TheAgitator.com
Pulitzer Blogging
Tuesday, April 13th, 2010Seems to me the most regrettable Pulitzer Prize winner this year is the New York Times blatantly prize-baiting series on distracted driving. The one-sided series practically begged for the legislation the paper could later claim credit for inspiring, but never really explained why if the increase in distracted driving is spilling blood all over America’s highways, America’s highways are safer than they’ve been since the 1950s. Nor did the series adequately explain the merit of targeted distracted driving laws that can’t really be enforced, and probably won’t make the roads much safer.
But I do want to point out two of this year’s Pulitzer winners that I think are particularly deserving.
The first is the “Tainted Justice” series, which won an investigative reporting prize for Philadelphia Daily News reporters Barbra Laker and Wendy Ruderman. The series, which I’ve blogged about numerous times, exposed a rogue, corrupt narcotics unit led by Philadelphia police officer Jeffery Cujdik that was raiding and stealing from immigrant-owned bodegas across the city. Further investigation found the unit encouraging snitches to lie, accusations of sexual assault, and patterned lying on police reports. They also found systematic failures within the department that allowed Cujdik and his fellow officers to thrive—and that still hasn’t held them sufficiently accountable. Raker and Ruderman received anonymous threats and were personally attacked by the Philadelphia police unions for their investigation.
The second is Gene Weingarten’s wrenching Washington Post Magazine feature on parents who killed their own children by inadvertently leaving them in the backseat of the car. The story is more evidence that Weingarten writes better than any journalist alive. It’s one of the most moving features I’ve ever read. The piece also mentions Commonwealth’s Attorney Earle Mobley. I do a lot of writing about bad prosecutors, so it’s worth sending some praise to Mobley, a particularly honest and thoughtful DA. Here’s an excerpt from Weingarten’s article, in which Mobley explains why he didn’t charge a father who caused his own son’s death by inadvertently leaving him in a hot car:
As tragic as the child’s death was, Mobley says, a police investigation showed that there was no crime because there was no intent; Culpepper wasn’t callously gambling with the child’s life — he had forgotten the child was there.
“The easy thing in a case like this is to dump it on a jury, but that is not the right thing to do,” Mobley says. A prosecutor’s responsibility, he says, is to achieve justice, not to settle some sort of score.
“I’m not pretty sure I made the right decision,” he says. “I’m positive I made the right decision.”
There may be no clear right or wrong in deciding how to handle cases such as these; in each case, a public servant is trying to do his best with a Solomonic dilemma. But public servants are also human beings, and they will inevitably bring to their judgment the full weight of that complicated fact.
“You know, it’s interesting we’re talking today,” Mobley says.
He has five children. Today, he says, is the birthday of his sixth.
“She died of leukemia in 1993. She was almost 3.”
Mobley pauses. He doesn’t want to create the wrong impression.
He made the decision on the law, he says, “but I also have some idea what it feels like, what it does to you, when you lose a child.”
Those of you who followed the Ryan Frederick case might remember that Mobley is the prosecutor who, in mid-trial, spoke up to say that a jailhouse snitch Frederick prosecutor Paul Ebert put on the stand was notoriously unreliable. It was a pretty extraordinary and admirable thing for Mobley to do.
“As tragic as the child’s death was, Mobley says, a police investigation showed that there was no crime because there was no intent…”
Amazing that there are still prosecutors who understand and hold true to one of the most basic tenets of justice. Sadly, there are far too many ways to unintentionally commit “crimes” today.
What, no love for the National Enquirer? :)
Seconded on Mobley, that exercise of discretion when easy press play is available is unicorn-rare in DAs today.
We need to clone Mobley.
I read the Gene Weingarten piece when you first linked to it. I almost wished I hadn’t. It gave me mental images I wish I could delete. As a mom of small children it almost ripped my heart out. But I now double check that the car seats are empty before leaving my car to the point that it’s almost obsessive-compulsive.
[...] Edited to add 2: Weingarten’s post-win chat session on the WP website. Radley Balko approves. [...]
Yeah, Weingarten’s piece is absolutely phenomenal. I read it the other day when the Pulitzers were announced and it is easily one of the most difficult things I’ve ever read. I had to struggle to get through it.
Anyone that can read that article without crying (or at least struggling not to cry) isn’t human.
“A prosecutor’s responsibility, he says, is to achieve justice, not to settle some sort of score.”
How the hell did someone who actually has some sense of justice and empathy end up as a prosecutor?
Sorry for the thread jack, but out of Prince George:
http://www.cnn.com/2010/CRIME/04/13/maryland.police.beating/index.html?hpt=T1
Too bad Mobley felt the only way justice could be served was by not putting the case before a jury. A jury could certainly come to the same conclusion under a system of jurisprudence which permits juries to find law as well as fact. As it is, the only means by which a jury may judge the appropriate application of law is via the unsanctioned and personally risky act of jury nullification.
I think that manditory passenger side air bags lead to this kind of death. When the kid has to be put in a child seat in the back seat he is “out of sight, out of mind.” Kids fall asleep riding in cars and are easy to forget about. It would be much harder if the kid were in the front passenger seat. An off switch for the air bag would help.
Some cars have automatic shutoffs. It helps ,but they aren’t widely known about.
Sad stories, and it truly can happen to anyone. What wasn’t discussed is WHY people have so much going on in their lives that it allows for things like this to be a more likely outcome. I believe our society, employers, culture, etc. demand more done with the same amount of time, be more efficient, blah blah blah and it leads to being overworked, stressed, lowered productivity and quality of work due to being stretched over more tasks — everyone and everything suffers. It’s like bread dough that is being stretched, and it will eventually break for some people through no fault on their part.
America’s highways are safer than they’ve been since the 1950s
Are there fewer accidents per capita or fewer injuries?
If it’s fewer accidents, one can argue in favor of speed limits.
If it’s fewer injuries or fatalities, one could argue in favor of federal auto safety standards.
Robin Hanson has an interesting take on police corruption.
It occurred to me that it might be a good idea to put some sort of big item (like a “Koosh” ball or a doll) on your key ring with one of those “quick connect” key ring thingys (http://countycomm.com/swisskey.html) that would keep you from being able to put your keys in your purse or pocket if it’s attached. Get two of the key rings and put one of the connector bits on your keys and one on your child’s car seat in such a way that the car seat cannot be closed with the big ball or doll attached, you MUST remove the ball and put it on your key ring. ANY TIME YOUR CHILD IS IN THE CAR SEAT, THE BALL IS ON YOUR KEY RING. When you remove your child from the seat, the ball goes back on the car seat or you won’t be able to put your keys in your purse or pocket. the ball would never leave the car, and would only be on your keys when you’re driving.
Basically:
Kid in car seat=big ball on your key ring
Not foolproof; but it would take seconds, and your car keys are handy already, right?