WE Blog » Crime

Sensitivity no favor to other Muslim soldiers

Phillip Brownlee — Wed, 11 Nov 2009 12:00:13 +0000

“There’s a difference between sensitivity and stupidity,” columnist Eugene Robinson wrote about the U.S. Army’s caution in intervening against Maj. Nidal Hasan (in photo), the alleged Fort Hood shooter. The Army reportedly didn’t deal aggressively with Hasan’s erratic behavior and anti-American comments at least partly because it was being sensitive to his Muslim faith. But this failure to act was no favor to other Muslim soldiers, whose loyalty some are now questioning as a result of last week’s shooting. It was “unfair to the thousands of Muslims who have served in the military, and continue to do so, with honor and distinction,” Robinson wrote.

Shooting is tragic, terrible

Phillip Brownlee — Fri, 06 Nov 2009 17:04:10 +0000

The shooting at Fort Hood is so tragic and terrible. As President Obama stated, “these are men and women who have made the selfless and courageous decision to risk and at times give their lives to the rest of us on a daily basis. It is horrifying that they should come under fire at an Army base on American soil.” Suspect Maj. Nidal M. Hasan is in stable condition, and authorities are still trying to piece together what may have prompted the attack. In the meantime, our prayers should go out to the families of those killed and to the wounded, which includes a woman from Kansas.

Pro-con on Polanski’s prosecution

Rhonda Holman — Wed, 30 Sep 2009 11:01:15 +0000

Roman Polanski is a cinematic genius with a tragic history. But he is also a fugitive from justice who pleaded guilty to having sex with a 13-year-old girl. Los Angeles County District Attorney Steve Cooley and the U.S. Justice Department acted properly in asking Switzerland to extradite Polanski, regardless of how much time has elapsed and despite the fact that his grown-up victim isn’t seeking his imprisonment. The 76-year-old director of “Rosemary’s Baby,” “Chinatown” and “The Pianist” was arrested over the weekend in Zurich, where he was to have received an award. Many of Polanski’s admirers in this country and abroad were outraged. But Polanski shouldn’t be left alone because of tragedies in his life or his status as a legendary director. Nor is it relevant that his victim seeks no further punishment for him. Prosecutions are brought in the name of the state, not the victim. The arguments are eclipsed by a simple fact: Polanski fled the country. In February, a judge said there had been “substantial” official misconduct in Polanski’s original case, so the director may well persuade a court to free him. But first he must return.
— Los Angeles Times editorial

Polanski’s crime — statutory rape of a 13-year-old girl — was committed in 1977. The girl, now 45, has said more than once that she forgives him. There is evidence of judicial misconduct in the original trial. There is evidence that Polanski did not know her real age. Polanski, who panicked and fled the U.S. during that trial, has been pursued by this case for 30 years, during which time he has never returned to America, has never returned to the United Kingdom, has avoided many other countries, and has never been convicted of anything else. He did commit a crime, but he has paid for the crime in many, many ways: In notoriety, in lawyers’ fees, in professional stigma. He could not return to Los Angeles to receive his recent Oscar. He cannot visit Hollywood to direct or cast a film. Polanski is 76. To put him on trial or keep him in jail does not serve society in general or his victim in particular. Nor does it prove the doggedness and earnestness of the American legal system. If he weren’t famous, I bet no one would bother with him at all.
— Anne Applebaum, Washington Post

Review restrictions on DNA testing

Phillip Brownlee — Wed, 09 Sep 2009 11:00:15 +0000

The Sedgwick County Regional Forensic Science Center, the Wichita Police Department and the Sedgwick County Commission need to work together to make sure that police and the forensic center have the resources they need. At issue is a memo from the center last month outlining restrictions on DNA testing. Because of limited resources, the center wants to focus on violent crimes and not do testing on weapons or ammunition in cases alleging that felons possess guns. But police Deputy Chief Tom Stolz told The Eagle that DNA testing on weapons can help put gang members behind bars and prevent violence. Some prioritization on testing makes sense, given tight budgets, but the center and the commission need to make sure they aren’t taking away an important tool for keeping Wichita safe.

Kansas less safe because of budget cuts

Phillip Brownlee — Sun, 12 Jul 2009 11:05:21 +0000

Cutting the state budget has consequences, and one of them is that Kansas is less safe. As a result of about $23.5 million in cuts, the Kansas Department of Correction has lost 300 positions and decimated a number of programs aimed at preventing inmates from reoffending, the Lawrence Journal World reported. “We’re not as safe as we were,” Corrections Secretary Roger Werholtz told an oversight committee last week. Are lawmakers going to put that quote on their campaign literature?

