Person of interest

Person of Interest: A Term with a Controversial Past

Have you ever wondered what it means when the news reports someone as a “person of interest” in an investigation? This term, often used by law enforcement, refers to individuals who are under scrutiny but haven’t been formally accused or arrested. It’s a bit like having a cloud hanging over your head—neither rain nor shine, just a sense that something is amiss.

But here’s the twist: this term has no legal meaning! It’s more of a euphemism for “suspect,” which can be quite misleading. Imagine if someone told you they were interested in you because they thought you might have information or characteristics worth looking into—wouldn’t that make your skin crawl?

The term’s origins trace back to 1986 during the Green River Killer investigation, where it was coined by Fae Brooks. It gained notoriety after Attorney General John Ashcroft used it in 2002 regarding Dr. Steven Hatfill in the anthrax attacks case. This usage sparked a wave of controversy and legal battles.

The Controversial Hatfill v. Ashcroft Case

When John Ashcroft used the term ‘person of interest,’ it wasn’t just a simple description; it was a loaded phrase that could change public perception and media coverage. Dr. Steven Hatfill, who became a person of interest in the anthrax attacks investigation, sued the Department of Justice for $5.8 million, claiming his life was “publicly shredded.”

The Justice Department argued they didn’t mean to cause harm; they just wanted to deflect media scrutiny by using this term. But the damage had been done. The term ‘person of interest’ became a euphemism that could be used carelessly, leading to public trials by media.

From Controversy to Regularity

The term’s initial use caused quite a stir, but it has since become increasingly regular in law enforcement jargon. Richard Jewell, the suspect in the 1996 Atlanta Olympics bombing, questioned whether the public would view someone as innocent upon hearing the term ‘person of interest.’ He was right; things have changed.

Go back before 1996 at a shooting or murder and see how they refer to the person being arrested. Compare that with something recent, and you’ll notice the difference. What happened to me is a factor in that change,” Hatfill said. The term has evolved from a neutral description to one that can carry significant weight.

Legal Clarification

The term ‘person of interest’ isn’t recognized in law or criminal procedure, which makes it even more confusing. Normal Justice Department parlance includes terms such as ‘suspect,’ ‘subject,’ and ‘target.’ In 2002, Senator Chuck Grassley asked for clarification on the use of this term.

The department replied that they did not intend to cause harm and meant to explain Hatfill was just one of many scientists cooperating with the investigation. There is no formal definition for the term “person of interest.”

Conclusion: A Term Worth Revisiting

The term ‘person of interest’ has a complex history, filled with controversy and legal battles. It’s a term that can change public perception and media coverage in ways that go beyond its intended meaning. As we continue to navigate the complexities of law enforcement and public relations, it might be worth revisiting whether this term is truly serving its purpose or if it’s time for a more precise and less misleading description.