|
Money matters: A short history of nearly every fiat currency
Part 3
Graham Macdonald
MBMG International Ltd.
As promised in the opening part of his series, I feel the
need to share with you the history of the US dollar. If you don’t have an
aptitude for history and/or useless information, now is a good time to roll over
and switch off that bed lamp.
Legal Tender cases involve lawsuits brought to the U.S.
Supreme Court involving the constitutionality of the Legal Tender Act of 1862,
which was passed to meet currency needs during the Civil War. The act had
authorized the issue of $150 million in “United States notes” without any
reserve or specie basis. Intended originally as only a temporary measure during
wartime, about $450 million had been issued in greenbacks by the end of the war.
The paper money depreciated in terms of gold and became the subject of
controversy, particularly because debts contracted earlier could be paid in this
cheaper currency.
Many cases concerning the greenbacks were entered in the
courts, but it was not until 1870 that the Supreme Court attacked the
constitutionality of paper money.
On June 20, 1860, a certain Mrs. Hepburn made a promissory
note, by which she promised to pay to Henry Griswold on Feb. 20, 1862, eleven
thousand two hundred and fifty “dollars.” At the time when the note was
made, and also at the time when it fell due, there was, confessedly, no lawful
money of the United States, or money which could be lawfully tendered in payment
of private debts, but gold and silver coin. Five days after the day when the
note by its terms fell due, that is to say, on Feb. 25, 1862, congress passed
the first legal tender act, commonly so called, by which the United States notes
issued there under were made a legal tender for “all debts, public and
private, within the United States,” except certain public debts. In March,
1864, Mrs. Hepburn tendered payment of the debt, principal and interest, in the
United States notes issued under this act. The amount tendered, $11,250 in
legal-tender notes, at that time was worth only about $7,000 in coin. The tender
was refused. She was sued in the Louisville chancery court in the state of
Kentucky.
In Hepburn v. Griswold (1870), the Majority opinion, written
by Chief Justice Samuel P. Chase, declared the act unconstitutional as a
violation of Fifth Amendment protections against the taking of property without
due process.
The chief justice declared that the act was obnoxious to
those clauses of the constitution which forbade the impairment of the
obligations of contracts, the taking of private property for public use without
compensation, and the deprivation of any person of his property without due
process of law. And that the constitution was ordained to “establish
justice,” which this act did not do, so far as regards pre-existing debts.
Justice Clifford showed that the words “and emit bills on
the credit of the United States” were originally reported in article seven, in
the draft of the constitution as submitted to the convention. Mr. Governor
Morris moved to strike the clause out on the ground that it was unnecessary, and
a vicious suggestion of a power which would be unquestionably used anyhow
without it. Mr. James Madison thought it would be sufficient to let the clause
remain, as it did not contain the hurtful power to make such bills legal tender,
but finally voted in favor of striking out the clause entirely, as was done, as
eliminating even a “pretext for a paper currency, and particularly for making
the bills a tender either for public or private debts,” without disabling the
government from the use of treasury notes.
President Ulysses Grant, angered by the decision, promptly
nominated two Republican justices to the Court who reversed the decision in Knox
v. Lee and Parker v. Davis (1871), ruling that the act was valid on the basis of
the implied powers of Congress. The constitutionality of the act was more widely
sustained in Juillard v. Greenman (1884).
The Hepburn decision was handed down by the Supreme Court in
February 1870 during the time of what was arguably the most corrupt
administration in American history. On the day the decision was given President
Grant nominated 2 new judges, who were known to favor Legal Tender, for
appointment to the Court. The origin of Court stacking is popularly associated
with President Roosevelt and the New Deal of the 1930s. However as the Legal
Tender cases show, Roosevelt was not the first to think of it.
Four days after the appointment of the new judges was
confirmed in March 1870, the Attorney-General moved the Court to consider 2
further Legal Tender cases. By a vote of 5-4 the Court voted to reconsider
Hepburn v Griswold. The Court then took up the 2 new cases and again by a vote
of 5-4 in Knox v Lee overturned its 15 months earlier decision. A casual reading
of the report clearly reveals some of the bitterness that accompanied this
divided judgment.
