Told to share some evidence, Crime Stopper Chief, eats it in court

[cali]

The executive director of Miami-Dade Crime Stoppers is facing up to two weeks in jail on a contempt of court charge for stuffing an anonymous tip in his mouth instead of handing it over to a judge Friday.

Richard Masten was appearing before Judge Victoria Brennan when he refused to share information related to a tip in a cocaine possession case. Instead, he ate the paper containing the tip while sitting in court.

We promise the people who give us information to solve murders, serious violent crimes in this community, that they can call with an assurance that they will remain anonymous and that nothing about them or their information would ever be compromised," he said. "The case today started creeping into that... it’s not going to happen on my watch and I understood the consequences."

Brennan was ordered to share the tip with the judge after an attorney for a woman charged with cocaine possession asked to see the information it contained. The attorney said his request had nothing to do with identifying the person behind the tip.

"In this case, there’s absolutely no information that I am looking for that has to do with the name or the identity of a tipster," Jean-Michel D’Escoubet said. "It's only the evidence that would be used in trial against her that the tip provided."

<snip>

http://www.nbcnews.com/news/weird-news/crime-stoppers-chief-eats-evidence-n53376

[exboyfil]

1. Kind of like Lincoln jumping out of a window

to avoid a quorum vote.

[stevenleser]

2. Can't help but admire Masten a little here.

Last edited Sat Mar 15, 2014, 12:02 PM - Edit history (1)

He promised anonymity and is going to jail to preserve it.

[dballance]

3. I have to disagree for two reasons

First, the defendant's lawyer and judge DID NOT ask for the identity of the tipster. So he was not asked compromise the identity of the person who supplied the tip.

Second, in this country you have a right to face your accuser in open court. The credibility of the accuser and the veracity of their claims against you are part of the process which needs to be weighed by the judge or jury. The content of the tip, and in my opinion, the identity of the tipster both are important to assessing a defendant's case.

[dsc]

4. they may not have directly asked for the name

but the contents may well have led to the name.

[cali]

6. so the judge should have been able to see the message without the identity

there's a risk to everything.

[dballance]

10. Frankly, I think that's okay. The judge deserves to be able to see the evidence.

This isn't the NSA sweeping up broad loads of metadata which, seems innocuous since it doesn't have content, but really isn't because the metadata easily leads to personal information. The NSA is doing that without a warrant and on just anyone.

This is a very specific, very narrow use of appropriate judicial powers to see the tip. In this country one is not allowed to fling to crap at others anonymously and get those people convicted of crimes without revealing oneself in open court and facing the one at whom one has flung the crap. Remember here, we are talking about depriving a person of their liberty and possibly jailing them for years or life if convicted.

The judge deserves to be able to see the evidence to consider its veracity, and to decide whether or not it is meaningful to the defense. Even if it reveals the identity to the judge it does not mean the identity has been compromised publicly. The judge can easily seal that information.

[dsc]

11. I tend to agree that the judge so get to see both

but I think we should be honest when we say what the risk actually is.

[Nuclear Unicorn]

12. I understand your points and I admit they are legitimate.

But to hand-over the tip would tell all future, potential tip-providers that their anonymity is subject to the demands of the court. No matter the practical extent of the judge's actions in this case the negative impact on the program would be permanent and unmistakable.

Just as a curiosity, hasn't the issue of anonymous tips -- considering how long the practice has been employed -- already been resolved through legal challenges? I ask that from a point of honest ignorance.

[dballance]

13. Thank you thoughtful for a comment in response to my post

I always appreciate thoughtful comments like yours. I have to agree that the matter does cause me some difficulty too. By it's strange nature we do need to try to provide anonymity to people where practical, but at the same time, the accused does need to have a fair day in court.

As to the answer for the question - I don't know. I will have to Google and see what the courts of said about the anonymity thing. That's a good question.

[cali]

5. did you actually read the article? Anonymity was NOT threatened.

Maybe he ate it to hide tainted evidence or something.


but maybe you have a deep and abiding trust in all things police.

[stevenleser]

7. You mistake Masten for police and ask me if >I< read the article?

[cali]

9. Yes. I do.Yes, I read the article

Yes, I thought Crime Stoppers was a police program. No where does that article say it's not.

[randome]

8. Send in the nanobots!

[hr][font color="blue"][center]Don't ever underestimate the long-term effects of a good night's sleep.[/center][/font][hr]