Attorney doesnt tell the whole story
On Jan. 26, ADN published an article by criminal defense attorney Marcelle McDannel in which she continued to criticize the Ferguson prosecutor for not ensuring the grand jury in the Michael Brown case returned an indictment so the case would go to trial. McDannel described a trial as:
"[A]n adversarial contest … ideal for ferreting out the truth. One side presents a witness and the other side is permitted to challenge that witness' testimony through cross-examination, which is, according to the Supreme Court, 'the greatest legal engine ever invented for the discovery of truth.' Only trial witnesses, not those who appear before the grand jury, are subjected to this truth-divining engine."
Just as "McDannel doesn't tell the whole story about grand juries" (ADN, Jan. 16), she doesn't tell the whole story about trials. There are Alaska rules of evidence and case law that prohibit trial juries from hearing certain relevant, truthful evidence. Criminal defense attorneys routinely argue these rules to keep such evidence from the jury. The U.S. Supreme Court has long recognized it is the "normal course" for defense attorneys to "confuse a witness, even a truthful one, or make him appear unsure or indecisive." The National Association of Criminal Defense Lawyers argues on its website that a criminal trial is not about the truth and urges its members to challenge any jury instruction that suggests it is.
ADN readers deserve a balance of reporting and opinions from which they can make up their own minds about their criminal justice system. I trust the paper will continue to try to provide that to them in the future.
— Val Van Brocklin
Anchorage
Post office workers always helpful
Linda Buhler (Letters, Jan. 24) must not use the same post office in Wasilla as I do. All the years I have used their services, they have always been most helpful — cheerfully so, even when there's a line out the door of disgruntled customers, even after they have been on their feet for hours.
I have been going there since they opened, know them well, and if I can stand in line at my age, nearly 92, I should think others could take it as another bump in life's travels. And I am against private sector mail delivery.
— Virginia Spreen
Wasilla
Keep government free of Christianity
More blather from well-meaning Christians — Jim Minnery and his flock can massage-obfuscate-confuse and jumble their point of view in any number of ways. All this rhetoric, however, has only one objective in mind — more "religion" (Christianity) creeping into a government that was intended by its founders to remain secular.
Mr. Minnery can preach from his church, his pulpit or any old soapbox but he should keep his Christianity out of my government.
— Mike Gogolowski
Anchorage
Dont warp facts to protect Williams
The article about Brian Williams and his "misremembered" story in the paper is an unbelievable spin. The spin is even incorrect. Mr. Williams wasn't in the helicopter behind the one that was shot at, either — he was going in the opposite direction. Get your facts straight. A lie is a lie no matter how you want to spin it to protect one of your own.
— Roberta Townes
Anchorage
Scientists with reservations about evolution risk all
Mr. Box decries that "science is under fire" ("Science under attack in US, and harm could result," Feb. 1). He's correct about the war but he misidentifies the belligerent. The toughest enemies of free inquiry today reside in the bastions of mainstream science.
Let's begin with a little background. Without naming them, Mr. Box refers to creation scientists as ideologically motivated fanatics whose goal is to discredit evolution — "the fundamental principle of biology" — and introduce their agenda into the school system.
Mr. Box neglects to mention that a growing number of credentialed scientists see serious weaknesses in the hypothesis of evolution. He and other interested readers are encouraged to read Jonathan Wells' book "Icons of Evolution" to see evolution's "strongest cases" critically examined by an impeccably credentialed scientist (Wells holds a Ph.D. in molecular and cell biology from the University of California-Berkeley).
This brings us to "science under fire." Mr. Box also neglects to mention that a scientist who publicly states her reservations about evolution risks the destruction of her professional and personal life. Mr. Box and others are encouraged to watch Ben Stein's 2008 documentary "Expelled: No Intelligence Allowed" to see what happens when a mainstream scientist dares to point out an empirical weakness in the Darwinian position.
Science should be an open-ended pursuit of knowledge. That pursuit should not get shut down when a scientist differs, using respectable data and logic, from the ruling paradigm. I trust Mr. Box would agree that science flourishes in an environment open to free inquiry and bound only by the rules of honest data collection and clear thinking.
— Rudy Poglitsh
17-year biology teacher
Wasilla
The views expressed here are the writers' own and are not necessarily endorsed by Alaska Dispatch News, which welcomes a broad range of viewpoints. To submit a letter for consideration, email letters@alaskadispatch.com, or click here to submit via any web browser. Submitting a letter to the editor constitutes granting permission for it to be edited for clarity, accuracy and brevity. Send longer works of opinion to commentary@alaskadispatch.com.