Marsy's Law

Marsy's Law Is a Gift to Bad Cops

In South Dakota, officers can claim their names shouldn't be released to the public after shooting someone.

|

Mathayward/Dreamstime.com

On September 16, 2018, a South Dakota Highway Patrol trooper spotted 21-year-old Kuong Gatluak speeding down I-29. After a 4-mile pursuit at high speeds, the trooper pulled over Gatluak, who got out of his car despite the trooper's orders to remain in the car, and attacked the trooper. During the melee, the trooper felt Gatluak going for her gun, so she fired two shots at Gatluak, hitting him in the left shoulder and bicep.

What the officer did next, however, is part of a worrisome trend. She invoked Marsy's Law, a 2016 constitutional amendment passed by the state's voters that protects victims' rights, which has also been passed in at least 10 other states. "Due to officer safety and the subject being out on bond, and that the trooper has invoked the privacy provisions of Marsy's Law, the Attorney General's Office will not be releasing the name," a spokesperson wrote to the Rapid City Journal.

In late November 2018, another South Dakota police officer did the same thing after shooting and killing a suspect during a chase and shootout. "The deputy is invoking his protections under Marsy's Law," the Pennington County Sheriff's Office spokesperson told the Rapid City Journal. "The new constitutional amendment affords him protections as it does any victim of crime."

In neighboring North Dakota, a July 2018 investigation by the Grand Forks Herald discovered that at least eight officers had claimed the privacy protections of Marsy's Law since the state's voters approved the ballot initiative in November 2016.

Officers claiming they have a victim's right to privacy after shooting someone is another unintended consequence of Marsy's Law and its campaign, Marsy's Law for All—founded and backed by billionaire Henry Nicholas—which seeks to enshrine victims' rights protections in every state constitution and the U.S. Constitution.

The recent occurrences of officers availing themselves of Marsy's Law have civil libertarians and policing experts concerned. (For a fuller discussion of how Marsy's Law threatens due process and the presumption of innocence, see my article in the April issue of Reason magazine.)

Jonathan Blanks, a research associate specializing in criminal justice, race, and policing at the Cato Institute, calls victims' rights for cops "absurd" and says it will only bolster the secrecy of police officers and their police departments and unions, who often try to hide the inner workings of policing from the public, "particularly when its controversial or potentially illegal." Blanks notes that police officers wear their names on their uniform and act in the name of the public in public. "That information, by nature, must be public," said Blanks.

David Bordewyk, general manager of the South Dakota Newspaper Association, couldn't agree more. "You have law enforcement officers able to use Marsy's Law to shield their identities in the line of duty, doing the public's work," he told Reason. "It's something that none of us ever contemplated when Marsy's Law was enacted in South Dakota. It obviously flies in the face of good open transparent government at all levels in our state."

The state's former attorney general, Marty Jackley, told the Rapid City Journal that his office "took a look at the constitutional amendment" and that "it doesn't have an exception for any category," including cops. Reason reached out to South Dakota's new attorney general, Jason Ravnsborg, to see if his office has the same interpretation of Marsy's Law as his predecessor, but the office did not respond to requests for comment. The secretary Reason contacted even refused to give out the public information officer's name because it would have violated office rules.

Police officers, of course, can be legitimate victims of crime. For instance, it would be impossible to argue that New York City police officer Miosotis Familia wasn't a victim when a gunman walked up to her vehicle in the early morning hours of July 5, 2017, and fired one fatal shot through the mobile command vehicle window she was sitting in.

But according to Blanks, giving police officers the right to invoke privacy protections in use-of-force incidents could have grave effects on community trust. First off, officers with histories of abuse or alleged abuse complaints will be able to hide their identities from public scrutiny—including from prosecutors and defense attorneys—and continue to abuse their authority. This leads to another problem for police departments, says Blanks. Abusive officers, who generally are a very small minority, receive protection while the reputations of the majority of their good officers are tarred and feathered.

"When you're protecting the worst officers," Blanks said, "all of the officers get smeared."

Both the International Chiefs of Police and the Police Executive Research Forum, which advocate for police best practices, ignored repeated requests for comment on how police officers invoking Marsy's Law might protect bad actors and erode community trust.

The Marsy's Law for All campaign, however, continues to roll on with its ill-advised mission to enshrine victims' rights in every state constitution. Though every legislature should defeat the initiative because of the model legislation's vague language that undermines defendants' rights, any legislature that goes forward with it should at the bare minimum amend the language to exclude police officers from its protections.

The notion that a sworn officer who is a member of an organization that releases mugshots of people who are presumed innocent can hide his identity when he uses violence in the public's name left Blanks incredulous.

"No, no," he said, "that's not how it should work."

NEXT: ICE Is Releasing a Staggering Number of Migrants Into Some U.S. Cities

Editor's Note: We invite comments and request that they be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of Reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment for any reason at any time. Report abuses.

  1. The whole notion that victim-hood can be established reliably prior to a trial and conviction of a victimizer is obscene.

