Now that the Manhatten DA has recommended the dismissal of cases against the young men convicted of raping a woman in Central Park from several years ago, newspapers are beginning to chant that all police interviews should be videotaped from the moment of contact with the defendant to the end of any interview.

Personally, I am not looking forward to watching hours and hours of dull videotape, but if this is where we are headed, why can't the defense attorney be required to do the same for his contact with the defendant and state's witnesses?

The public's concern seems to be with an inappropriate influence by a person in the criminal justice system. How many times has a prosecutor wondered why the victim appears with a recantation immediately after visiting with the defense attorney? How many times has a prosecutor wondered why the defendant remembers being attacked only after discussing self-defense with his attorney?

Wouldn't society benefit from seeing and hearing these interviews, too?

These are probably the same people chanting against the proliferation of routine surveillance video as an "invasion of privacy." If they are so concerned about police interrogations, why aren't they equally concerned about brutal, senseless crimes as well?

Anyway, sounds like a good amendment for the "usual suspects" in the coming session.