The court said, in reference to the case of Hepburn vs.
Griswold: “That case was decided by a divided court and by a court having a
less number of judges than the law then in existence provided this court shall
have. These cases have been heard before a full court, and they have received
our most careful consideration.”
And Justice Bradley, in his separate concurring opinion said:
“And in this case, with all deference and respect for the former judgment of
the court, I am so fully convinced that it was erroneous and prejudicial to the
rights, interest and safety of the general government, that I, for one, have no
hesitation in reviewing and overruling it. It should be remembered that this
court, at the very term in which, and within a few weeks after, the decision in
Hepburn vs. Griswold was delivered, when the vacancies on the bench were filled,
determined to hear the question reargued. This fact must necessarily have had
the effect of appraising the country that the decision was not fully acquiesced
in, and of obviating any injurious consequences to the business of the country
by its reversal.”
In 1884, in Juillard v Greenman, by a vote of 8-1 the Court
upheld the constitutionality of the peacetime issue of fiat money. With the
rationale of wartime necessity not available the justices effectively fashioned
one of economic necessity in its place; only by the mandated use of paper money
could there be sufficient currency available for economic growth and to enable
Congress to benefit the people. The economic reasoning of the majority has been
criticized by economists as na๏ve.
The conclusion of the dissenting judge in Juillard’s case,
Justice Stephen Field is worthy of quote:
“From the decision of the court I see only evil likely to
follow. There have been times within the memory of all of us when the legal
tender notes of the United States were not exchangeable for more than one half
of their nominal value. The possibility of such depreciation will always attend
paper money. This inborn infirmity no mere legislative declaration can cure. If
Congress has the power to make the notes a legal tender and to pass as money or
its equivalent why should not a sufficient amount be issued to pay the bonds of
the United States as they mature? Why pay interest on the millions of dollars of
bonds now due, when Congress can in one day make the money to pay the principal?
And why should there be any restraint upon unlimited
appropriations by the government for all imaginary schemes of public
improvement, if the printing press can furnish the money that is needed for
them?”
Until next week.
|
The above data and research was compiled from sources believed to be
reliable. However, neither MBMG International Ltd nor its officers can accept
any liability for any errors or omissions in the above article nor bear any
responsibility for any losses achieved as a result of any actions taken or not
taken as a consequence of reading the above article. For more information please
contact Graham Macdonald on [email protected]
|
Snap Shots: Recognizing ‘good’ photographs - and selling them
by Harry Flashman
I received an email a few weeks back from a keen
photographer called Tom. He asked, “How do you recognize a ‘good’
photograph when you have taken one? I have attached two photos that I
think are OK but would value your opinion and, if they are OK, are they in
any sense saleable? And if so, how?”
 Firstly,
Tom, sorry it has taken a little while to answer you, but these columns
are written some weeks in advance. You have really asked three questions -
what do I think of your photos, are they saleable and how. That’s a big
ask, Tom, but I’ll do my best.
There have been a couple of topics recently, dealing
with this subject generally, but here’s what I feel about your photos. I
looked at them, as if I were judging them in a competition. I will be
brutally honest, so forgive me if you don’t agree with my opinion - but
you did ask!
 First
off, the cook in the Malibu shot. I liked this as it had some immediate
impact, and the happy smile of their cook just added to that. It was also
a classic of the ‘frame within a frame’ genre, where the serving
window delineated the subject. It was also easy to see just who or what
was the ‘hero’ (in this case ‘heroine’). The overall darkness was
(partially) offset by the bright yellow label on the Maggi sauce bottle,
the blue plastic strainer on the left and cook’s white hat. Even the
sloppy white paint around the serving hatch added authenticity to this
‘cinema verite’ grab-shot.
