The Fusion of Arrest with Guilt

The fusion of arrest and guilt creates confusion and prejudice for the public, as well as unfair treatment and unnecessary punishments for people who are arrested.

Table of Contents

An Arrest Does Not Equate to Guilt

Getting arrested for a crime does not constitute guilt. Arrest and guilt are legally distinct terms, but they are often fused together in the minds of many people. This unfair fusion creates consequences for people who are arrested even when guilt is never proven. It is used in assessing a person’s “risk,” in calculating “recidivism,” and in identifying “offenders.” The fusion of arrest and guilt creates a lot of problems within the justice system.

When a person is arrested, he/she is often considered guilty by public and private sectors. Since an arrest becomes part of an accessible permanent record, mug shots may be posted on social media sites like Facebook and Twitter and private individual websites. Arrests can lead to refusal of employment, job loss, disciplinary actions in the workplace, and housing problems. Many people also face threats of losing child custody and the possibility of deportation. People who are arrested and stand trial, but are found not guilty in the end can face a variety of problems and restrictions that impact their personal lives. Unfortunately, many people who are arrested are convicted by the public well before any legal conviction takes place.

Studies on recidivism must rely on some sort of proxy to assess a person’s risk of re-offending. Court judges frequently use an arrest record to gauge a person’s risk of committing future crimes, regardless of guilt or innocence. Relying on the number of arrests and re-arrests a person has can be very inaccurate, since many people who are arrested see their charges dropped or dismissed. Arrest records do not portray an accurate picture of criminality. Arrest data also fails to account for individuals involved in criminal activity who have been missed, overlooked, or given less priority by law enforcement. Each year in the U.S., 11 million people are arrested for some type of offense, but few of these arrests lead to actual convictions.

Many people say the criminal justice system needs reforms to protect the innocent. Many law enforcement officials and criminal defense attorneys argue that recidivism should only be measured by known convictions, rather than by a person’s arrest record. Has the criminal justice system abandoned the presumption of innocence?

Max Keller has won countless jury trial cases involving misdemeanors and felonies, sex crimes, and DWI’s. He is a member of the Minnesota Society for Criminal Justice, which only allows the top 50 criminal defense attorneys in the state as members. Max is a frequent speaker at CLE’s and is often asked for advice by other defense attorneys across Minnesota.

Years of Experience: Approx. 20 years
Minnesota Registration Status: Active
Bar & Court Admissions: State of Minnesota Minnesota State Court Minnesota Federal Court 8th Circuit Federal Court of Appeals State of Maryland

What to Do If You Have Been Charged with a Criminal Offense

The Surprising Cost of a Guilty Criminal Plea in Minnesota

Defendants in Minnesota may plead guilty or accept deals without understanding the hidden cost of a guilty criminal plea. A guilty criminal plea, regardless of how appealing it appears, can leave you dealing with substantial lifelong consequences. You may skip lengthy trial proceedings and likely get a lenient sentence, but end up with a criminal record. The record can lead to various financial and collateral consequences, including difficulty in securing employment, loss of housing rights, license revocation, and immigration issues.

What You Can Expect at a Pre-Trial Motions Hearing in Minnesota

The pre-trial motions hearing is a court session you attend after your first arraignment. At the hearing, the prosecution and defense appear before a judge to clear several details about the case before trial. These details include pre-trial motions, evidentiary queries, and constitutional matters.

Refusing Arrest vs. Resisting Arrest in Minnesota: What’s the Difference?

Highly publicized incidents of police using excessive force over the past few years have led to people wondering, “What’s the difference between refusing arrest vs. resisting arrest?” Resisting arrest in Minnesota occurs when you use force to prevent a police officer from making a lawful arrest. Refusing an arrest, on the other hand, involves statements or actions that show reluctance to cooperate with an officer’s instructions without using force.