Bob Chiarito: Surveillance video, often decried, may be the key to getting justice

Chicago Tribune

a day ago

A white man who alleged he was afraid for his life shoots Black teens. This was the gist of the 1984 incident involving Bernhard Goetz in New York City, and it seems to be the gist of the shooting involving Charles Leto that took place on June 26 here in Chicago. The major difference thus far seems to be that in the most recent case, there is surveillance footage.
The plethora of surveillance cameras in society, from banks to residences and everywhere in between, is often looked at negatively, as something Orwellian and as a way for the government to control the masses — but there are many upsides for those seeking justice.
In 1984, when Goetz shot four Black youths on the New York subway after they approached him and asked for $5, America had not yet entered the surveillance era. Although he was charged with attempted murder, assault and reckless endangerment, he was ultimately found guilty of only one count of carrying an unlicensed firearm. Had there been a surveillance video, things may have turned out differently. Instead, the word of a white adult was taken over the word of four Black youths, and Goetz not only was found not guilty of the major crimes against the boys, but he became a hero known as the 'Subway Vigilante.'
It's important to realize that along with the fact that surveillance video was nowhere near as prevalent in 1984 as it is today, 1980s New York was a powder keg, unlike Chicago in 2025. Crime in New York was rampant, and racial tensions were high. Two years after the Goetz incident, a white mob in the Italian American enclave of Howard Beach in New York chased 23-year-old Michael Griffith and two friends, all Black, and beat Griffith to death for simply being in their neighborhood. Had the jury in that case had surveillance video, it's likely the sentences of the white perpetrators would have been longer.
Then, in 1989, the Central Park jogger case came along, and five Black and Hispanic teenagers were convicted of the crime of brutally raping a white woman. They served sentences ranging from five to 12 years, and in 2002, their convictions were vacated because they didn't do it. Had there been surveillance video, there is little doubt that things would have turned out differently for those innocent boys.
In Chicago, the closest parallel to the racial attacks in 1980s New York was the 1997 Bridgeport attack on Lenard Clark, a Black 13-year-old, by a group of teenagers including Frank Caruso Jr., who was convicted of the beating but ultimately forced to serve only two years of an eight-year sentence. Had there been video, it's likely that Caruso would have had a much harsher sentence.
Almost 20 years after the Clark beating, Chicago would experience another high-profile incident — the shooting death of Black 17-year-old Laquan McDonald by a Chicago police officer. The initial report put out by the Police Department was that McDonald was walking erratically down a street while carrying a knife and then lunged at officers when they approached, forcing them to shoot him. However, there was a video of this incident, which was withheld from the public for more than a year before it was finally released and only because a Cook County judge ordered it. The video led to the resignation of police Superintendent Garry McCarthy, then-Mayor Rahm Emanuel's decision not to seek reelection and the conviction of Officer Jason Van Dyke for second-degree murder and 16 counts of aggravated battery, one count for every shot that hit McDonald.
Without the video, it's very likely that the initial report would have been the final word, and Van Dyke would still be a Chicago police officer today.
This brings us to the most recent incident: It is alleged that Leto shot two black youths who approached him while he was fixing his bicycle outside the Douglass Park pool, where he worked as a lifeguard. Marjay Dotson, 15, was killed, and 14-year-old Jeremy Herred was critically wounded. (Ironically, Herred is a cousin of McDonald.)
Unlike in the McDonald case, it took authorities just a few days to release the surveillance video, and Leto was quickly charged with murder and attempted murder. While he is likely to claim that he felt threatened and that he believed the boys had weapons, no weapons were recovered, and it's a safe bet that the video will be key to the prosecution.
Every day, surveillance videos help solve all types of crimes, from carjackings and purse snatchings to murder. They can help convict and exonerate, but they are not a cure-all. We've all seen savvy defense lawyers attempt to take them apart frame by frame in court and twist them before a jury. It worked in the trial of the Los Angeles police officers accused of beating Rodney King in 1991, but it did not work in 2016 when Van Dyke's attorney tried to convince jurors that McDonald posed a threat.
It will be interesting to see how the case against Leto plays out. What is apparent to those favoring justice is: It's much better to have surveillance video than not to have it.