What I did not like, was the fact that it was still too
dark, and unfortunately there was flare in the cook’s spectacles. This
really was a pity, as up till then, this shot was doing well. Did you only
take one shot? With anyone who wears glasses, always take a few shots, as
flare will kill these photos every time.
 As
regards saleability - for any shot to be sold, it must fill a need in a
marketplace. Where would we sell our cook? That’s difficult. It would
not be suitable for a Tourism Authority of Thailand brochure on local
restaurants. It could be used in a Health and Hygiene setting (she is
wearing a hat), but then it gets hard from there. Chances of selling this
to a stock agency would be around 10 percent.
Now the three monks. This one I did not like, sorry
Tom. It was too difficult to see what or who was really the hero. Was it
the Million Year Stone Park? Was it the three monks standing in the vast
background with grounds, trees, stones and acres of sky, or perhaps it was
the koi, echoing the saffron robes? You were standing far too far away,
Tom, sorry. Look at my cropping of the photograph, at least now the monks
are the main feature. Since the monks look posed to me, it would have been
a better picture to have them crouching down and feeding the koi, getting
in close with a telephoto lens and making the crop fairly tight.
Who would buy this? Perhaps the Million Years Stone
Park for a brochure, but I can’t see anyone else lining up for this
particular shot. Chances of selling this to a stock agency would be around
zero, I’m afraid.
So what should you do? Definitely do not throw the
camera in the pond with the koi, because you do have an eye for detail,
and for something different. You have to continue to take photographs, as
it is all good practice (that makes perfect). Get in close, get in close,
get in close! Decide who or what is the subject of the shot and think
about how you can show that subject to best advantage. Think about
lighting, colours, placement, position. Take numerous shots using
different frame-ups, viewpoints and lighting. Don’t take 12 identical
shots of the same subject, but take 12 different shots of the same
subject.
That’s about it, Tom. Thank you for the nice words, and keep
shooting. You have definitely stepped on to the lower end of the ladder,
so now start climbing!
Modern Medicine: Cat Scratch Disease or the Marauding Moggie
by Dr. Iain Corness, ConsultantAlmost
every household has at least one cat, and often more. Cats are affectionate,
warm pets that will sit on your lap for hours, purring away, while it licks
your hands. During that time, it may even be giving you more than love. It
may be giving you a little present called Bartonella henselae, or simply,
Cat Scratch Disease!
Tell me more, you say, while wondering if you should
strangle the cat now or later! But first a little history. A little over 50
years ago, the clinical signs of Cat Scratch Disease were described, called
romantically “La Maladie des griffes du chat.” However, the symptoms of
this ailment are far from romantic.
Cat Scratch Disease affects between 2-10 people per
100,000 head of population in America, so whilst it isn’t an every day
diagnosis, most doctors will come across a few cases in their medical
lifetime.
The presenting symptom is a regional swelling of the
lymph nodes, generally in a young person or a child, and the usual scenario
involves a panicking parent who is sure the child has lymphatic cancer.
What actually happens is that the cat is carrying the
organism, known as Bartonella henselae, which it inoculates into the human
system. This bug in turn is trapped by the lymph glands, within which one
almighty fight takes place, with the end result being that the glands swell
dramatically and can even burst through the skin as a suppurating discharge.
Other signs and symptoms include a fever, sore throat and headache.
Now there are many causes for swollen glands, fever,
headache and sore throat, so how do we pick on the family pussy cat? Quite
simply, there will be a history of having been bitten or scratched by the
family moggy, and the inoculation site will drain into the affected lymph
glands.
So just how does the cat give you a “shot” of bugs?
Well, firstly somewhere between 20-40 percent of cats are carrying the
organism, and it lives in the cat’s saliva as well as in its blood. While
licking its claws, puss leaves a collection of the organism there, which in
turn becomes yours when the cat scratches you.
Cat Scratch Disease, although generally localized, can
end up infecting internal organs such as the liver, spleen heart and brain,
though this is very rare. For most people who contract the illness they
quietly recover, though it can sometimes take some months. However, for
people with compromised immune systems, spontaneous recovery is not the
norm.
