Tag Archives: law enforcement


Citizens Demand More Use Of Digital And Social Media By Police – Infographic

Do you Like Bones on Facebook? Do you live-tweet Dexter every week? Turns out, social media users want to be involved with the real-life fight against crime, as well.

Approximately 92% of citizens from across six countries want to support their police force, according to a June 2012 survey by Accenture.

Of the 1,300 participants, 88% percent believe they have an important role in preventing crime, but only 16% feel well-informed.

The survey, which spanned Canada, the U.S., the UK, the Netherlands, Germany and Spain, highlights the relationship between social media, police and citizenry. You’ll find its results in the infographic.

Source: Mashable.com, Accenture

What the “DSK” case can teach us for the future

The dramatic turn in the DSK case has shocked a lot of people over the past couple of days. When we think back to the time when things happened back in May and how the mercy-less media, police and prosecution blew up the case, we need to wonder about the things we do in our justice-system and even if there are a few things we must change.

First, let’s take a look at everyone’s motivation in this case. The media needs “material” to make money. A prominent figure such as DSK is a much welcomed subject to jump on, especially in a “rape case”. The case was stretched with all kind of nonsense in order to stretch air hours and advertising money. Whether the reporting was in any way true or had to do with the case or not was absolutely not important. In order to make money, it seems everything is allowed.

The humiliating procedures of law enforcement with putting DSK in handcuffs and really present him to the media, rather than protect him from them, is also clearly influencing public opinion. Here are a lot of questions that should be asked. Of course law enforcement needs to show successes and “trophies” in order to measure and justify their existence. Presenting a “high caliber” guy as DSK in handcuffs in front of the press certainly does the trick. Guilty or not seems not to be their problem, nor is the fact that they influence public opinion with their actions.

Statements of the DA’s office about the strong case and the victims credibility, without having done any research, back in May also fueled and influenced public opinion against DSK. Don’t we learn we are innocent until proven guilty? What’s the motivation of the DA? He needs to show results. The question is not how many times did you find out the truth, the question is how many people did you put to jail? Facts, and most important, the truth, are only playing second fiddle. 

Looking at the case from the beginning, facts or evidence are rather short listed. DNA was found and showed there was sexual activity going on. Does it clearly say anything else? Other than that,the case is “she says/he says”, and that’s it.

Based on all this, DSK was put in jail, had to post $6 million in bail and was put under house arrest on his own expense, which is estimated at $250,000 a month. He lost his job and his career as a politician might be ruined.

Some might say, well, he is not poor and he will survive all this and still be in politics. That might be right. However, how would it be with the plumber, teacher or anyone else from next door that is accused of the same with just the same evidence? Would the DA even do the same research?

Since the case took such a turn, we now see much of the same procedures on the other side. The woman’s credibility is suffering. Does that really help in finding the truth? With a few spots in her history she can’t be a victim of a rapist anymore? The mess the media, law enforcement and DA have created in this case is incredible. The worst of all, this happened before and it can happen again, any day, to anyone.

Media, law enforcement and DA’s need to make changes in their procedures and treating cases without special treatment and provide fair chances to find out the truth, for both, the victim and the accused. For us, watching the cases based on the (bad) information we are fed, we need to understand that the motivations of these organizations are not always “in the name of the people”.