Talk:Perp walk

source/etymology of the word 'PERP'?
Could someone explain where the word comes from? It is not a term used in other English speaking nations as far as I know. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 211.25.211.35 (talk) 06:24, 17 June 2011 (UTC)
 * See the note at the end of the first sentence. It's short for "perpetrator", the commonly-used American police term for an arrestee. Daniel Case (talk) 17:04, 17 June 2011 (UTC)

Biases?
Please try to keep your one-sided biases out of this article (and all Wikipedia articles) when editing. The intention here-- as with all Wikipedia articles-- is simply to define and explain the item, issue or practice.

Your personal opinions and unsupported assertions about the right or wrong of perp walks, or police motivations behind them, are not relevant or appropriate here, unless 1) you are a credentialed expert, and 2) you have provided citations for your assertions.

Bias is not necessarily a bad thing, but in an objective encyclopedia article (as opposed to an editorial page-- which Wikipedia isn't) it has to be clearly identified as such. Carelessly inserting your own particular cause or opinion into an otherwise objective article is not only a disservice to other users, but may also ultimately damage the cause you believe you are promoting! Please insert biased viewpoints and details carefully, with appropriate attention to their context to the overall intent of the article. For example, insert a section titled "Controversies regarding (Topic)" or similar.

Of course, police certainly perpetrate injustices against innocent people every day, and everyone reading or editing here probably has an example to share. But don't dump your pet peeve or cause here. There are plenty of articles and forums elsewhere to discuss this kind of thing. Go find one.

Remember, even the courts are split on whether this is 'fair', so let's not try to solve the issue by ranting. The first step is just explaining the issue clearly-- and further steps aren't appropriate here.

Thanks, all, for remembering what we're doing here.

Oklahoma City bomber Timothy McVeigh received a particularly notorious perp walk, in which he was paraded before television cameras (by a group of a dozen FBI agents who had been selected for the "honor"), nearly three hours before he was officially arrested for the bombing

How on earth was he in FBI custody and on a 'perp walk' BEFORE being "officialy arrested", whatever that means? I believe the writer means before he was formally CHARGED for the offence/s....as he was "officially arrested" by a State Trooper for a firearms violation prior to entering FBI custody... —Preceding unsigned comment added by 124.170.29.29 (talk) 03:49, 1 March 2008 (UTC)

French reaction to SDK perp walk
Elisabeth Guigou's comments were actually directed at the televised coverage of the bail proceedings, which she described as a pre-trial indictment: I haven't attempted to edit because there's a second quote there ('I don't see what it adds') which I cannot source and might be about the perp walk. But the preceding comment definitely about bail proceedings.

(Added) She was interviewed the day after by RTL TV when she became the first socialist politician to aver publicly that DSK was a drageur ("persistent flirter") and took a little more care to express at least a degree of sympathy for the complainant, but she didn't refer to the images and I don't think she made any other public utterances about the case. At any rate I can't find any sources on the internet and in particular I can't find any direct reference to the perp walk. BTW this is Le Monde commenting that the poll, which found that nearly three fifth of the Fench populace thought DSK was or probably was the victim of a plot, was itself a violation of the law Guigou. FightingMac (talk) 22:26, 14 June 2011 (UTC)

Good section, very thorough and I like it. FightingMac (talk) 22:08, 14 June 2011 (UTC)
 * Thank you. To address one of your points, you said Guigou was referring to "televised coverage of the bail process". This couldn't be the actual bail hearing itself, since New York doesn't allow television cameras in the courtroom at present (Photography, which produced that image of DSK sitting at the rear wall looking like he'd rather be a million other places, is allowed at the judge's discretion). I would also describe the perp walk in this case as part of the bail process, since it occurred after he was processed for arrest, on the way into the bail hearing. I'll read her remarks and see what I think. Daniel Case (talk) 15:51, 15 June 2011 (UTC)


 * Oh, that's curious (enjoyed the 'million other places' :-)). I didn't know that. It must be as you say although the French sources do stress some form of proceedings (this from my first cite above)


 * "Je suis bouleversée et j'ai trouvé les images écoeurantes", a déclaré la députée de Seine-Saint-Denis sur Europe 1, évoquant la retransmission télévisée de la comparution [appearance] de DSK devant une juge new-yorkaise.


 * Perhaps not the bail application itself but certainly some part of the appearance was televised. The L'Express article I cite has a photo of DSK side by side with Ben Brafman directly in front of Judge Jackson and you can see footage on a website_that_may_not_be_named_on_Wikipedia_:) here, originally from Euronews it seems (and there's a perp walk here as well, but not I think the same walk as the one the article has an image of).


 * However it's not a really important detail. Your source does say 'perp walk' and I don't doubt that Guigou was referring to the perp walk as well, which I do agree would no doubt have been part of the televised proceedings. FightingMac (talk) 11:57, 18 June 2011 (UTC)

Not a valid subject
Sorry, I don't see how this has warranted an entire enormous article. Perp walk? This is something I'd expect in Urbandictionary, not Wikipedia. I feel like this only serves the interests of handcuff enthusiasts. I wrote an article on half shirts and their history and the whole thing was pulled. This makes absolutely no sense in contrast. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 167.206.174.75 (talk) 13:36, 7 November 2013 (UTC)
 * "Sorry, I don't see how this has warranted an entire enormous article." Well, when I began writing it I didn't think I'd be adding too much to it, but as I sat down and researched it I found there were more and more dimensions to it (including two appellate-level federal court decisions (i.e., citable legal precedent) on aspects of the perp walk) and it became what it is now. That's the difference between writing an encyclopedia article and a dictionary entry.
 * "I feel like this only serves the interests of handcuff enthusiasts." Whatever you mean by that, I suppose.
 * "I wrote an article on half shirts and their history and the whole thing was pulled." Ah ... so this is where we're coming from. What did you call it? I can't find it in either your regular contrib history or your deleted contrib history. Did you write it from another account? (If so, please remember to use your own account to make such complaints). As I'm involved in the fashion WikiProject, I would really be interested to see it. We do have a lot of trouble writing acceptable articles about many aspects of fashion, particularly types of garments, because the sort of sources that count as reliable are sparse and often hard to reach online (or even off). So, if I can help you write a keepable article, I'd like to. Daniel Case (talk) 18:22, 7 November 2013 (UTC)

I disagree -- Perp walks are a major and controversial difference between the administration of justice in the United States and the administration of justice in other Western countries, even those countries that share much of our legal structure and tradition. The core objection to perp walks is that the public is told to be mindful that the accused in "presumed innocent", while at the same time, the public is shown that the accused had to be handcuffed, and had to be accompanied by armed officers to his/her court appearance. I am not aware of half-shirts having nearly that level of controversy, or having such a damaging effect on the lives of (potentially) innocent people. [I do agree, though, that reference to Adam & Eve, is a stretch, and really much too reaching for a mainstream article; Adam & Eve were banished, not arrested; they did not lose their freedom, and they were never involuntarily paraded before others -- largely because there were no "others" around at the time.] 98.216.172.247 (talk) 03:24, 17 February 2014 (UTC)
 * That was in a newspaper column being cited as a source, not the inline article text. Daniel Case (talk) 05:54, 17 February 2014 (UTC)