THE RUNAWAY DEFENDANTS

Let me share one case in my experience as a Trial Judge, which is ordinarily one of the many  run of the mill petty cases which simply clog the court dockets, if not, for the object lesson it presents  of how we view human  behavior.

The case arose from an incident of snatching which happened in the downtown area,  by an alleged group of teenage boys, who grabbed the hand bag of a woman, and running away with it. As they sped away others scampered.   The police officers on the beat, was alerted by the shrill cries of the victim. They saw a group of young men running fast so they gave chase. The two policemen were able to make an arrest. The hand bag was never recovered. Five  teenage kids were charged of Robbery.  

Things got interesting when I called the case for trial.

All five boys  entered “not guilty” pleas.

The first witness to be called was the woman, the victim herself. She said everything happened too fast and she was caught unawares when someone grabbed her bag and wrestled it away that she staggered. She saw a person running  away fast with her bag.  She wasn’t sure who forcibly took her hand bag, and she was not sure if the five teenagers charged in court were the snatchers. All she knew was the policemen  presented the boys to her as the suspects. Through the suggestion of the apprehending officers she signed a statement without any factual basis that the five individuals caught by the policemen were the robbers.  Her stolen property was not found. Neither was it found in the possession of the five the defendants. She openly repudiated her prior written statement as to the positive identification of the defendants.

The apprehending  police officers,  testified next, telling the court that they heard the screams of the woman, crying out she was robbed. When they approach to investigate they saw people running away so they gave chase and caught five of them. They admitted they did not see who actually snatched the woman’s hand bag. They presumed  since they were running away they were the perpetrators.    

On the basis of these testimonies the prosecutor had no other evidence.

This is one case which need not waste the time and resources of the court. Before the defense counsel could present his defense, I took the bull by the horns. I hate it when police officers are sloppy.

So in open court I questioned the defendants.

Do they know each other? No.

What were they doing when the incident happened? Window shopping.

Do they know the victim? No.

Did they rob the woman of her hand bag? No.

Do they have any prior criminal record? Vigorous shaking of heads, No.

Did they know or hear  the woman scream when she was robbed? No.

In what circumstances were they arrested? They were  running.

Why did you run? Because many people were running and scampering, in different directions so they were alarmed. They also ran with the crowd. They noticed the police behind them so they ran all the more but they got caught.

I looked at the Prosecutor and told him he had no case. He agreed. He moved for dismissal.

People would  say the oft quoted remark, “They happened to be in the wrong place at the wrong time.” Maybe true but still a bad joke. They were arrested simply because they were running away with the others who were fleeing not knowing what was going on.  

It is textbook rule that the flight of the accused is competent evidence to indicate guilt especially when it is unexplained. Here it is not one where the running away of the defendants is unexplained. More so under the circumstances where many others in the downtown crowd  were running  in different directions. All of them could possibly be suspects if we get the drift of the policemen.  The defendants here  thought running with the crowd was the right or the safest thing to do.

Not too long ago, psychologists have discovered the “herd instinct” or sometimes referred to as “social proof” coined by Rolf Dobelli.   

A herd instinct is a behavior wherein people join groups and follow the actions of others. Herd behavior in humans is a social behavior that is caused when individuals subjugate their individual will, thoughts, and behaviors to the majority; the group or herd. Herding does not require a leader, it just requires individuals coming together at the same time to act. And that is exactly what happened here. Psychologists trace this instinct from the will to survive. We are the direct heirs of those who copy behaviors of others. This pattern is deeply rooted that we see it in the modern world.  We follow the herd because they might be headed to the truth or the right and safe way, or the most profitable way.

The great writer W. Somerset Maugham once commented, “If fifty million people say something  foolish, it is still foolish.”

Yet more often than not we act foolish because many are doing it.