Akron Beacon Journal, 25May1999-2

AKRON BEACON JOURNAL
Tuesday, May 25, 1999
Section: EDITORIAL
Page: A10\
Memo: Letters to the Editor / Voice of the People

It seems that one Akron Beacon Journal reporter thinks the Summit County prosecutor's office is trampling the rights of citizens by filing charges against people who seek to influence witnesses in the alleged rapes of two minors.

His series of May 16 and 17, "Justice for all?", reeks of ill-disposed, thinly veiled hatred of the law-enforcement community. The story starts out in graphic, heart-rending detail of the effects that felony charges have had on a young man's life. And only six pages later does he mention, dripping with sympathy and compassion, the fact that this man and an accomplice were essentially stalking a witness.

Perhaps the reporter thinks they were outside this young man's house 300 miles away to sell Girl Scout cookies, but no reasonable person would.

The writer must think that serial killers can be rehabilitated with some hugs, food stamps and judicious counseling about their inner child.

And he would still bash the cops and prosecutors for not offering the right kind of environmentally correct tofu-fiber muffins in jail.

His article really belongs on the editorial page, because it doesn't contain enough fact to put it in with the news. Is this the same Beacon Journal that just ran a weeklong series of critical articles on Akron Police Chief Edward Irvine (May 2-9, "An internal affair")?

Brad Hennebert

Cuyahoga Falls

-----------------------------------------

BAD PROSECUTING CAN DO MUCH HARM

I read with great interest the May 16 and 17 articles pertaining to the Summit County prosecutor's office ("Justice for all?").

But the one about Prosecutor Michael Callahan's opinions on overindictment and prosecutorial immunity really rubbed me the wrong way (May 17, "Prosecutor dismisses complaints"). What arrogance.

As an alleged advocate of the people of Summit County, how can he subscribe to the idea that if you are accused, you must be guilty of something?

Correct me if I'm wrong, but isn't it supposed to be innocent until proved guilty? Callahan obviously has no qualms about sacrificing innocents to get the guilty.

If we mere mortals must atone for our sins, surely prosecutors should pay for theirs.

Immunity gives them free rein to trample anyone's civil rights with absolutely no recourse for a person who is maliciously accused.

They admit they make mistakes, but that does nothing to mend the reputation or monetary loss suffered by one who is falsely indicted and tried without evidence to back it up.

I fear the prosecutor's office has become a political one -- a stepping stone to higher political office, at the very least.

If the staffers are held accountable for their incompetence maybe impartiality will return to the process and they will be less inclined to sneer at civil liberties.

It's no wonder that after a revolutionary overthrow of a government, lawyers are the first ones taken to the guillotine.

I better mind my tongue or I'll find myself indicted for sedition and conspiracy to commit murder.

Anthony P. Flaker

Akron