# Does the DA have to call a perp "the accused" or can he say "the murderer"? **URL:** \ **Category:** Factual Questions\ **Created:** [November 30, 2005, 11:54pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/does-the-da-have-to-call-a-perp-the-accused-or-can-he-say-the-murderer/333475 "2005-11-30T23:54:05Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 1
**Author:** ![Angels\_Flight](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/6bbea6/32.png) [@Angels\_Flight](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Angels_Flight)\ **Post date:** [November 30, 2005, 11:54pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/does-the-da-have-to-call-a-perp-the-accused-or-can-he-say-the-murderer/333475/1 "2005-11-30T23:54:05Z")
In court he has just said under oath that the man is a murder, and that he will prove it, and that the jury should be ashamed to think otherwise. So is there any reason to pussyfoot at the press conference while they await the verdict? ---
**Author:** ![Angels\_Flight](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/6bbea6/32.png) [@Angels\_Flight](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Angels_Flight)\ **Post date:** [November 30, 2005, 11:56pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/does-the-da-have-to-call-a-perp-the-accused-or-can-he-say-the-murderer/333475/2 "2005-11-30T23:56:00Z")
And, yeah, I know his oath is not one of giving evidence, but it is an oath and he is stating the guy is a murderer. Flat out. No hedging or alleged talk in front of the jury. ---
**Author:** ![David\_Simmons](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/9de053/32.png) [@David\_Simmons](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/David_Simmons)\ **Post date:** [December 1, 2005, 12:13am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/does-the-da-have-to-call-a-perp-the-accused-or-can-he-say-the-murderer/333475/3 "2005-12-01T00:13:18Z")
Go to the board and write 100 times: A person isn’t guilty of a crime until the jury says so. ---
**Author:** ![Random](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/57b2e6/32.png) [@Random](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Random)\ **Post date:** [December 1, 2005, 12:15am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/does-the-da-have-to-call-a-perp-the-accused-or-can-he-say-the-murderer/333475/4 "2005-12-01T00:15:37Z")
Prosecutors’ arguments are not under oath. ---
**Author:** ![David\_Simmons](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/9de053/32.png) [@David\_Simmons](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/David_Simmons)\ **Post date:** [December 1, 2005, 12:42am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/does-the-da-have-to-call-a-perp-the-accused-or-can-he-say-the-murderer/333475/5 "2005-12-01T00:42:06Z")
If the jury acquits wouldn’t the prosecutors having publicly called him, or her, a murderer be slander? ---
**Author:** ![Atticus\_Finch](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/ec9cab/32.png) [@Atticus\_Finch](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Atticus_Finch)\ **Post date:** [December 1, 2005, 12:54am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/does-the-da-have-to-call-a-perp-the-accused-or-can-he-say-the-murderer/333475/6 "2005-12-01T00:54:57Z")
Every prosecutor _must_ accuse the defendant of having committed a crime. They couldn’t do their job otherwise. They have a certain type of [immunity](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Transactional_immunity) that allows them to do so, in most legal systems. ---
**Author:** ![David\_Simmons](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/9de053/32.png) [@David\_Simmons](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/David_Simmons)\ **Post date:** [December 1, 2005, 2:26am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/does-the-da-have-to-call-a-perp-the-accused-or-can-he-say-the-murderer/333475/7 "2005-12-01T02:26:17Z")
> [@Atticus Finch](#): > > Every prosecutor _must_ accuse the defendant of having committed a crime. They couldn’t do their job otherwise. They have a certain type of [immunity](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Transactional_immunity) that allows them to do so, in most legal systems. Well sure at a Grand Jury or a preliminary hearing or at the trial. But at a news conference after the trial is over? ---
**Author:** ![Poysyn](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/p/f4b2a3/32.png) [@Poysyn](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Poysyn)\ **Post date:** [December 1, 2005, 3:08am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/does-the-da-have-to-call-a-perp-the-accused-or-can-he-say-the-murderer/333475/8 "2005-12-01T03:08:14Z")
After the trial is over if the person is found guilty of murder, then yes, it is my understanding that you can call them a murderer (based on my journalism studies). But not before. Unless you are under French law. ---
**Author:** ![Walloon](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/w/fbc32d/32.png) [@Walloon](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Walloon)\ **Post date:** [December 1, 2005, 5:11am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/does-the-da-have-to-call-a-perp-the-accused-or-can-he-say-the-murderer/333475/9 "2005-12-01T05:11:13Z")
Prosecutors can, and often do, continue to maintain that the defendant is guilty, after acquittal. ---
