NEWS
CLASSIFIEDS
AUTO
HOMES
JOBS
What's Inside:
Hyperlink Legend · E-mail story · Comments · iPod friendly version · Print friendly version

Our Opinion: More than a ticket at stake

Saturday, October 24, 2009

We’re hoping everyone — the police, the defendant, the public at large — picked up on the key point in Thursday’s Municipal Court proceedings.

Judge John Boeh, in fact, was paying attention when defendant Marcell “Big Daddy” Jackson argued the St. Joseph Police Department appears to be targeting him and his neighborhood. As reported, the police issued eight citations for walking in a city street in the year prior to Sept. 15. All eight were in Midtown.

Judge Boeh’s response: “The city needs to evaluate whether they are fairly applying this in the rest of the city. If it’s a violation in Midtown, it should be a violation everywhere else.”

He’s right. The suggestion the stay-out-of-the-street ordinance is unevenly enforced is a big part of why this case captured the public’s attention. In every section of the community, at varying times of the day, people can be found walking in the street.

Some walk near the curb; some choose the street because there are no sidewalks. We presume in every instance, the person involved is prepared to offer an explanation. Many will make sense, a few will not.

Should Mr. Jackson be treated any differently? No. Was he? It’s possible, but this case had specifics many others do not. Mr. Jackson was walking in the middle of street. A sidewalk apparently was available on at least one side of the street. When stopped, he argued with the police officer. Given those additional facts, his explanation that he feared for his safety did not do enough to sway the judge.

As for the focus on Midtown, we know the concept of “community policing” calls for regular interactions with residents to keep officers well informed of activities in the community. If certain kinds of street crimes are more prevalent in an area, more interactions may be in order — though not necessarily more tickets.

The message to the public: Sidewalks exist to promote public safety, particularly where motor vehicles might be present. Walk in the street and you risk injury, and also a ticket.

The message to the police: Appear to single out Midtown and never get around to ticketing someone in another neighborhood, and you risk a breach of trust with the entire community, not just Midtown.

  COMMENT
These comments are a means for our readers to voice their opinion on local issues in and around the St. Joseph area.
The following comments are the sole responsibility of the person posting them. We do not review every post or respond to every suggestion for a comment to be removed.
Before posting, please read the following rules:
  • Comments that threaten someone or degrade them on the basis of gender, race, class, national origin, religion or disability will be removed.
  • Comments containing abusive, vulgar or sexually-oriented language will be removed.
  • Comments that spread rumors or lies will be removed. Please discuss only what has been factually proven.
  • Comments posted in all caps will be removed.
  • Stay on topic! Comments that stray away from the original topic will be deleted.
  • Brief quotes are okay as long as the source is given. Blatant cutting and pasting is not acceptable.
  • Comments must be kept under 250 words or less.
  • Stjoenews.net moderators also reserve the right to remove comments for any reason they deem worthy.
Please read our user agreement
heritage_sarahhochschwender October 24, 2009 at 9:42 a.m. (Suggest removal)

there was NO continuous sidewalk along the route which big daddy took to his smoker. the officer who stated this in court was not being truthful. when big daddy stated that the officer was misrepresenting the issues , that was the Truth.

this is not racism. i know a young mother who lives a block or two north in the same street. she is white, but was also rousted. i see children playing in that quiet street often. this is lousy community police work and it is weed, NOT seed. this is targeting people who appear to be suspicious to the law simply because of where they live. i don't know what is worse, racism, or believing that poverty is somehow criminal.

i have property i maintain on bonton. about a month ago , for fully an hour i watched two officers stand talking to each other at corner at union and bonton . when i wandered over to ask if there was anything i should be aware of, i got a less than friendly initial response. one of the officers "warmed up" but the other one stood there with his arms crossed over his rather surly chest, glowering.

Good Community Policing would dictate that if the officers were sent there to show a "police presence" their time could have been much better spent by locking their cars and walking up the one block and chatting with the residents. Good Community Policing would mean that the officers should make themselves more familiar with the faces on the street. Good Community Policing would mean that on a bright sunny day with most of the residents sitting on their front porches an officer would stop , make small talk, engage the children, and show the community that the POLICE ARE NOT THE ENEMY. standing at the end of a street for an hour and being nothing but an intimidating presence is just plain useless.

Recommend:
+ 2
- 0
apmastrangelo October 24, 2009 at 10:37 a.m. (Suggest removal)

Np - Fair conclusions for thought at the end of the article.

heritage also raises a valid issue for thought. As the owner of commercial property the routine presence or patrol of officers is always welcomed. Still, it is concerning when a wave or other greeting does not receive a response nearly a quarter of the time; especially when this action is taken to acknowledge their efforts in serving the community.

Recommend:
+ 1
- 0
Requires free stjoenews.net registration.

Username:
Password: (Forgotten your password?)

Comment: