Thursday, July 22, 2010

Boy's 'no contest' plea not admission of guilt

On Wednesday, July 21, The Citizen ran a front-page story with the headline "Brothers admit to sex battery." According to the story, the 13-year-old, whom I represent, "pleaded guilty to two counts of sexual battery" while the 11-year-old pleaded guilty to one count of lewd and lascivious battery. This is simply not true.

Neither boy admitted to anything. While I am not authorized to speak for the 11-year-old, I can state that after sifting through the evidence -- both pro and con -- the 13-year-old decided that it was in his best interests that he not fight the charges.

This is not to say that there is not another side to the story. Indeed, other considerations besides innocence and guilt may come into play. For instance, it is important to note that this child has been vilified by his neighbors in conversations and on Facebook. He is the subject of a widely circulated petition calling for him to be monitored at all times. He and his 11-year-old brother have even been approached in a public place by a grown man who pointed at them and screamed, calling them "faggots" and "pedophiles." The last incident left their 4-year-old brother, who was present, shaken and crying.

As the reader can see, there may be many concerns that may enter into a decision to enter a plea. The "best interest no contest" plea my client entered offers a comfort zone where he can get the case over without admitting to anything.

It is unfortunate that the front-page story contained these inaccuracies and that the correction runs at the bottom of the second page. Nevertheless, I hope readers will keep in mind that Wednesday's story does not accurately depict the facts. Indeed, all of the facts of this case have yet to come out at all.

Thank you for reading this.

Jack Bridges, attorney

Key Largo

With cheap goods, we got poor quality

I read Donald Booth's letter with great interest. Here in Scotland, where we live, things are very much the same. Perhaps worse. We have no manufacturing industries to speak of. Coal mining, ship building and steel making are all history now. These industries were consigned to oblivion by the "free market" assisted ably by Margaret Thatcher and the "greed is good" theory. Today, the majority of these commodities are now imported from China, Taiwan or South Korea.

I am of an age where I can remember that anything made in Japan was substandard and could not match the quality of British-made items. Times have changed indeed.

We had stores in the UK that were the bastions of quality and workmanship. Sure, they were a bit more expensive. But as the years went by, the population seemed to forget all about quality and reliability in preference to rock-bottom prices.

We have vacationed in Florida for the past 18 years now, and we have seen the same thing happen in your state. We used to buy clothes and goods from the chain stores. ... The quality was there in the early days, and at reasonable value. Now these items are so cheap to buy, but you can see the difference in quality easily. And all the tags display Made in China, India, Sri Lanka, Vietnam, Thailand, Cambodia, etc. So it is here in Scotland.

The saying, "You reap what you sow" springs to mind.

Ronnie Stuart

Kirkcaldy, Fife, Scotland

Federal finance bill empowers bureaucrats

The new financial bill expands and empowers the bureaucracy to create new regulations that will limit commerce as the bureaucrats justify their own jobs. This heavy government footprint in our economy will prevent prosperity.

As the Heritage Foundation pointed out, this bill is a boon to lawyers, lobbyists, and big business that will breed more corruption. They will use campaign contributions to influence the drafting of regulations; an influence that has historically been to the detriment of small businesses unable and less inclined to finance this influence.

In these new regulations, we can expect more like the EPA's recent determination that milk producers must meet regulations for oil drillers by ruling animal fat the equal to petroleum. The same agency that recently threatened one third of our refinery capacity, insisting they are bound by the Supreme Court's comment on carbon dioxide. Neither of these authorities is elected.

This governance by appointed administrators over elected representatives has been the liberal Democrats' form of rule since Woodrow Wilson. The true danger of this bill, like so many others, is the abandonment of our republic to dictators, by substituting administrators for legislators.

Buried in the Dodd-Frank Act is a requirement for companies to prove their products contain no materials from the Congo, to prevent profit from exploitative labor practices and financing tyrannical governments. Yet, due to the moratorium on oil drilling in the Gulf, idled oil rigs are now setting sail for the Congo. Therein lies the lunacy of our own tyrannical government.

David Carter

Key West