Jackson: Blame it on the guns

Rhonda Holman — Fri, 19 Jun 2009 11:03:01 +0000

The Rev. Jesse Jackson connects the dots from the alleged crimes of Scott Roeder and James von Brunn to their weapons of choice, also decrying the new law allowing concealed guns in national parks and the lack of political will to plug the gun-show loophole or bring back the assault weapons ban. “Hunters do not need assault weapons to kill deer,” Jackson wrote in the Chicago Sun-Times. “Honest gun owners have a huge stake in policing the sale of guns so the nuts and haters have a hard time getting them. But instead of strengthening our laws after 9/11, we have been weakening them. The majority is getting rolled by a mobilized minority. Only leadership can turn that around.”

Von Brunn would be mainstream in Middle East

Phillip Brownlee — Wed, 17 Jun 2009 11:03:36 +0000

“James W. von Brunn was quickly segregated from the American mainstream and designated the crackpot he is,” columnist Richard Cohen wrote about the alleged U.S. Holocaust Memorial Museum shooter. “In the Middle East, though, he would be no such thing — not some sort of reptilian vestige of the past but an ordinary man and therefore an extraordinary threat to the future.” Cohen noted how “in vast parts of the Islamic world, too many people not only deny the Holocaust but embrace the thinking that made it possible.” He argued that “if Arab leaders do not attempt to rebut and eliminate the hatred of Jews that is poisoning their societies, they will find that the peace that most of them undoubtedly want will not be possible.”

Roeder expects a lot of government he disdains

Rhonda Holman — Mon, 08 Jun 2009 17:36:02 +0000

Suspect Scott Roeder sure has a lot to say for himself, as if allegedly shooting George Tiller to death weren’t enough of a statement. Roeder, once associated with an anti-government group that objected to obeying laws and paying taxes, has contacted Associated Press multiple times from the Sedgwick County Jail to warn of additional threats, fret about his family and complain about “deplorable conditions” in jail. As one Eagle reader said in an e-mail: “It’s a bit ironic that Roeder, who denied the state’s authority and its taxing power, has a sense of entitlement that demands services from government despite his unwillingness to contribute to the commonweal.” Still, Sedgwick County Sheriff Robert Hinshaw and other authorities obviously need to ensure that Roeder’s treatment is by the book.

Pro-con on hate-crimes law

Rhonda Holman — Mon, 18 May 2009 11:03:58 +0000

After years of unconscionable delay, the House has approved legislation that would, for the first time, extend federal hate-crimes law to give substantive coverage to gay people. The act would be an important step forward in protecting all minorities from violence and a tribute to a young man whose life was cut short by bigotry. The Matthew Shepard Act, as the bill is known in the Senate, would provide increased funding to state and local authorities to prosecute a wide range of hate crimes — ones motivated by race, religion, national origin, gender, sexual orientation, gender identity or disability. It would also authorize the federal government to prosecute these crimes when states fail to do so. The biggest beneficiaries would probably be African-Americans, who make up the largest group of hate-crime victims. It would also help Hispanics, who have been increasing targets of anti-immigrant hatred. The bill’s opponents have focused on the protection of gay people, who were the victims in more than 16 percent of the hate crimes reported by the FBI in 2007. In addition to providing more resources, the act would serve an important public education role, underscoring the seriousness and horror of these crimes. After the House’s strong vote — 249 to 175 — in favor of the bill, the Senate needs to follow. — New York Times editorial

The bill targets actions we would all like to eliminate — physically injuring or trying to injure someone with “fire, a firearm, a dangerous weapon, or an explosive or incendiary device.” But it’s hard to imagine that it would reduce the prevalence of such conduct, which is already 1) really, really illegal and 2) subject to harsh penalties. This legislation would add extra punishment for attacks designated as hate crimes. But if a criminal is not deterred by the fear of five years behind bars, he’s probably not going to be pushed onto the straight and narrow by the prospect of six. The proposed federal law is mostly a curiosity, since it applies only to hate crimes in which the attacker singles out a victim on the basis of race, religion or national origin and is trying to interfere with the victim’s participation in one of six federally protected activities — going to a public school, applying for a job, serving as a grand juror and so on. Sen. Edward Kennedy, D-Mass., wants to eliminate these restrictions because they make it hard for the feds to go after hate crimes. But the change might not go down well at the Supreme Court. So a federal hate crimes law may go from being a ban on extremely rare offenses to being unconstitutional. Some achievement. If federal licensing laws required disclosure of the ingredients in congressional legislation, here’s what the label on this one would say: 90 grams of empty symbolism and 10 grams of needless duplication. — Steve Chapman, Chicago Tribune columnist

When rampage killers are licensed

Rhonda Holman — Fri, 10 Apr 2009 11:04:16 +0000

Guns and ammo are flying off the shelves related to fears that President Obama and the Democratic Congress will try to curtail gun ownership. Meanwhile, nearly every gunman responsible for the rampage killings of 57 people in the past month was licensed to own firearms, according to Associated Press. Before Jiverly Wong died last week in the attack that also left 13 others dead in Binghamton, N.Y., he even mailed his gun permit and other materials to a TV station. “In retrospect, this is probably not a guy who should have had a gun,” said attorney Jeffrey Chamberlain, a former Rochester prosecutor and chief counsel to the New York State Police. You think?
Gun sales boom aside, Congress is unlikely to roll back gun rights. If guns aren’t part of the problem, what is the solution?

