"arrest" vs. "charge"

Wed Apr 4 01:17:41 UTC 2012

I don't believe there is a mug shot, at least not from this case.

The famous picture is said to be "old." A new photo shows a more relaxed
and personable-looking individual.

BTW, the original photos of Martin, from his family's lawyer, were taken
when he was 14 or 15.  Recent photos show that he was a big guy for a
17-year-old. None of that, of course, is relevant to the case, only to
the emotions surrounding it.

JL

On Tue, Apr 3, 2012 at 8:32 PM, Victor Steinbok <aardvark66 at gmail.com>wrote:

> ---------------------- Information from the mail header
> -----------------------
> Sender:       American Dialect Society <ADS-L at LISTSERV.UGA.EDU>
> Poster:       Victor Steinbok <aardvark66 at GMAIL.COM>
> Subject:      Re: "arrest" vs. "charge"
>
> -------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> I don't have BLD in front of me, but I very rarely consult it, except
> for obscure and obsolete terms. I went a bit hog wild on the distinction
> and want to scale it back a bit--the "suspicion of X" wording seems to
> be English, not really used in the US AFAIK.
>
> But this does not mean that I would defer to Gardner, necessarily.
> Seizure is a major Constitutional issue (like "taking") and its
> definition is constantly adjusted. Since "incident to arrest" (e.g.,
> search incident to arrest) hinges on definition of "arrest", adjustment
> to formal definition of "arrest" are also made pretty my constantly
> (although there is a clear line of defining cases). But these are
> formalistic distinctions, not common speech. I generally agree with the
> inclusive/exclusive distinction, but I continue to argue for multiple
> levels of exclusivity. By some definitions, an "arrest" requires
> processing--as Dave Wilton points out, he was asked for both "arrested"
> and "detained" lists, because, under ordinary circumstances, people who
> have never been processed or "entered into the system" don't need to say
> that they have been arrested (on the other hand, people who have been
> formally charged, with the record expunged later, may still have to
> answer the question "Have you ever been arrested?" in the affirmative).
> So, under some definition, it's likely Zimmerman has been arrested,
> while under others he has not. His detention falls somewhere in the
> middle of the exclusivity scale. I do not know, however, if he has ever
> been "processed"--since his mugshot was made available, that's a strong
> suggestion that he has, in which case, he most certainly has been
> arrested but not charged.
>
> I am also wondering if there is a number of levels for "being charged".
> What seems to pass for "being charged" in the news is actually having
> been formally indicted. Otherwise, any "moving violation" can be
> described as a "charge"--oddly enough, without an arrest (but with a
> brief seizure), in most cases (DUI/DWI being an exception).
>
> Eventually we may get back to the "tomato is a fruit" line once again.
>
>     VS-)
>
> On 4/3/2012 3:27 PM, Dave Wilton wrote:
> > Black's Law Dictionary (8th ed) defines "arrest" as:
> >
> > "1. A seizure or forcible restraint. 2. The taking or keeping of a
> person in
> > custody by legal authority, esp. in response to a criminal charge;
> specif.,
> > the apprehension of someone for the purpose of securing the
> administration
> > of the law, esp. of bringing that person before a court."
> >
> > So in legal circles there is both a general sense and a specific one
> related
> > to being charged with a crime.
> >
> > What does the AP Stylebook say? (I no longer have one in my possession.)
> It
> > could very well be that journos are advised to keep to the narrow sense
> in
> > order to avoid libel suits by people taken into custody but never
> charged.
> >
> > And for what it's worth, the last time I underwent a background check
> for a
> > security clearance, the powers-that-be distinguished between being
> > "arrested" and "being detained," requiring me to tell them whether
> either I
> > had ever been either (in my case, yes to "being detained"). But that dual
> > language was undoubted chosen to ensure that those being investigate were
> > complete in their answers.
>
>
> On 4/3/2012 3:17 PM, Baker, John wrote:
> >          I would say that Zimmerman was arrested briefly, then released
> without charge.  From Black's Law Dictionary (the leading American law
> dictionary):
> >
> > arrest, n. (14c) 1. A seizure or forcible restraint. 2. The taking or
> keeping of a person in custody by legal authority, esp. in response to a
> criminal charge; specif., the apprehension of someone for the purpose of
> securing the administration of the law, esp. of bringing that person before
> a court. - arrest, vb.
> > "The question of what constitutes an arrest is a difficult one. On one
> end of the spectrum, it seems apparent that detention accompanied by
> handcuffing, drawn guns, or words to the effect that one is under arrest
> qualifies as an 'arrest' and thus requires probable cause. At the other
> end, a simple questioning on the street will often not rise to the level of