**Author:** ![Tim\_T-Bonham.net](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/46a35a/32.png) [@Tim\_T-Bonham.net](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Tim_T-Bonham.net)\ **Post date:** [December 1, 2005, 6:30am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/does-the-da-have-to-call-a-perp-the-accused-or-can-he-say-the-murderer/333475/10 "2005-12-01T06:30:29Z")
> [@Walloon](#): > > Prosecutors can, and often do, continue to maintain that the defendant is guilty, after acquittal. The (ex-)defendant could then proceed to sue the prosecutor for slander because of this. They seldom do, because that would just give the prosecutor another chance to prove that they are guilty (and this time under more lenient Civil Court rules). Like OJ Simpson, who beat the rap in the Criminal Case, but lost in Civil Court. Most defendants are glad to be done with the case with an acquittal. And there is a cost factor involved. In a Civil case, the ex-defendant has to pay for his own lawyer (no ‘court appointed at no cost’) and legal fees. But many times the prosecutor fighting a slander suit would be considered related to his job, and the costs would be paid by the prosecutors office. So it would be expensive for an ex-defendant, and many of them do not have great financial resources. ---
**Author:** ![clairobscur](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/839c29/32.png) [@clairobscur](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/clairobscur)\ **Post date:** [December 1, 2005, 7:03am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/does-the-da-have-to-call-a-perp-the-accused-or-can-he-say-the-murderer/333475/11 "2005-12-01T07:03:31Z")
> [@Poysyn](#): > > After the trial is over if the person is found guilty of murder, then yes, it is my understanding that you can call them a murderer (based on my journalism studies). > > But not before. > > Unless you are under French law. Could you elaborate about this part of the French law? ---
**Author:** ![Marley23](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/45deac/32.png) [@Marley23](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Marley23)\ **Post date:** [December 1, 2005, 7:57am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/does-the-da-have-to-call-a-perp-the-accused-or-can-he-say-the-murderer/333475/12 "2005-12-01T07:57:06Z")
> [@Poysyn](#): > > After the trial is over if the person is found guilty of murder, then yes, it is my understanding that you can call them a murderer (based on my journalism studies). In this country, you can call someone a murderer or a thief in print after he’s been convicted of it without fear of being sued for libel. But before conviction is another thing. In press releases and announcements, my experience is that DAs state unequivocally what the defendant did, when and how he did it, and so on. However, their releases always finish with the disclaimer that “The charges are merely an accusation and the defendants are presumed innocent until and unless proven guilty.” [Here is an old local example.](http://www.ins.state.ny.us/p0005232.htm) They always speak from a position of certainty, but they do so advisedly. > [@Angels'Flight](#): > > So is there any reason to pussyfoot at the press conference while they await the verdict? I suppose they would not want to be accused of making it impossible for the defendant to get a fair trial or fair sentencing. I don’t know what the law is there. Still, if they can speak that way in press releases and at press conferences before the trial starts, I figure they can probably do it after the trial has started - though I don’t know if they would want to. ---
**Author:** ![Marley23](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/45deac/32.png) [@Marley23](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Marley23)\ **Post date:** [December 1, 2005, 8:08am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/does-the-da-have-to-call-a-perp-the-accused-or-can-he-say-the-murderer/333475/13 "2005-12-01T08:08:43Z")
That said, however, I may’ve overlooked something important: the DA’s office still doesn’t call any of those people “the thief” or “the defrauder” or anything. It’s stated that they committed these crimes, but I don’t think it’s a coincidence that those words are absent. ---
**Author:** ![don\_t\_ask](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/e68b1a/32.png) [@don\_t\_ask](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/don_t_ask)\ **Post date:** [December 1, 2005, 8:28am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/does-the-da-have-to-call-a-perp-the-accused-or-can-he-say-the-murderer/333475/14 "2005-12-01T08:28:58Z")
I am in Australia but a workmate actually had an experience of this in a high profile case some years ago. He was a juror and they had listened to evidence for weeks in (IIRC) a complicated drugs/conspiracy case. While the prosecutor was making his closing address he said something that prompted the defence lawyer to leap to his feet and object. A whole lot of legal to-ing and fro-ing went on, the jury was removed, arguments were made and the judge recalled the jury to declare a mistrial. Apparently the prosecutor had made some remark that presupposed the conviction of one defendent, who was not yet convicted, as evidence of their guilt. The guy I worked with said that no-one on the jury had any idea what was going on and the remark had just gone over their heads and couldn’t have had any influence. ---
