one kind or another, acquiescing to violence as a just response to hate...there's danger in the question Ajax asked beyond the apparent simplicity in the answer that may seem obvious to you or I. And it is concerning.
The world is always full of the sound of waves..but who knows the heart of the sea, a hundred feet down? Who knows it's depth? ~ Eiji Yoshikawa
ajax18 wrote:Hey Canpakes, thanks for chiming in. I'd like to get your opinion on this. Do you think Crystal Mangum should have been charged with filing a false police report? What should her punishment have been?
I absolutely believe that she should have been charged with filing a false police report. I don’t have an opinion on specific punishment other than I don’t believe that it merits jail time in this situation. ; )
ajax18 wrote: ... as a means of revenge after feeling disrespected by ...
I have little to no sympathy or respect for folks who choose their actions based on feeling ’disrespected’.
I absolutely believe that she should have been charged with filing a false police report.
Thanks for responding. Why do you think no charges were filed?
And when the confederates saw Jackson standing fearless as a stone wall the army of Northern Virginia took courage and drove the federal army off their land.
ajax18 wrote:Thanks for responding. Why do you think no charges were filed?
The NC AG stated that no charges would be filed against Magnum because he believed that she may have been ‘mentally unstable’ and actually believing some of the accusations put forth.
I believe that the possibility of penalty in cases of false accusation must be carefully thought through if they are to be applied. I understand the reasoning behind not wanting to penalize someone who could be mentally unstable or handicapped as there is a distinct need to protect those individuals from the unintended consequences of some of their actions. Magnum’s prior history, though, merited some sort of response, in my opinion, regardless of any claim of mental impairment.
I’m pretty sure that you’d categorize me as a ‘liberal’; why do you think that I’m not on board with ‘no penalties’, and why do you believe that anyone to the left of you politically feels that way exclusively for the reason you gave?
The Ellis County DA office made a statement as to why they are not pursuing charges related to the false accusations in the Texas case in the OP.
This office shares the outrage felt by the general public for the blatantly false and malicious allegations made by Sherita Dixon-Cole against the Texas Highway Patrol trooper who arrested her for driving while intoxicated on Sunday, May 20, 2018. However, no criminal charges will be filed against Dixon-Cole for her conduct. We know this decision will frustrate many in the public who have called for criminal charges against Ms. Dixon-Cole as both a punishment to her and as a deterrent to others who may make false and damaging allegations against the peace officers who protect all of us. We share the public’s frustration. In making any decision to charge a crime, this office is bound by the facts and the law. To help the public understand our decision in this matter, we are providing a detailed analysis of the facts and law.
FACTS At approximately 3:53 a.m. on Sunday, May 20, 2018, Sherita Dixon-Cole was being booked into the Ellis County jail when she first made a claim of inappropriate conduct by the Texas Highway Patrol trooper who arrested her. Ms. Dixon made a general claim that the trooper made inappropriate physical contact with her. That claim was made to a detention officer, not to a peace officer. That fact is important in this office’s analysis. In response to the claim, the detention officer advised Ms. Dixon-Cole that she needed to make a complaint with the Texas Department of Public Safety after she was released from jail. The detention officer provided Dixon-Cole with the phone number to call for her complaint.
At a later time, while still in the Ellis County jail, Ms. Dixon-Cole made additional, more detailed false claims about the trooper who arrested her. Those additional statements were also made to a detention officer, not to a peace officer.
After she persisted with her complaint to detention officers, Dixon-Cole was transported to a hospital by Ellis County Sheriff’s Office personnel. After arriving at the hospital, Dixon-Cole refused to be examined or treated.
During her time in the Ellis County jail, Dixon-Cole made several phone calls which were recorded as part of the jail’s routine security measures. Every call that is made by an inmate in the Ellis County jail is preceded by a recorded message that tells the inmate that the call is being recorded and that the call is subject to monitoring. Over the course of several hours, Dixon-Cole made multiple phone calls in which she made shockingly detailed false allegations of criminal conduct against the Texas Highway Patrol trooper who arrested her. Those claims were all made to a private citizen. It is from those phone calls that the false claims against the trooper were made public.
LAW There are two possible criminal charges that this office considered. One is False Report to Peace Officer, Federal Special Investigator, or Law Enforcement Employee (Texas Penal Code § 37.08), a Class B misdemeanor. The other is False Alarm or Report (Texas Penal Code § 42.06), a class A misdemeanor.
False Report to a Peace Officer (Texas Penal Code § 37.08) (a) A person commits an offense if, with intent to deceive, he knowingly makes a false statement that is material to a criminal investigation and makes the statement to: (1) a peace officer or federal special investigator conducting the investigation; or (2) any employee of a law enforcement agency that is authorized by the agency to conduct the investigation and that the actor knows is conducting the investigation. (b) In this section, “law enforcement agency” has the meaning assigned by Article 59.01, Code of Criminal Procedure. (c) An offense under this section is a Class B misdemeanor.
The false report statute requires that a false claim be made to a peace officer conducting an investigation or to an employee of a law enforcement agency that is authorized by the agency to conduct an investigation. Detention officers are clearly employees of a law enforcement agency, the Ellis County Sheriff’s Office. But detention officers are not authorized by the E.C.S.O. to conduct criminal investigations. That fact was supported when the detention officer referred Dixon-Cole to another law enforcement agency for her complaint. For these reasons, statements that Ms. Dixon-Cole made to detention officers at the Ellis County jail do not constitute a false report to a peace officer.