    1. I just started 6 weeks ago and I’ve gotten 2 check for a total of $2,200…this is the best decision I made in a long time! “Thank you for giving me this extraordinary opportunity to make extra money from home. This extra cash has changed my life in so many ways, thank you!”
      Click here >>>>>>>>>> http://www.Theprocoin.com

    2. I am creating an honest wage from home 3000 Dollars/week , that is wonderful, below a year agone i used to be unemployed during a atrocious economy. I convey God on a daily basis i used to be endowed these directions and currently it’s my duty to pay it forward and share it with everybody, Here is I started??.

      >>>>Click THIS WEBSITE>>>> http://www.payshd.com

  2. Police officers wear their names on their uniform and act in the name of the public in public. By nature, their names should also be public after a shooting.

    “Officer THX 1138 has been placed on administrative leave.”

    1. Won’t be long before they take a cue from the IRS and use fake names.

  3. Marsy’s Law brings us one step closer to secret criminal proceedings even if we don’t apply it to cops.

    1. I was thinking that this will come in handy when the cops start raiding gunowners’ homes. I know I’m becoming paranoid – maybe cause my worst suspicions are constantly proven correct.

      1. By all standards, that would be unlawful.
        First, the prime duty of gov’t is to protect and secure the lives and property of the citizens.
        Second, all public laws are just that – public. Your house (home) is not public and therefore not subject to public statutes. What you do on your property or possess on your property is without the jurisdiction of public officials although some grave public safety situations may be exempt.

        1. What you do on your property or possess on your property is without the jurisdiction of public officials

          So cannabis is legal in your country?

  4. Victims have the same rights as everyone else. What laws like this call for are privileges for victims which conflicts with the public’s right to know what the police and courts are up to and with the rights of the accused.

  5. The Law of Unintended Consequences has a corollary – “But that wasn’t what we meant!”

    1. Too bad, because that is what you said/did.

      Just for you: The World’s Saddest Song Played on the World’s Smallest Violin

  6. Crime is going down and we need to acknowledge that. Most police misconduct is due to over-policing. The solutions are to reduce funding for law enforcement, and to reduce red tape, most of which doesn’t make us safer. Other reforms aren’t necessary or helpful.

    1. Prohibit the government from initiating force.

      1. Savage! Terrorist! Child-hater!

  7. David Bordewyk … told Reason. “It’s something that none of us ever contemplated when Marsy’s Law was enacted in South Dakota.”

    David Bordewyk is an ignorant twat.

    The notion that a sworn officer who is a member of an organization that releases mugshots of people who are presumed innocent can hide his identity when he uses violence in the public’s name left Blanks incredulous.
    “No, no,” he said, “that’s not how it should work.”

    How come the rest of us, excepting Dajjal, knew this would happen when we first heard about the law?

  8. My neighbor’s mother makes $64 hourly on the laptop. She has been out of work for five months but last month her payment was $15080 just working on the laptop for a few hours.

    Go to this web site and read more. ?????? http://www.AproCoin.com

    1. Sounds rather uncomfortable.

  9. A small minority of cops being bad is a fallacy of logic….by definition, what the police do is immoral. That ‘Blue Code of Silence’ means guilt by association, every department in America has at least one ‘problem’ cop; that means that every cop is aware of abuse by one or more colleagues. When that standard is applied to civilians, it would be a felony.

    Not to mention, if your job involves kidnapping and ransoming individuals who are assumed to be innocent until proven guilty then you are culpable in the overall declibe of American values. Even an arrest record can and will ruin a person’s life, and since there is never a penalty for police who do wrong…..nothing short of the complete abolition of any and all ‘rights’ of police will be satisfactory for me….public servants should be considered less than human, in a sane world.

    1. If only there was an amendment to the Constitution that addressed tyranny…

  10. Police are victims now? News articles are going to be hard to read.

    “Victims responded to a 911 call from the 1100 block of Elm Avenue, where they found four victims of an armed robbery, and also fatally shot a bystander who it turned out was unarmed. Hospital officials told victim officials that the victims are in serious but stable condition. The victims union defended the victims actions, saying that the victim had a criminal record and had not responded to the victims’ orders.”

  11. Abusive officers, who generally are a very small minority…

    You clearly have limited experience with actual LEOs.

    1. I was thinking the same thing. It’s almost like it’s mandatory in the media that any criticism of police be predicated with “most cops are good.” Even though anyone who has actually met police knows better.

  12. This is why I like Reason, allot of times the details that are hardly talked about in other outlets are the very important details

  13. When you protect bad officers, all officers get smeared. Well, since it’s the majority of officers who tolerate and protect the bad ones in their ranks in the first place, I think “smearing” is the least of what should happen.

  14. The police are the most dangerous gang in America.
    Never call the police. They will kill your dog, throw a grenade in your child’s crib and possibly kill you.
    Police kill thousands of Americans every year. Police send another 55,000 Americans to the hospital each year.
    Pure evil. Abolish the police.

  15. I would be in favor of the name being withheld until after adjudication, either by the police board or by the courts if it goes to that. Once it hits court all bets are off.

  16. http://paper-writing-service.info
    Buy Cheap high-quality research papers, thesis papers, speeches. Experienced UK Essay Writers Provide Best Quality Essays Here.

Please to post comments

Comments are closed.