There is treatment, with one of the most appropriate
antibiotics being Doxycycline, while the most usually available penicillins
are fairly ineffective. There are tests which can be done in the laboratory
to prove or disprove infection by Bartonella henselae, so what we call a
“Definitive” diagnosis can be made. Again you can see the dangers in
self medication. If you do indeed have Cat Scratch Disease from the cat
bite, the penicillin you bought is useless!
So should we all go out and take our cats down to the vet
and consign them to the great veterinary hospital in the sky? The simple
answer is no, but the moral to this tale is that we should be on our guard.
Cat scratches and bites should not be taken lightly. Immediately after any
injuries you should wash the wounds with soap and water and after a thorough
cleansing only then apply your favourite antiseptic, and at the first sign
of problem, pop into the hospital and get it checked. But please leave the
cat at home!
Learn to Live to Learn: Postcard from Umbria
with Andrew Watson
It is amazing how the general business of life can
sometimes seem to cast a long shadow over the enduring beauty of the
world. When you’ve been working your butt off, it’s all too easy to
allow your labours to envelop you, creating a cycle of fatigue, which
gradually grinds you to a halt.
If you have been living in an environment where
anxiety, tension and fear are dominant, everyday features, like London
today, life can seem very difficult and opportunities for respite seem
to recede, like a distant hope, to the horizon. It is perhaps salient to
consider that for many, “getting away from it all” simply isn’t an
option.
Towards
the divine blueness of Sienna
So, as I find myself back here once again, for the
first time in two years, presiding over a panoramic vista of glorious
solitude amidst the raw and untouched wonder of the Umbrian hills, I am
counting my blessings, answering old questions, and asking new ones. I
am looking back, looking forward, all the time moving on.
Even in the two short years since I was last here,
things have changed immeasurably, in lots of ways. For me, Umbria has
always been a healing place. Which infers, I suppose, that I always have
wounds that require healing. Well, I guess that’s right, but the
wounds come in any number of different forms. Of course, from grotesque
iniquity, which can appear prevalent in the hearts and minds of
pusillanimous perpetrators everywhere, on every scale. Sometimes, I
might have been the target, the victim, but not necessarily. The
gratuitous infliction of pain on others is something that affects me
profoundly in the manner described by John Donne, in “For Whom the
Bell Tolls” and if readers are incredulous or sceptical at this claim
of kinship with the persecuted, then consider that this feeling is by no
means inevitably altruistic. By looking out for others, you are looking
out for yourself, even if it often seems a vain hope that someone will
do the same for you.
As I reflect on recent injustices and those who
demonstrate courage and tenacity in combating them, I am struck by two
contrasting sentiments. Firstly, how those whom by their words and
actions refuse to accept iniquity, stand out a mile. Like beacons,
resonating with infectious compassion. Secondly, how some people seem to
find it almost impossible to recognise that individuals can genuinely
put another’s interests ahead of their own. If I feel pity, then it
must be for unfortunates so adrift from the reality of unconditional
giving that they cannot conceive of its existence. Of course, to those
unfamiliar with the concept, the very different manifestations of ways
of giving can appear confusing.
Amidst the ambient peace of this tremendous
seclusion, I think back two years to who was alive and is no longer. I
think particularly of a former student of mine, a friend and a
confidante. To me, his murder summed up the pitiful situation in the
Middle East. A Palestinian Christian, living in East Jerusalem, he was
shot dead ‘by mistake’ whilst jogging on a Friday evening (he’s
not going to be Jewish then) by the “Al Asqua Martyr’s Brigade”.
The murderers apologised, as well they might. The boy’s father is a
revered Palestinian human rights lawyer whose own father had been killed
by a Palestinian bomb intended for others, who spends his time defending
the victims of wanton acts of violence and persecution. It was an
appalling tragedy, full of sickening irony, not least because the
Palestinians had deprived themselves of an individual quite capable of
leading them to freedom.
