Mob mentality on the streets -- and online

Version 2.0 of the Vancouver Stanley Cup riot has proven a boon for glass installers and call-in talk radio programs alike, but it has also given rise to what may very well be an unprecedented level of cyber-vigilantism in this city.

Unlike the 1994 riot, where for the most part individuals were identified by snatches of news-camera footage, the 2011 riot was photographed and videotaped by all manner of portable devices and -- here's the really new part -- posted on internet sites like YouTube for everyone to watch (repeatedly, if desired).

This in turn led to numerous individuals who would otherwise have gone unidentified to be "outed", sometimes by friends, family or co-workers. In some cases this has led to loss of employment or educational opportunities. But is this right? Do cyber-vigilantes perform a public service by exposing alleged rioters?

The visceral response is yes; but the rational response is no.

From a legal perspective (which, as a lawyer, happens to be mine) punishment follows conviction, not identification. Presumption of innocence is a fundamental principle of our legal system, our constitution, and our country. Exposing individuals for acts they may have committed may seem appropriate, but the law of unintended consequences quickly asserts itself. Soon, individuals are losing everything because of one mistake, or families are being driven from their homes such as in this case of teenager Nathan Kotylak.

That is the problem with vigilantism, cyber or otherwise. It is the mirror-image of a riot: unpredictable, uncontrollable, and damaging to individuals and society. Yes, identification, arrest, prosecution, conviction and sentencing is a tedious process. But that's the system we've devised over several hundred years to ensure (as best we can) that only the truly guilty are identified, and that their punishment is proportional to their conduct. A mob can be emotional, irrational, thoughtless. But society, through cyber-vigilantes or otherwise, cannot afford to be. There are simply too many futures at stake.