There’s nothing like some media attention to get cops off their stools at Dunkin’ Donuts, so when the “dapper groper” case caught the attention of the press, someone had to be arrested. That someone was Karl Vanderwoude, whose picture was smeared across the screen and tabloids.
As that bastion of journalistic integrity, the New York Post put it:
In the most recent case, Vanderwoude allegedly grabbed a 22-year-old woman’s butt and then stuck a camera under her skirt to film her as she exited the Chambers Street subway station on March 30.
KARL VANDERWOUDE Targeted gals, cops say. The sicko also approached a 19-year-old woman on Feb. 27 on Second Avenue near East 67th Street, grabbed her butt and took off, cops added.A day earlier, he grabbed a woman’s crotch and butt on Varick Street near King Street, police said.
Nice big, clear picture, so that everybody could see what the “sicko” looked like. Except for one detail. He was completely, totally, 110% innocent of any wrongdoing. They pinched the wrong guy.
From the Daily News :
Charges against a Bible study leader accused of groping women in Manhattan are expected to be dismissed after prosecutors saw security tapes and dinner receipts that backed his alibi, his attorney said Saturday.Here’s the trick: Arrest first and investigate later. Mind you, it’s not as if the cops actually investigate at all, except to the extent necessary to make their case. The concept of investigation, as a means of ascertaining guilt or innocence, is one of the great jokes of the criminal justice system. “Investigation” is just a euphemism for nail down the evidence to prove that the guy already under arrest gets convicted.
Prosecutors saw security tapes and other evidence provided by MVision, Karl Vanderwoude’s employer, that showed the 26-year-old was at his Madison Ave. office sending emails just before 2 p.m. on Feb. 27, said lawyer John Tumelty.
That’s the same time a man who police believed was Vanderwoude grabbed a 19-year-old woman’s behind at Second Ave. and E. 67th St.
Had it not been for those who gave a damn, particularly his lawyer, John Tumelty, having run down the alibi evidence that the cops could have sought had they chosen to find out whether he had done anything wrong before smearing his name and reputation, this might have waited until trial for an outcome, and that outcome is hardly certain. Need I add that whoever was doing the groping would have been groping still.
So what will the cops do to give Karl Vanderwoude back his reputation? And what of the media who was only too happy to make sure everyone in New York saw the face of the pervert who wasn’t?
It’s irrelevant that he’s a bible study leader, a boy scout or just a regular guy with nothing special to commend him. What is relevant is that he did not grope anyone. He did not commit the crime for which the cops released his image, his name, and blessed its dissemination as wide and far as possible to prove what great detectives they are and how they captured a heinous sex offender and thus are due their pension and the adoration of an appreciative public.
So Vanderwoude gets a dismissal, and maybe someone will tell him they’re sorry he had to go through this, as if sorry makes it all go away.
Sleep well tonight, neighbors, knowing New York’s Finest is on the job.
Discover more from Simple Justice
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
And I thought I was in the only place that had that problem. Silly me.
I have a case right now where all the cop had to do to get the facts was walk across the street and interview the folks in the neighborhood bar, who were expecting him to do just that. But the light was on at Krispy Kreme, so they waited in vain.
That “Hot Donuts Now” sign is just so difficult to resist 🙂
Of course, the cops themselves won’t have to pay at all. It’ll be the tax payer that picks up the lawsuit tab. Frankly, someone should post the arresting officer’s mug on the web for all to see.
Pay? There’s nothing to pay.
Why doesn’t the real bad guy just join the TSA?
Now that was funny. Who knew you had it in you?
Defamation of character? False light per se? Does the name Richard Jewell ring a bell?
Heh. You’re very funny. It never ceases to amaze me how people think there’s some mysterious remedy at the end of the rainbow.
As long as the police had probable cause for the arrest (such as an identification, even if mistaken), and no affirmative violation of constitutional rights (such as concealment of evidence of innocence), they’re off the hook. If you ask a judge, this is a text book case of the criminal justice system working perfectly. Case dismissed.
Now I’m even more depressed, because I know you’re right.
This is a fantastic story that shows that the innocent actually sometimes, well maybe.. ok ok its an anomaly that must be stopped, get found innocent after being found guilty by the powers that be.
It’s not like he was a politician or CEO of a bank or something. /sarc off
Too late.