Letters To The Editor

LAW AND JUSTICE

Au pair judge ruled wisely

In the Massachusetts au pair case, my sympathies are currently with Judge Hiller Zobel. Regardless of how he ruled in this case, he was doomed to face criticism and in a no win situation.

Perhaps he believed that allowing the murder conviction and life sentence to stand would have constituted a gross miscarriage of justice. None of this should have come as any great shock after his refusal to provide transcripts the jury requested during their deliberation. He hinted strongly at the time that their request for such information could be construed as reasonable doubt about Woodward’s guilt.

Maybe he was right. If ever a case screamed reasonable doubt, this one did.

What about all the conflicting expert testimony? Were Matthew Eappen’s injuries sustained February 4 or earlier? Even medical experts seemed confused. The jury may well have been also.

This tragedy left too many unanswered questions and no witnesses to tell what happened. If there was a history of abuse, how had it gone undetected so long? If Matthew’s injuries were old ones, had he ever been cared for by anyone besides Louise Woodward?

Did his older brother show any signs of, or complain about, having ever been abused by a caregiver? Toddlers are often a parent’s best source of information about such things.

Ultimately, it matters little whether we agree with Zobel. He acted well within the scope of his powers in reducing Woodward’s sentence. Karen Carver Spokane

Ruling grounds for impeachment

At a time when our schools are plagued with such real problems as drugs and violence, an “activist” federal Alabama judge recently issued an unusually broad ruling censoring voluntary student-led prayers, even in time of national emergency, and decreed that a monitor patrol student grounds to enforce his order.

House Majority Whip Tom Delay recently called for the impeachment of renegade federal judges, “a recourse described in six clauses of the Constitution.”

Contrary to the claims of those who support judicial activism, the Constitution does not guarantee a judge his position for life, but only for the duration of “good behavior” (Article 3, Section 2).

The drafters of the Constitution intended impeachment to protect the immutable principle of “the consent of the governed.” Since the Constitution carries no title but “We the people,” impeachment was provided to remove judges who disregarded that standard - something common with today’s judiciary. For example, courts recently overturned elections in several states not because of any constitutional violation but simply because those judges preferred a different outcome.

This type of judicial activism was never intended. Federalist Paper No. 78 declared that the federal judiciary was designed to be “the weakest of the three departments of power” and “may truly be said to have neither force nor will.” Why? Because it was unelected.

While Congress is ultimately responsible for the discipline of judges, a wise political axiom declares that “Congress sees the light when it feels the heat.” It is time that we citizens make a difference by weighing-in on this issue with our own representatives. W.J. Lawson Spokane

LAW ENFORCEMENT

No political correctness for victims

How unfortunate, that a Washington State Patrol trooper and his supervisor have been punished for writing too many DWI tickets on or near the Spokane Indian Reservation.

It seems like any time a minority of any kind has a concern, imagined or real over anything, they immediately start screaming civil rights violations and racism. Due to the thing they call political correctness, most reactions to these concerns become overreactions.

Remember, this same group rallied at Franklin Park over its imagined concerns about the Walt Disney movie, “Pocahontas.” Not long ago, this group threatened Colville’s school board with all sorts of dire consequences if the high school mascot wasn’t changed. They evidently have a lot of free time on the reservation.

When DWI laws were written, no one race, creed or color was or should’ve been excluded. Certainly, no victims of these drivers are excluded for any of these reasons. Rightly so. I read nowhere that any of these accused contested the scientific facts that they deserved the DWI. Even on extensive investigation by the patrol itself uncovered no wrongdoing by the officer.

We all should be extremely disappointed in the outcome of this case. Those most disappointed will be the next victims and families of one of these unnoticed drunk drivers. Political correctness wins again. How sad for all concerned. James A. Nelson Spokane

Tribe, WSP should think again

Re: “DWI politics nabs trooper,” Nov. 16.

If Trooper David Fenn disobeyed direct orders to stay off the Spokane Indian Reservation, he should indeed be subject to disciplinary action. However, the transfer to another area seems extreme.

If the Spokane Tribe doesn’t want the Washington State Patrol patrolling its roads, so be it. But likewise, WSP shouldn’t be expected to respond to traffic accidents involving fatalities on the reservation, either.

The article indicates the investigation curtailed DWI arrests on highways near the reservation. Near the reservation - appalling! Let WSP stay off the reservation but not highways near it.

If the Spokane Tribe has a problem with its members being arrested off the reservation, maybe it should question whether there is really a problem.

If a particular area has a reputation for a high level of drunk drivers, that area should be patrolled more regularly than others. As sure as all drivers deserve protection from undue risk, patrols should be as vigorous as is called for, regardless of how close to or far they are from the reservation.

As for Jim SiJohn’s comment that the tribal council does not want the situation to escalate to the point that Fenn might get hurt, this could be perceived as a threat disguised as concern.

The investigation showed only one in five of Fenn’s DWI arrests were of Native Americans. Maybe some other ethnic group should be offended. Mark S. Mills Spokane

Fenn deserves an award, not transfer

Strike another blow to justice, thanks to political correctness. Washington State Patrol Chief Annette Sandberg is bowing to political pressure to discipline Trooper David Fenn, who was just doing the job taxpayers pay him to do: arrest criminals. Anyone driving drunk is breaking the law. Families die because of drunk drivers. My family drives on the highways Fenn was protecting. It shouldn’t matter whether someone is red, yellow, black or white. If the person is driving or drunk breaking any other law, make an arrest.

Fenn deserves to be honored, not reprimanded. Steve C. Ghering Deer Park, Wash.

IN THE PAPER

Key information didn’t make the cut

I saw your reprint of the Associated Press story which ran in The Spokesman-Review under the headline, “Clinton’s protection plan misguided, says Nethercutt.” The Tri-City Herald ran the same story under the headline, “Nethercutt wants authority over environment to be local.” There was one major difference between the stories apart from the headlines.

The Tri-City Herald used the entire AP story. The fact that newspapers must often edit stories so that they may fit into the paper is understandable. However, I do question what appears to be selective editing in this case.

The Spokesman-Review eliminated the final three paragraphs of the story, in which I outlined my reasons for offering concerns about the project. I mentioned that the federal government has spent $30 million on this project since 1993 and that the cost of the implementation of this plan will likely be upwards of $125 million a year. Furthermore, as a member of the House Interior Appropriations subcommittee, which oversees the funding of this and other projects, I questioned whether the federal agencies involved would have adequate funding during the next fiscal year for such a far-reaching project.

Leaving information out of the article regarding the costs and consequences of this project gives the reader an incomplete explanation for my concerns about actions by the federal government that affect the citizens of our region. Rep. George R. Nethercutt Jr. 5th Congressional District, Washington