> an arrest. Somewhere in between lie investigative detentions at the
> stationhouse.... " Charles H. Whitebread, Criminal Procedure § 3.02, at 61
> (1980).
> >
> >
> >          Similarly, in Victor's example, I would certainly say that the
> kid was arrested, even if the arrest was only pretextual and for the
> purpose of scaring him.  The additional paperwork steps to which Victor
> refers are usually called booking the suspect/detainee.
> >
> >
> > John Baker
> >
> >
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: American Dialect Society [mailto:ADS-L at LISTSERV.UGA.EDU] On
> Behalf Of Victor Steinbok
> > Sent: Tuesday, April 03, 2012 2:43 PM
> > To: ADS-L at LISTSERV.UGA.EDU
> > Subject: Re: "arrest" vs. "charge"
> >
> > You're right... sort of
> > There are also various attempts to distinguish between detained, seized
> > and arrested. Some have legal justification, some are just wind.
> >
> > He was most certainly detained--he was picked up, put in the vehicle,
> > cuffed, then brought to the precinct. Just being stopped and unable to
> > leave qualifies for seizure, I believe. But was he arrested? Well, it's
> > not entirely clear. It's quite common to refer to "arrest" if someone's
> > been picked up and restrained, which clearly happened here. But,
> > suppose, cops pick up a kid just to scare him, handcuff him, place him
> > in the car, drive around the block, then release him. Was the kid
> > arrested? I doubt anyone would say that he was. So what would be the
> > difference between that situation and Mr. Z? Being charged is easy--you
> > need a special document from someone other than the arresting officer
> > and clearance from above. From what we know from this story, several
> > people in the police department wanted him charged, but they were
> > overrulled--so he was NOT charged.
> >
> > But not the frequent difference in language that is usually glossed
> > over--one is arrested "on suspicion of" murder or some other crime, but
> > he is charged "with" that crime. So one clearly be arrested and even
> > accused--by the police--without being charged.
> >
> > But it is possible to have an extended detention without actual arrest.
> > Arrest is a formal procedure--all sorts of paperwork to fill out,
> > fingerprints, etc. Mugshot is just the first step. Once the paperwork
> > has been filled out, you've been arrested--merely having your mugshot
> > taken is not quite enough, according to some definitions. The point of
> > processing is important--if you've been processed as having been
> > arrested for some cause, you have to report that on every form that asks
> > if you've ever been arrested. If you were merely detained, you don't
> > have to report it--you have not been formally arrested.
> >
> > So if no paperwork was filled out to process the arrest, Z has not been
> > arrested. He might have been detained on suspicion of homicide, but not
> > arrested. It's also possible that he indeed WAS arrested, but then
> > released without having to spend a night in jail--yet another very loose
> > measure which people think of when they think of an arrest. So the best
> > we can do is that, by some measures, he's been arrested, but it's quite
> > likely that no formal arrest was ever made. If you think of all those
> > black-and-white movies that use lines like "You're under arrest!" they
> > mean absolutely nothing--just saying that you're under arrest does not
> > mean that you've been arrested.
> >
> > Does this make any sense or am I just running around in circles?
> >
> >       VS-)
> >
> > On 4/3/2012 1:30 PM, Jonathan Lighter wrote:
> >> It must be me. For over a week, highly-paid newspeople and others have
> been
> >> insisting that George Zimmerman was "never arrested" by police.
> >>
> >> Then, a police video surfaced that shows Z. beiin custody at the police
> >> station with his wrists cuffed behind his back. .
> >>
> >> In fact, CNN has enhanced the video to help answer the question of
> whether
> >> Z. had a head injury.  Immediately after two minutes of discussing said
> >> video and enhancement, another journalist informs us that controversy
> still
> >> swirls around the issue of why Z. "was not arrested."
> >>
> >> What is wrong with these people/ me?  Isn't the issue that Z. was
> released
> >> without being *charged*?  He sure looked like a guy under arrest to me.
> >>
> >> This makes even "brokered-convention"-gate look trivial by comparison.
> >>
> >> JL
> > ------------------------------------------------------------
> > The American Dialect Society - http://www.americandialect.org
> >
> > ------------------------------------------------------------
> > The American Dialect Society - http://www.americandialect.org
> >
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------
> The American Dialect Society - http://www.americandialect.org
>

-- 
"If the truth is half as bad as I think it is, you can't handle the truth."

------------------------------------------------------------
The American Dialect Society - http://www.americandialect.org