On Point Vincent Carroll, editor of the editorial pages, writes his On Point column most weekdays. He is also an author and freelance writer. Reach Vincent Carroll at carrollv@RockyMountainNews.com.

• Blog front page
• Add this blog to your RSS reader

They say cops develop a dark view of human nature given all the predators, creeps and failures they encounter.

But maybe some attorneys develop a similar affliction: They spend so much time around people portraying themselves as victims of injustice that they begin to doubt that anyone is treated fairly in the normal course of events.

Take David Lane, an attorney best known for his defense of Ward Churchill but who has championed real civil liberties cases, too.

In a recent rebuttal of a Rocky editorial that opposed sealing the records of arrests that fail to result in convictions, as well as old convictions of certain crimes, Lane declared that he’d “represented countless individuals who were wrongfully arrested . . . The average employer or landlord rarely bothers to distinguish between an arrest and a conviction. These people simply don’t hire or rent to someone who has a ‘record’ as opposed to someone who is ‘clean.’ ”

Meanwhile, in USA Today, the co-chairs of the American Bar Association’s Commission on Effective Criminal Sanctions argued that “the unfair use of convictions to limit opportunities needs to be controlled in a genuinely effective way.”

By sealing certain criminal records, you see.

As successful lawyers, these three individuals have probably done a bit of hiring in their day. Would they have disqualified someone solely because of, say, a pot conviction from long ago, or an arrest for disturbing the peace with no conviction?

Very unlikely.

So why do they assume that their ability to discount such blemishes is rare? Are activist attorneys really that much more virtuous than the average landlord or employer?

If they gave their fellow Americans any credit, they’d recognize that many of us bring to bear a judgment no less nuanced than their own.

If we reject an applicant with an arrest record but no convictions, or with a minor conviction from years ago, maybe it’s for complex reasons that have to do with other aspects of the person’s résumé or demeanor, too.

Meanwhile, what should we make of Lane’s contention that “if the government can’t come up with a conviction, there is no justification whatsoever for an innocent citizen to have his or her name smeared with the baggage that a mere arrest carries. The Rocky is completely off-base in arguing that somehow it is in the public’s interest to pillory innocent people and not automatically have their arrest record sealed . . . .”

Needless to say, this newspaper never advocated pillorying someone for an arrest. But it is astonishing that Lane, having ransacked his busy brain, can’t imagine a single good reason why someone might reasonably argue on behalf of open records.

Police are, after all, public employees engaged in activity that radically affects personal liberty. Surely those of us curious about how officers exercise that power — with names, dates and details of arrests — are not merely meddlesome voyeurs.

And as difficult as the following concept might be for Lane to concede, it’s just possible that a record involving several arrests — with or without convictions — might rationally disqualify someone for consideration, say, as the lone cashier in Uncle Joe’s bagel shop.

Now I’ve gone and done it: confirmed Lane’s suspicions that people pay attention to arrest records. And of course they do — if not necessarily in the simple-minded fashion he imagines.

Would this work, too, Mr. Hooper?

You can always count on Ibrahim Hooper, spokesman for the radical Council on American-Islamic Relations.

After a numbskull Catholic bishop in the Netherlands suggested this week that “we all say that from now on we will name God Allah,” Hooper predictably weighed in to endorse this appeasement.

“It reinforces the fact that Muslims, Christians and Jews all worship the same God,” Hooper told FoxNews.com.

They do, do they? Well, if that’s the case, then here’s an idea: Why doesn’t Hooper start referring to Allah as Jesus?

Vincent Carroll is editor of the editorial pages. Reach him at carrollv@RockyMountainNews.com.

READER COMMENTS

Lane's right of free expression does not obligate the rest of us to take him seriously.

You know the good arguments against your position, Mr. Carroll; discuss them, if you want to talk about the subject.

Hooper is a cancer on our society. Easily one of the most disingenuous people operating in D.C. since Prince Bandar left our shores.

Interesting.

Someone posted a comment that included a court case # from the Denver County Court and that comment quickly dissapeared. I saw it and checked and it appears to have been a real case number.

Sounds like someone is enthused about open records as long as they are someone elses records...

Our justice system holds that we are innocent until proven guilty. By allowing citizens access to arrest records where no crime was proven we allow society to punish the innocent. Anti-American, but fully fitting Vince and the Rocky editorial page's fascist leanings.

