Rush to judgment
EDITOR: It was gratifying to read the excellent commentary by Chris Smith on the career, accomplishments and dedication of the Rev. John Crews (“Hanna’s band of brothers without its father,” Sunday). Crews is dedicated to his church and to the residents of the Hanna Boys Center. I am certain the positive influence Crews had on Walter Linares and J.T. Trainor are not isolated examples.
In this litigious world in which we live, it has become practice to consider one guilty upon accusation; to remove the accused despite years of exemplary service. Is this a rush to judgment without due process?
EDITOR: A drunken driver kills himself, and you eulogize and martyr him on the front page (“Friends: Crash victim was getting life back on track,” Saturday). Would your article have been the same if he had killed someone else, perhaps an entire family? Luckily, he only killed himself. That was a poor choice of a front page article. Your readers deserve better.
EDITOR: Regarding New Jersey Sen. Frank Lautenberg’s retirement, how can an 89-year-old man even consider in good conscience running for re-election in two years when he will be 91? Shouldn’t we have a mandatory retirement age for Congress? Or is the effort they put out on our behalf so little that even a 97-year-old senator can do it?
EDITOR: In Sunday’s editorial (“Drone strikes: Death without due process”), The Press Democrat said neither the president nor any other singular authority should be able to issue an order to kill a U.S. citizen suspected of terrorist activities abroad. You think that our citizens are entitled to the full protections of the Constitution even if they have joined a terrorist organization and are suspected of posing an eminent threat to the United States. I think not.