| Send to Printer | << Back to Article |
| Letters |
|
Letters: April 24, 2008
There are exceptions to two-witness rule The April 21 story “Detectives blast policy of having 2 witnesses” highlights the importance of the formal charging process that is followed prior to filing criminal charges to arrest a suspect for murder. Unfortunately, the story fails to mention an important distinction for many one-witness cases — that often there are one-witness murder cases that include corroborating evidence. The State’s Attorney’s Office supports the approval of murder warrants where there is a single witness and corroborating evidence, such as forensics, including DNA, gunshot residue, a recovered weapon or video surveillance from a crime scene. Since 2003, the Baltimore City Police Department and the State’s Attorney’s Office have agreed to a memorandum of understanding regarding a charging protocol that requires homicide detectives to work closely with prosecutors during a felony investigation and to obtain approval from a prosecutor before an arrest warrant is issued. In addition, we have enacted other measures to improve the quality of case investigations. We believe these policies are working because our statistics reflect an increase in the number of first-degree murder convictions and life sentences between 2006 and 2007. In 2006, prosecutors obtained 21 first-degree murder convictions and 15 life sentences; in 2007, prosecutors obtained 37 first-degree murder convictions and 31 life sentences. I believe that our current charging policy in homicide cases has served our citizens well and is in the best interest of public safety. This policy protects an innocent suspect from a possible charge that could not be proven beyond a reasonable doubt and is wholly dependent on the testimony of one witness. At the same time, it helps to ensure the successful prosecution of the guilty, based on a well-investigated case that includes both witness statements and other corroborating evidence. State’s attorney Rejecting idea of evolution forfeits our future P. Leon Brown’s April 16 letter, “Faith clouds arguments about evolution,” rebutting Kevin McGhee’s April 12 column attacking the theory of evolution overlooked one downside of McGhee’s criticism: the threat it embodies to America’s prosperity and future well-being. The scientific theory of evolution is a keystone of modern science. To deny evolution is to reject modern science. Should America reject science, other nations will forge ahead of it in science and technology, leading this great country down the road to scientific, technological and, therefore, economic oblivion — a road that will consign the United States to economic subservience to more science-savvy countries. For Pastor McGhee to wish that such a fate should befall this great country is to echo, in its own way, the loathsome words of the Rev. Jeremiah Wright, “God d--- America.” Baltimore Anne Arundel school cuts are painful but needed There has been considerable discussion lately about my plan to reduce teaching positions across the county as one way to cope with what we believe will be a significant shortfall in the amount of money allocated to us by the county as compared with our board’s budget request. We have requested an additional $77.5 million from the county this year and have been told to expect an increase of about $20 million. I want to correct several misconceptions. First, we anticipate no layoffs of certified teachers. We hired approximately 700 teachers for this school year, and we expect a similar number of vacancies next year from retirements and resignations. The reduction would come from that pool of vacancies. However, as in prior years, non-tenured teachers with one-year contracts are subject to reappointment. Fewer teachers with such contracts, which end June 30, may be brought back than in previous years. It is also important to note that the average target class sizes remain unchanged. The reductions mean that, unfortunately, class sizes will increase. While most classes will remain at or under those target averages, there will be some where the number of students exceeds the target average. That, again, is the case every year. Finally, staffing allocations were given to schools in March — the same time they are done each year — so that principals could begin the process and follow the timeline spelled out in the negotiated agreement with the teachers association. We continue to examine other cuts that may have to be made across our system. They, like those we have already made, will be painful. They will be necessary, though, if the level of funding forthcoming from the county falls short of our budget request. Superintendent of schools |