And as a fully fledged jesus freak, VC should no that JC is god the son, and allah is god the father.

Looks like Vince can dish out his bigotry but can't take it when it comes back to bite him on the backside:

Case Number: 86C265382
Last Name: CARROLL
First Name: VINCENT
DOB: 01/10/1952

Reap what ye sow, hypocrite !

Case Number Last Name First Name DOB

A296917 TEMPLE JOHN 04/12/1953
B092599 TEMPLE JOHN 04/12/1953

06GS802813 TEMPLE JOHN B 10/01/1987

Nice that Karma Kop is too chickens**t to post what those arrests were for (assuming of course that he didn't just make the information up - were they just traffic tickets that these guys had to appear for?) - and that he couldn't be bothered to put a date on the alleged case against Mr. Carroll.

Meanwhile, between being drafted in 2005 & July 2007, Pacman Jones has been arrested 5 times and questioned by police 11 times and the NFL saw fit to suspend him for a year despite not a single conviction (some cases have yet to go to court - interestingly enough, TNA is willing to take advantage of his bad boy image). Meanwhile, under federal investigation, Michael Vick was only banned from camp (now that he has plea bargained, will the NFL has the guts to suspend him too?). Do you think a non-sports employer might be right to be concerned about hiring either of them?

I think we need to look at expunging or sealing records on a case by case basis - and need to remember that lack of a conviction can be because the case was dropped due to a technicality (for instance the case of the gang banger whose main witness was murdered may be dropped because now there is no witness), the case may be pled down to a lesser offense, or the jury believed there was enough reasonable doubt not to convict (remember OJ - criminal case not guilty, whle in civil case, guilty). That doesn't mean these folks are innocent - it may just mean they have really good lawyers, the cops dropped the ball - or witnesses were intimidated or murdered. On the other hand, when folks are being released today based on new DNA findings - their records should clearly be sealed. Unfortunately, when something is case by case, it tends to fall thru the cracks - but that still doesn't mean that a 'blanket decision' is the right thing to do.

Mary Mary quite contrary:

Could you be any more clueless or off-point?

If you had half a brain you'd look up what those cases were for, online in less than 3 seconds. If you had any clue what you're babbling about you'd know that the dates are incorporated into the case number for Vincent and John B,

Regarding your whine about inane sports icons -- who cares?

And your final example of your abject ignorance on the subject is illustrated in your last paragraph.

1) Sealing in Colorado *is* done on a case by case basis. The DA, the Judge and the Defendant are all entitled to hearings, and the Judge must find that the ex-defendant's right to privacy outweighs the public's right to know.

2) The US Constitution, the Bill of Rights and Due Process are *not* "technicalities". If you don't agree with that, then move to Iraq or Afghanistan where they have New & Improved Democracies freshly excreted by the USA.

3) In a court of law, the defendant/accused *is* innocent, until proven guilty beyond a reasonable doubt. Now pay close attention because a clueless nitwit like you might miss this fact -- if they are found Not Guilty
or othewise acquitted, then they are still "innocent" in the eyes of the law.

So once again, if you don't enjoy or support the US system of justice as based upon the Constitution and Due Process, pack up your bags and move to some 3rd world kingdom and sleep your way to the throne.

Any questions?

Why do liberals always resort to faceless, personal attacks and insults? Must be their left-wing upbringing.

Why do rightards always resort to calling anyone who isn't as ignorant and vapid as they are "liberals" ?

Must be genetic inbreeding.

Zorander wrote "Why do liberals always resort to faceless, personal attacks and insults? Must be their left-wing upbringing."

Because liberals are Godless beings and are left only with the religion of politics. It is to this false idol that they bow. And they will reap what they sow.

Quote: "Why do rightards always resort to calling anyone who isn't as ignorant and vapid as they are "liberals" ?"

See what I mean?

Yes, society is well aware of the psycho-emotional defects of rightards.

zhgju lapydjbq iqpadk jgiwtsu qsixyena rhipyxu wsugz

POST A COMMENT

• Carroll: Slippery holiday slope
• Carroll: Parental gall
• Carroll: Clearing the air
• Carroll: Blather about business
• Carroll: The 'Truthers' cult
• Carroll: Numbers game
• Carroll: Brownouts by design
• Carroll: Poor judgment