**Author:** ![chrisk](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/6de8d8/32.png) [@chrisk](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/chrisk)\ **Post date:** [December 1, 2005, 11:07am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/does-the-da-have-to-call-a-perp-the-accused-or-can-he-say-the-murderer/333475/15 "2005-12-01T11:07:57Z")
Lawyer: _I’ll_ ask the questions here, Carjacker Willie! Lawyer 2: Objection! Judge: I’m going to allow it – it characterizes the defendant as a carjacker. (from Simpsons, “The great money caper”) ---
**Author:** ![Mordib](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/c0e974/32.png) [@Mordib](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Mordib)\ **Post date:** [December 1, 2005, 12:37pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/does-the-da-have-to-call-a-perp-the-accused-or-can-he-say-the-murderer/333475/16 "2005-12-01T12:37:09Z")
> [@Angels'Flight](#): > > In court he has just said under oath that the man is a murder, and that he will prove it, and that the jury should be ashamed to think otherwise. > So is there any reason to pussyfoot at the press conference while they await the verdict? is this a US court? I’m not familiar with their rules but the above seems a bit odd based on my limited experience of UK courts - a) as i understand it it is fine to say ‘I will prove today that the acused IS a murderer’ but it is not okay to seperate the statements eg ‘he is a murderer and I will prove it.’ The difference is the first is a conditional statement, it accuses but does not state as fact, whereas the second one does state as fact which it isnt legally true at that point in the trial. (the same goes for the rpess conferance before the verdict) b) guilt tripping the jury is surely not allowed, in the same way threatning them is not allowed. the idea is to sway their opinion with evidence and nothing else. I realise a certain amount of this does go on but not this blatently. ---
**Author:** ![Poysyn](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/p/f4b2a3/32.png) [@Poysyn](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Poysyn)\ **Post date:** [December 1, 2005, 1:02pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/does-the-da-have-to-call-a-perp-the-accused-or-can-he-say-the-murderer/333475/17 "2005-12-01T13:02:57Z")
> [@clairobscur](#): > > Could you elaborate about this part of the French law? I am sure someone will correct me if I am wrong - but it is my understanding that French law is the opposite, you need to prove innocence, not guilt. ---
**Author:** ![Cartooniverse](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/cartooniverse/32/3084_2.png) [@Cartooniverse](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Cartooniverse)\ **Post date:** [December 1, 2005, 1:20pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/does-the-da-have-to-call-a-perp-the-accused-or-can-he-say-the-murderer/333475/18 "2005-12-01T13:20:17Z")
> [@Walloon](#): > > Prosecutors can, and often do, continue to maintain that the defendant is guilty, after acquittal. Cites ?? ---
**Author:** ![Wallenstein](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/w/b5a626/32.png) [@Wallenstein](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Wallenstein)\ **Post date:** [December 1, 2005, 1:31pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/does-the-da-have-to-call-a-perp-the-accused-or-can-he-say-the-murderer/333475/19 "2005-12-01T13:31:44Z")
In the UK you’ll often hear the police / Crown Prosecution Service say “we are not looking for anyone else in connection with this crime” when a defendent has been freed (perhaps due to an administrative error or other procedural glitch). It’s basically telling the world, we know he did it but the court / jury / system was too dumb to convict. ---
**Author:** ![clairobscur](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/839c29/32.png) [@clairobscur](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/clairobscur)\ **Post date:** [December 1, 2005, 6:09pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/does-the-da-have-to-call-a-perp-the-accused-or-can-he-say-the-murderer/333475/20 "2005-12-01T18:09:48Z")
> [@Poysyn](#): > > I am sure someone will correct me if I am wrong - but it is my understanding that French law is the opposite, you need to prove innocence, not guilt. Widespread belief, but utter bullshit. > [@declaration des droits de l'homme et du citoyen](#): > > Article 9 - As all persons are presumed innocent until declared guilty, force used in making indispensable arrests which exceeds that needed, shall be severely punished by law. That’s the basis of the presumption of innocence under french law, since the 1789 declaration of man and citizen rights has constitutional value, as mentionned in the preamble of the 1958 constitution. For instance : > [@code civil](#): > > Chacun a droit au respect de la présomption d’innocence. The rest of this article adress the case of a person pulically presented as guilty before he has been found so, and would answer nicely the OP question if it were about french law. [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/does-the-da-have-to-call-a-perp-the-accused-or-can-he-say-the-murderer/333475.md?page=2)