The FDA prosecution of the tomato proved once again that criminal indictments are often tunnel visioned and have a malicious effect on the indicted.

How many criminal cases in this country focus on one suspect to the exclusion of all others?  Well, that was the case with the tomato.  The investigators, eager to nab a suspect… in this case the tomato… narrowed their vision and investigation to what seemed most obvious, allowing the real culprit to have time to escape the scene.  The tomato, in the instant case, was indicted on circumstantial evidence and hearsay.  That has happened more than once in the criminal justice system, too. 

“Tomato” was the name that cropped up consistently in the recent salmonella outbreak.  It seemed the obvious culprit.  The FDA jumped to the conclusion based on hearsay that it was obvious that the red round tomato was the only suspect.  Instead of looking at other complementary foods, it was easier to prosecute the tomato than to follow up on other less prominent leads.  It happens all the time.

Why?  Well, that’s a simple answer.  The general public wants to put “closure” to any event or incident that seems dangerous.  As we have seen in too many cases, eyewitness accounts are faulty.  The questioning of investigators have a tendency to lead the witnesses to a pre-supposed conclusion, to the exclusion of any other suspects.  Recently, based on such compelling testimony, the tomato was indicted.

Once the word was out… the tomato is the prime suspect… we all forgot the basic tenents of our judicial system.  The tomato should have been innocent until proven guilty.  However, the FDA spread the word that the tomato was the most likely culprit and the investigation that followed was focused on gathering information that would prove the tomato guilty.  As with so many criminal cases, the truth is not the objective.  Instead, a conviction… a notch on the belt for the FDA and “closure” for those affected… became the objective.

Regulators have struggled to pinpoint the source of the outbreak, which has raised questions about U.S. food safety and prompted lawmakers to demand new systems to trace fresh produce from farm to table.

FDA said it removed the tomato warning because there are no longer any tomatoes coming into the market from producers that were being looked at as possible sources of contamination.

As with so many who are indicted and tried in the press, it is doubtful that the tomato will regain its standing in the salad bowl.  Oh, eventually, it may work its way back onto the daily menu, but for now the tomato is still a danger in the minds of those who wish to believe it.  The removal of the warning concerning tomatoes comes too late to restore the tomatoes standing for this season.  The damage has been done.

And, as with hearsay and eyewitness testimony, regulators from the FDA were unable to link a single incident of salmonella saintpaul to the plump red tomato. 

Regulators never found Salmonella Saintpaul at any tomato farms or packing plants, even though early indicators pointed to tomatoes as the source of illness. 

The nation’s tomato farmers have paid the price for malicious prosecution.  The FDA is sorry for that.  But, the cost of defending the innocent is no less than defending the guilty.  In this case, the prosecution of the tomato has cost close to a hundred million dollars, more than a death penalty case.  And, like so many who have been exonerated, the tomato and those who grow them receive only an apology.  Then, they are forgotten for all intents and purposes, left to pick up the pieces of broken lives as the FDA moves on to the next suspect.