Rearrest Policy, 4th Amendment

Re “Sheriff Halts Policy of Rearresting Suspects,” Jan. 18.

As the attorney who filed the lawsuit challenging Ventura County’s delayed arraignment scheme, I commend all of the public officials who had the courage to admit that the resulting incarcerations were illegal. Their cooperation in abolishing the practice is also commendable.

I am personally concerned, however, with the attitude expressed by some that the practice could be reinstated with permission from the California Legislature.

The 4th Amendment requires that all persons arrested be taken to court without unreasonable delay. The entire purpose of an arrest is to get someone into court. If there is insufficient evidence, the arrest is no good. Even with probable cause, the person is entitled to a lawyer and reasonable bail.

U.S. Supreme Court Justice Antonin Scalia is on record as supporting a maximum of 24 hours precourt custody in cases where the arrest was not approved in advance by an arrest warrant. California has no authority to tinker with federal Constitutional requirements. One would also hope it would resist any temptation to try.

Should Ventura County reinstate a policy of holding arrestees incommunicado without appointment of counsel or the opportunity to plead with a judge, more lawsuits would be filed, even if the policy is supported by an unconstitutional state statute.

The entire notion is, frankly, un-American. Our founding fathers and mothers would be disappointed. They got the job done on time without computers, video arraignments, e-mail, digital booking photos and all the other newfangled conveniences. So can we.

MICHAEL C. McMAHON

Carpinteria