From where I am now writing, no other dwellings are
visible. There is a sixteenth century Castello down the hill and only a
monastery above, whose bells soothingly remind me of the passage of
time. Into the distance, the hills rise up into mountains, stretching
into divine blueness towards Sienna. I can detect the subtle scent of
pine, floating on a gentle breeze. I feel very lucky to be here, humbled
by the privilege. There are petunias of great variety, all of luminous
intensity. When the sun hits the hillsides, there’s definite
iridescence. I’m sure it’s gold. I use it in my paintings, like a
secret ingredient. Not that secret, though.
Just down the road from here is San Sepolcro,
birthplace of Piero della Francesca. I went on a pilgrimage there the
other day. The Italians know how to exhibit their work. Great artist.
There’s a favourite restaurant of mine there as well. The pork is so
tender that the weight of the knife alone is enough to cut the meat.
Once, I made the heinous mistake of sending my steak back to be cooked
(it looked tartar-esque). The cook charged out of the kitchen wielding a
machete. He suggested I have my steak ‘his way’. I agreed.
I have to leave here soon, to return to a different
reality, for which I am now ready, recharged. But what is it that I can
take with me from this place? What is it that I leave behind? I leave
behind the past, as I look forward to the future. In contemplation, my
memories will always be retrievable in this place. It is where I keep
them and it is nice to be able to return to them occasionally and
consider events in the clear, safe, Umbrian light. I take with me the
tranquillity of the place, with which I feel imbued. And I take the
renewed determination to taste a little bit of Umbria every day,
wherever I am.
[email protected]
Next week: The Guru
 Heart to Heart with Hillary
Dear Hillary,
My wife thinks I’m mad, but this is really bugging me. We have visited
Pattaya twice in the last 12 months, Spring being the latest, and
tonight a friend who has not been to Thailand for at least five years
asked us how much a small bottle of Singha beer costs in the beer bars
these days. Top of my head I answered, about 70 baht give or take a few
baht. Straight off he ridiculed me saying that it should be about 35
baht. My wife, who normally holds the purse strings on our visits, she
being arguably the sensible one, agreed with me. Adding that she had
seen it in the smaller shops at 30 baht. Now, the two chaps who where
sitting opposite us at the time, are frequent visitors to Pattaya, three
or so times a year, so I asked them to back me up. Imaging my surprise
when they agreed with him saying that they would normally pay 35 baht a
bottle in the majority of beer bars. Hillary, I don’t for one instant
entertain the thought that you frequent beer bars at the drop of a hat,
but if you can’t trust a journalist to point you in the direction of a
good watering hole and know the meaning of value for money, then just
what in life can you trust? Can we ask you to intercede in this matter
as it will be 2006 before my wife and I will be able to return
“home” and it will pray on my mind until I find out the truth? If we
are proved wrong then I promise that on our next visit we will consume
vulgar quantities of the amber nectar (instead of vast amounts), if in
the right then I assure you that a bottle of bubbly and some chocs will
find it’s way to you on our next visit (will my personal favourites
Demi Sec and hand made Belgium suffice?) actually right or wrong you can
have the goodies, not only because you are a good read, but also in the
vague hope that it might spur the scoundralous Mistersingha into action.
As a Scot who is residing in the Channel Islands may I sign off as,
The Gordon Islander
Dear Gordon Islander,
Of course you can get a small bottle of beer for 35 baht in every beer
bar, provided you go back in time to around 1985! The average price is
now around 50-70 baht, with go-go bars around 120 baht. My authority
tells me that if you go to some small beer bars up sois where nobody
else would go, you can get the 35 baht bottles still, but you probably
wouldn’t want to drink there. It is also definitely not the
‘majority’ of beer bars as your friend is claiming, either. So my
Gordon Islander Petal, I look forward to your bottle of bubbles and the
hand made choccies in 2006. I can taste their sweetness already and the
bubbles foaming around my teeth!
