Some of you may have noticed a diary on the rec list yesterday about the arrest and detention of a kid from North Carolina.
That diary, as currently written, is substantially different from the way it originally appeared earlier in the day. It evolved during the course of the day in response to new information and increasing criticism.
It was written initially out of concern that a child had been arrested by authorities invoking powers derived from the USAPATRIOT Act. That turned out to be false. This was categorically denied later in the day by Mr. Capp, the US District Attorney of Indiana who took the unusual action of issuing an official formal public statement regarding a juvenile case in order to dispel these unfounded fears.
The diary now has a prominently displayed explanation of key findings, events, and clarifications. However, I believe a separate diary offering an apology to various injured parties is appropriate, but it is not simply enough to say "I screwed up" and move on. Words have consequences. And that diary had a lot of words... and a lot of consequences. Several apologies are in order.
The quickest way
to get the right answer
on the Internet --
post the wrong one.
-- old adage from USENET
The first apology goes to those who acted in good faith and accepted the earliest versions of the diary without question. If you feel foolish, don't. You accepted it because it had the semblance of verisimilitude. It had the quality of seeming to be true. When I wrote it, I believed it was true. As indicated above the fold, some key assertions turned out to be false. The diary also conveyed a clear sense of urgency that was entirely misplaced. If you made any mistake as a result of my instigation, I am sincerely sorry.
Additionally, if you emailed this to friends, contacted local papers, or felt moved to do anything beyond contacting the people I had listed, I am truly sorry. The more aggressively you pursued that course of action, the more profound my apology. I understand such actions may have compromised your credibility in the eyes of those you contacted. That is the most distressing point of all this to me personally. It is distressing because any damage that resulted flowed from a transferance of trust. Your friends trusted you because you trusted me. Please forward my apologies to them as you deem appropriate.
I want to be clear that I do not think it was wrong to contact the people I listed. As we now know it was unnecessary, but it was not wrong to be concerned. It was not wrong to ask them for reassurance regarding a matter over which they exercise some authority and oversight. The fact that our concerns were unfounded does not undermine the legitimacy of the concerns. Let me explain this caveat.
The officials I directed people to contact are all elected to represent the interests of their constituents. Given the way elections are held, we have historically thought of constituents as a geographic category. For example, "My constituents back home" is a common phrase among representatives. It makes sense, the people in some region of the country are the people who voted for them.
However, over the years with the growth of lobbying interests, the changes in campaign finance, and now the integration of the Internet into the political process, these same representatives have a new class of constituent. These are people whose interests they represent. They can come from any location. In the past the people I listed have demonstrated a general sympathy to our concerns and values by participating in this online forum. Thus, we represent a constituency of common political interests.
A central function of their jobs as elected officials is to hear constituent pleadings. That is exactly what the action item tied to the diary was, a constituent pleading for clarity and reassurance about a fundamental and common concern directly relevant to their positions of oversight and authority. It's a standard part of their daily routine.
The next apology, goes to these representatives, and more importantly their staff, because all of them are "busier than a one-legged man in an ass kickin' contest" and addressing the constituent pleadings on this matter took up valuable time from other matters of greater concern to their constituents-- matters like healthcare. I apologize for taking you away from these other pressing matters.
I doubt the bosses spent any time on the matter given the speed of its resolution. However, if anyone on the list was inconvenienced, directly or indirectly, please accept my apologies for my failure to follow the example set by the President in a recent news conference when he was asked why he didn't rush out to condemn the bonuses at AIG. I believe he said something to effect, "I like to know what I'm talking about before I speak." I have a new appreciation for that advice.
In the course of commenting on the original diary and its various editions, several lawyers repeatedly and strenuously remonstrated me for insisting on "a formal official statement from the appropriate authorities that convinces us the constitution is not being abridged" before I deleted it. As luck would have it, these critics were mistaken. The declaration I had hoped for actually appeared. Whether that had anything to do with the diary I wrote is completely unknown and the two may be completely unrelated. This was not the only site where people were voicing alarm over the reported claims made by the kid's mother.
I do not believe an apology is owed to Mr. Capp, the District Attorney in Indiana or his staff. Rather, I think a statement of appreciation is more appropriate. In response to a growing public concern, here and around the Internet, Mr. Capp took the unusual action of issuing a formal public statement regarding an ongoing juvenile case and categorically denied the arrest had anything to do with the USAPATRIOT Act as had been falsely claimed. He then went further to specifically demonstrate his support for the due process rights of the accused. He then went even further to explicitly reassure people the child was nowhere near any adult inmates. His formal official statement exceeded anything I hoped we might get. I find that very reassuring for a variety of reasons.
The next apology goes to the lawyer tasked with representing the kid. It will not help, but I offer my profound apology for setting processes in motion that will create a cascade of fire drills down the road. I understand how difficult it is to prepare for this sort of case and increasing the profile of the case does nothing to make your job easier. Moreover, I am concerned that the decision to move for a change of venue from juvenile to adult court may have been motivated in part by an interest in making the proceedings more generally transparent. The unintended consequences of this action are going to be significant and they probably won't benefit your client.
Finally, for my fellow Kossacks who did not fall into any of the aforementioned categories, but expressed a concern this incident might somehow sully the credibility of dailykos. I think you give me much more credit than I deserve. If this had been a front page matter, that would have been a whole different ball of wax.
I'm not going to lose any sleep worrying about what Freepers think of us. Last time I checked, eight out of the ten voices in Glenn Beck's head are perfectly happy to go nuts for no reason at all. The remaining two were busy fighting with each other and did not return my calls.
The truth of the matter is this concern spread across the political spectrum from liberal to conservative to libertarian. If there is any silver lining to this, it is the fact that we now have some reassurance that our concerns for the sanctity of constitutional rights is a widely held and deeply cherished belief that goes far beyond our little community. This gives new meaning to the words from the will.i.am song, Yes We Can
We are not as divided as our politics suggest.