False Alarm or Report (Texas Penal Code 42.06) (a) A person commits an offense if he knowingly initiates, communicates or circulates a report of a present, past, or future bombing, fire, offense, or other emergency that he knows is false or baseless and that would ordinarily: (1) cause action by an official or volunteer agency organized to deal with emergencies; (2) place a person in fear of imminent serious bodily injury; or (3) prevent or interrupt the occupation of a building, room, place of assembly, place to which the public has access, or aircraft, automobile, or other mode of conveyance. (b) An offense under this section is a Class A misdemeanor unless the false report is of an emergency involving a public or private institution of higher education or involving a public primary or secondary school, public communications, public transportation, public water, gas, or power supply or other public service, in which event the offense is a state jail felony.
As detailed above, when Dixon-Cole told her lies about the trooper who arrested her, she clearly made false and baseless allegations of multiple criminal offenses which had allegedly already occurred. Her specific lies about false conduct which occurred only to her would not ordinarily place a person in imminent fear of serious bodily injury; neither would those lies prevent or interrupt the occupation of a building, room, place of assembly, etc.
To compare, a common situation in which this statute is used to charge a crime is the all-too-common scenario in which a threat of future violence against a public building is conveyed to emergency officials.
The question for our analysis of Dixon-Cole’s lies then becomes, “Would her lie about a past false crime in which she was the alleged victim ordinarily cause action by an official who deals with emergencies?” That question requires a review of the definition of “emergency.”
In Texas Penal Code § 38.15(e), “emergency” is defined as follows: a condition or circumstance in which an individual is or is reasonably believed by the person transmitting the communication to be in imminent danger of serious bodily injury or in which property is or is reasonably believed by the person transmitting the communication to be in imminent danger of damage or destruction.
In a nutshell, the lies told by Dixon-Cole related to already-completed conduct against her. Those lies did not create a situation, either real or false, in which there was imminent danger of serious bodily injury or imminent danger of damage or destruction to property.
CONCLUSION There are many wrongs in the world. Not all wrongs are criminal wrongs. This office agrees wholeheartedly with the public sentiment that something should be done to Sherita Dixon-Cole for the malicious lies she told and for the harm she brought to a dedicated peace officer who was just doing his job with grace and dignity. But the law and the facts in this matter do not support the filing of criminal charges. Other possible remedies at law are outside the scope and expertise of this office.
So Ajax, what are your thoughts on not just the conclusions but the analysis in the above statement? Is this an example of the justice system working as intended if the result is not satisfying? Or is this a case of the justice system failing to ensure justice was served within the limits of the law? Or, perhaps, a mix of the two where it is the justice system working as required but justice still needs served to Dixon-Cole by means outside of the law?
The world is always full of the sound of waves..but who knows the heart of the sea, a hundred feet down? Who knows it's depth? ~ Eiji Yoshikawa
ajax18 wrote:Thanks for responding. Why do you think no charges were filed?
The North Carolina AG stated that no charges would be filed against Magnum because he believed that she may have been ‘mentally unstable’ and actually believing some of the accusations put forth.
I believe that the possibility of penalty in cases of false accusation must be carefully thought through if they are to be applied. I understand the reasoning behind not wanting to penalize someone who could be mentally unstable or handicapped as there is a distinct need to protect those individuals from the unintended consequences of some of their actions. Magnum’s prior history, though, merited some sort of response, in my opinion, regardless of any claim of mental impairment.
I’m pretty sure that you’d categorize me as a ‘liberal’; why do you think that I’m not on board with ‘no penalties’, and why do you believe that anyone to the left of you politically feels that way exclusively for the reason you gave?
Should Mangum's mental instability been taken into account before these young men had to spend several million dollars in attorney fees proving their innocence.
And when the confederates saw Jackson standing fearless as a stone wall the army of Northern Virginia took courage and drove the federal army off their land.
Thanks for digging up why Dixon-Cole was not charged, Honor. Given the wording of the applicable laws, I have to agree with the decision not to charge.
I think I have a pretty good feeling for what Ajax is doing here and why. I’m just not sure how much oxygen to give what he does. When you look at the actual problems of bias and injustice in our justice system, Ajax’s cherry-picking strategy becomes pretty apparent.
“The ideal subject of totalitarian rule is not the convinced Nazi or the dedicated communist, but people for whom the distinction between fact and fiction, true and false, no longer exists.”
― Hannah Arendt, The Origins of Totalitarianism, 1951
ajax18 wrote:Should Mangum's mental instability been taken into account before these young men had to spend several million dollars in attorney fees proving their innocence.
It would’ve helped, right? But the initial DA (Nifong) shares much of the blame for how this initially played out.
Is this an example of the justice system working as intended if the result is not satisfying?
It does make more sense given your point that she didn't make this statement to the peace officer. I blame the media bias and people like Al Sharpton that the Duke Lacrosse players were expelled from Duke, had their season cancelled, and the false witness went for the most part unpunished.
If you have the right to make an allegation that can send someone to prison you should bear the responsibility of whether or not what your saying is true.
And when the confederates saw Jackson standing fearless as a stone wall the army of Northern Virginia took courage and drove the federal army off their land.
Is this an example of the justice system working as intended if the result is not satisfying?
It does make more sense given your point that she didn't make this statement to the peace officer. I blame the media bias and people like Al Sharpton that the Duke Lacrosse players were expelled from Duke, had their season cancelled, and the false witness went for the most part unpunished.
If you have the right to make an allegation that can send someone to prison you should bear the responsibility of whether or not what your saying is true.
There's a bigger point, here, Ajax. That being whether or not you and others believe in the necessity and efficacy of a functioning justice system while recognizing that it isn't going to be perfect. If a person believes in the necessity of an impartial justice system that serves to uphold the law and render justice, that person will direct their issues with outcomes they feel are unjust at trying to improve the system through democratic means. I'd like to know you get that.
The world is always full of the sound of waves..but who knows the heart of the sea, a hundred feet down? Who knows it's depth? ~ Eiji Yoshikawa