Dear Hillary,
My wife, whom I love dearly, has but one fault, if you want to call it
that. We have a large house, and everyone from her village seems to need
to stay with us, “just for one night on their way back to the
village,” which seems to stretch out into two or three nights, as
transport arrangements seem to change hourly! Should I just ignore this,
or should I put my foot down. I really would like your idea on what I
should do.
Easygoing Ernie
Dear Easygoing Ernie,
This is fairly standard practice for families, and villagers from the
country. They do not have spare cash that they can waste on a 500 baht
room, especially as they probably only make around 200 baht a day in
wages. If your house is large, then you should be able to keep part of
it free of villagers for yourself. Remember that it is also a sign to
her former friends in the village that she is doing well, now the
‘lady of the house’. However, I do put forward a caution, my Petal.
Make sure the duration of the stay is spelled out to all concerned, and
I would put a three day maximum on it, or else you will find that you
have become the village big house, something you obviously do not want.
Dear Hillary,
Having had a rather rude shock with a “lady boy” the other evening,
is there any foolproof way you can tell, short of DNA typing? I am sure
I am not the first to have been fooled (well almost), so how do we poor
men discover “true” identities? More than one of us is waiting for
your answer.
Confused
Dear Confused,
Too easy, Petal. Any lady who is taller than you are and drop dead
gorgeous and flaunting it, just has to be a lady boy. It is somewhat
difficult to tell at a distance, in these days of excellent plastic
surgery, but even if they have had a total make-over, landing gear gone
and enhanced superstructure as well, listen for the deeper voice, large
hands and feet and tiny hips! Some of them do it for love, but many for
money. Like all commercial deals, ‘Caveat emptor!’
Psychological Perspectives: A tragic, but understandable misunderstanding
by Michael Catalanello,
Ph.D.
Accounts of the police shooting of an
innocent man in a London subway appear to be changing. Recent news reports,
based upon leaked documents, have cast doubt upon key elements of the story
initially circulated concerning the tragic incident.
Misfortune seems to have plagued the police surveillance
operation investigating the London subway bombings from the very beginning.
Jean-Charles de Menezes had been spotted leaving a block of flats where
authorities believed two terror suspects were living. The undercover
officer charged with identifying individuals exiting the area had
apparently been away from his post “relieving himself” when Mr. de
Menezes left. This officer’s duties had reportedly included videotaping
suspects leaving the area, and transmitting his observations to others on
the surveillance team.
 Jean-Charles
de Menezes
Initial media reports indicated that Mr. de Menezes had
been “acting suspiciously.” Early news accounts had him attempting to
elude police officials by jumping a ticket barrier at Stockwell Underground
station, and failing to respond to commands from officials on the scene. A
witness reported that the suspect was wearing “…a thick coat that
looked padded.” Another claimed he “…appears to have a bomb belt with
wires coming out.” Citing witness reports, Reuters said the victim,
“…was shot five times in the head after being chased on to an
underground train by undercover police.”
Subsequent substantiated reports, however, have
established that Mr. de Menezes walked calmly through the subway station,
apparently unaware that he was being observed by police. He was apprehended
in an underground train and was reportedly being restrained by a police
officer when he was killed. The autopsy report cited by the press indicated
that Mr. de Menezes was hit in the head by seven bullets fired by
London police. Three other bullets were reportedly fired, but missed.
Photographic evidence confirmed that he was wearing a light denim jacket,
not a bulky coat capable of concealing explosives, as previously reported.
How could an innocent man, looking and behaving
normally, be mistaken for a suicide bomber? By what process could a
patently false story concerning the circumstances of the shooting
materialize?
Some have accused police officials of lying, and of
conspiring to cover up the facts surrounding the shooting. Although a
police cover-up cannot necessarily be ruled out, an explanation based upon
fairly well established psychological principles seems plausible, and
possibly sufficient, to explain this unfortunate episode.
 Hussein
Osman
According to the British television channel ITV, when de
Menezes entered the Metro car, officials “formally identified” him as
one of the suspects involved in the suicide bombing attempts of the
previous day.
