Mob justice: the similarity between Strauss-Kahn and Susairaj

“The media is becoming judge, jury and prosecution.” Indian Prime Minister Manmohan Singh said this a few days ago when he met a select group of editors. It could so easily have been said by former IMF head Dominique Strauss-Kahn. It could so easily have been said by Maria Susairaj. Last night, on CNN, Richard Quest attempted to analyse the Dominique Strauss-Kahn case and why there was an extraordinary turnaround. There was pressure that led to “arresting too soon”. “Bringing charges too soon”. There wasn’t enough time to “find out all the facts”. “This is what instant determination does.” “Strauss-Kahn was tried and convicted in the press.” [caption id=“attachment_35461” align=“alignleft” width=“380” caption=“In the Maria Susairaj case, the facts and evidence before the judge suggest that she did not kill Grover, the victim. Her role was limited to the destruction of evidence. PTI”]  [/caption] You could take all these statements and apply them to the Susairaj case. The media, putting intense pressure on the establishment, demands that cases are solved instantly and perpetrators brought to book.  And, caught up in the moment and the frenzy like the mob in Shakespeare’s Julius Caeser, the mob convinces the media that they, too, want instant justice and that the media’s judgment is the one that they want. In Strauss-Kahn’s case, our involvement is limited. In the Susairaj case, because it is closer to home, the involvement is heightened. “We are unhappy with the sentence. It is sheer injustice. It cannot get worse than this. I find it shocking that the two people who committed the same crime have been punished differently. They both deserved the death penalty for the brutal murder of my son,” said Amarnath, the father of the victim. “She (Susairaj) has not served her punishment as a criminal who murdered my son. I cannot get my son back, but I want justice for him. This judgment has left us shattered,’’ said the victim’s mother. “Susairaj walks free,” or words to that effect are the headlines in all the newspapers this morning, suggesting that she ought not to walk free. This is where the mob mentality comes in. The judge, unlike the editors of news media and unlike all of us, the citizens who make up the mob, has to rely, in the Susairaj case and the Strauss-Kahn case, on the facts and the evidence before him. In the Susairaj case, the facts and evidence before the judge suggest that Susairaj did not kill Grover, the victim; her role was limited to the destruction of evidence. Given this, the maximum punishment that he could award was three years – which Susairaj has already served under trial. The simple truth is that the evidence failed to prove the prosecution’s case that Susairaj was guilty of murder. But, having been conditioned by the statements of the prosecutors and the investigating authorities, we, readers and citizens, decided that Susairaj was guilty of murder and any judgment that said different was one that was a travesty. There is a new and unfair demand being made by media worldwide that, when a crime occurs, the perpetrators are caught and brought to book immediately. In an age of 24X7 media, the media attacks the establishment with an intensity that is close to unbearable, leading the establishment, in turn, to put pressure on the investigating agencies. More worrying, there is a demand the charges framed are precisely the charges made by the media. In the Susairaj case, what if the first statement that we heard from the police was along the lines of “Grover was killed by Jerome; Susairaj helped in the destruction of evidence”? We, the mob, would have found the prosecution case being accepted by the judge. In the Strauss-Kahn case, what if the first statement we heard was “IMF chief accused by hotel chambermaid”? He might still have lost his IMF post, but he would certainly not have his presidential aspirations shot down. There is need for both the media and the consumers of media to spare a thought for Strauss-Kahn and learn from his case. His reputation has been shredded to pieces, his ambitions are in tatters because, ironically, his profile forced the press to demand instant solution and instant justice – despite his not having committed the crimes that he was initially accused of. It’s time media – and all of us, citizens — accept that investigations take time. It’s also important to remember that the facts and evidence may not lead to popular outcomes. Most importantly, we need to remember that judges and juries make their assessments of facts and evidence before them and are answerable to the law, not to popular demands and mob justice. They need to make judgments that can stand appeals and challenges. Populist charges made under pressure and not based on facts and evidence will fail in court. It’s time the media helped the establishment by allowing them the time to frame charges rather than, as Manmohan Singh says, become the judge, the jury and the prosecution.