Although Mr. de Menezes had been described by witnesses
as “an Asian looking man,” he was, in fact, Brazilian.
The actual bombing suspect was Ethiopian-born Hussein Osman. Looking
at side-by-side photos of the two men published by news media, it would
appear easy to distinguish one from the other. Nevertheless, both men would
be recognizable as “foreigners,” not matching the White, Anglo-Saxon
stereotype. Both, in other words, were members of an “out-group,” in
reference to the stereotypical Londoner.
It is well established that individuals are better able
to visually identify and distinguish between members of their own ethnic
group, or “in-group,” as compared to members of ethnic groups to which
they do not belong. How often have you heard someone say, “Those (fill in
an ethnic group), they all look alike…”? Assuming that the positive
identification of Mr. de Menezes was made by native Europeans, under tense
conditions, such a mistake seems understandable. I would, however, be
surprised if an ethnic Brazilian or Ethiopian would have
mistaken one man for the other.
While that might help explain the case of mistaken
identity, how do we explain the eyewitness accounts of Mr. de Menezes
wearing a bulky coat, a bomb belt with wires coming out, jumping a ticket
barrier, etc.?
One’s memories of events are always incomplete,
fragmentary. That’s because being human, it is impossible for us to
record every aspect of an event the way a camcorder might. One’s
attention naturally focuses upon certain aspects of the event more than
others. Much important information may go unnoticed, and thus, fail to be
encoded into memory.
In addition, our understanding of an event is affected
by our knowledge and understanding of similar events. If, for example, I
tell you that I had an unpleasant visit to the dentist’s office, you
might form an impression of my experience, without my ever having told you
specifically what had occurred. Your impression would be a product of your
preexisting knowledge and experiences relating to dentist offices. If you
later recount the story to someone else, you might contribute new
information that was missing from my original account, without even
realizing what you are doing. Chances are you would be correct, but you could
be wrong. It is quite possible that my unpleasant experience had been an
atypical one that you couldn’t have easily imagined.
Psychologists speak of organized sets of beliefs and
expectations they call schemas, our existing knowledge frameworks,
that influence our interpretation of situations and events. Thus, when our
recollections are incomplete, our schemas help us to fill in the missing
parts from our store of information concerning similar events.
We all have preexisting ideas about how suicide bombers
look, dress, behave, etc. Witnesses recounting their experiences
immediately following a subway shooting, in the context of the recent
bombings, would be expected to fit their recollections into the general
outlines they already have concerning such events, potentially providing
faulty eyewitness accounts of the incident. Could this explain why
witnesses in the London subway reported the things they did?
Other factors potentially adding to the confusion were
also in play. Londoners, on the day Mr. de Menezes was shot, were
undoubtedly in a heightened state of anxiety and vigilance. It was just two
weeks after fifty-two innocent commuters were killed and hundreds injured
in four suicide attacks carried out on London’s mass transit system, and
one day after multiple suicide attacks were again attempted, albeit,
unsuccessfully. Intense emotions like fear, anxiety, shock, and anger can
have detrimental effects upon individuals’ perception and interpretation
of events, their judgment, and their later recollections of events.
Decisions needed to be made quickly. Authorities, we learned, had issued
standing “shoot to kill” orders to prevent terrorists from detonating
explosive devices while in the process of being apprehended by police.
Knowing what we know about the human propensity for making errors in
identifying suspects and recalling events, does it seem reasonable to
maintain a “shoot to kill” policy on terror suspects? What about the
principle of a suspect being “innocent until proven guilty?” I imagine
that controversial police policy will come under intense critical scrutiny
during the ensuing investigation.
|
Dr. Catalanello is a licensed psychologist in his home State of Louisiana, USA, and a member of the Faculty of Liberal Arts at Asian University,
Chonburi. You may address questions and comments to him at [email protected], or post on his weblog at
http://asianupsych.blogspot.com
|
|