Goofy argument in support of death penalty

Phillip Brownlee — Tue, 17 Mar 2009 17:04:47 +0000

It wasn’t surprising that the Kansas Senate decided Monday to send back for more study a bill to repeal the state’s death penalty law, given that lawmakers had questions about its possible impact. But what was surprising was the goofy argument put forward by Sen. Susan Wagle (in photo), R-Wichita, in opposing the bill. Wagle said that abolishing the death penalty would send the message that it is OK to take an innocent human life. “This step we are taking towards repealing the death penalty is just another step toward the devaluation of the unique significance of human life that our culture is driving towards,” she said. Huh? It devalues life to not execute someone? And sentencing someone to life in prison without the possibility of parole sends the message that it is OK to kill?

Smoking marijuana shouldn’t be a crime

Phillip Brownlee — Fri, 06 Feb 2009 18:03:30 +0000

“Understandably, parents worry that their kids will emulate their idol, but the problem isn’t Phelps, who is in fact an adult. The problem is our laws — and our lies,” columnist Kathleen Parker wrote about swimmer Michael Phelps being photographed inhaling pot from a bong. Parker argues that “it’s time to recognize that all drugs are not equal — and change the laws accordingly.”

Nation’s capital shone Tuesday

Rhonda Holman — Fri, 23 Jan 2009 18:30:51 +0000

Washington, D.C., did a remarkable job coping with an Inauguration Day crowd estimated at 1.8 million. There were reports of temporarily lost children, medical emergencies and suspicious packages. And investigations are under way of the checkpoint problems that kept thousands of ticketholders from their seats. But there were no fatalities connected to the four-day celebration, and the Secret Service-led security operation involving 50,000 law enforcement and military personnel made no arrests Tuesday – quite a feat for a city long ago dubbed the nation’s “murder capital.”

Police cameras are important start

Phillip Brownlee — Wed, 26 Nov 2008 12:00:47 +0000

It’s great that the Wichita Police Department finally has video cameras in patrol cars. Unfortunately, the cameras are only in eight cars as part of a yearlong pilot project. Still, it’s an important start.
Though cameras can’t catch everything, the footage can be effective in helping resolve some “he said, she said” situations, including allegations of racial profiling. Civilians and officers also tend to behave better when they know they’re being filmed.

Answer questions in Davis case

Rhonda Holman — Wed, 24 Sep 2008 17:16:02 +0000

Maybe Troy Davis really did murder Savannah, Ga., police officer Mark MacPhail in 1989, but the U.S. Supreme Court was right Tuesday to stay his execution until after a Monday hearing, stepping in to assure the state of Georgia doesn’t execute an innocent man.
The facts of the case against Davis should give even capital punishment advocates pause: He was convicted on eyewitness testimony alone, and seven of those nine witnesses have recanted. Three witnesses said another man admitted to the crime. The murder weapon was never found.
And is it too much to ask that if states must have death penalties, they not be used in cases where convictions are based entirely on eyewitness testimony?

Update Kansas’ cockfighting ban

Rhonda Holman — Sun, 31 Aug 2008 11:01:07 +0000

As Mary Prewitt, the state director of the Humane Society of the United States, argued in a commentary on the Opinion pages last week, it’s a problem that cockfighting is a misdemeanor in Kansas and a felony in neighboring states. As evidence that Kansas is now the “jurisdiction of choice” for cockfighters, Prewitt cited the recent cockfighting bust in northeast Sedgwick County, which led to 12 arrests. The current ban was viewed as the best the Legislature could get in 2002, when one lawmaker referred to cockfight ringleaders as “some misguided guys who want to kill a chicken on Sunday afternoon”; lawmakers need to take another look at the law. Sedgwick County Commissioner Kelly Parks also was right to urge residents to report such activity: “If you see a pickup full of roosters going kind of slow down your township road, they’re not going to Colonel Sanders.”

Shooting a partisan hate crime?

Rhonda Holman — Thu, 14 Aug 2008 18:10:11 +0000

If you lost your job at a Target store, reportedly because you wrote on a wall, it doesn’t logically follow that you would drive 30 miles to the state’s Democratic Party headquarters and fatally shoot its chairman. Or, for that matter, that you would then go threaten someone at the state Baptist convention office. Indeed, maybe there are no conclusions to be drawn from Wednesday’s fatal shooting in Little Rock, other than that a disturbed gunman killed somebody and then was himself killed. Still, in this time of bitter politics, you have to wonder: Was the murder of Arkansas Democratic Party chairman Bill Gwatney by Timothy Dale Johnson some kind of partisan hate crime?

Phelps protesters were no-shows in Canada

Phillip Brownlee — Thu, 14 Aug 2008 11:05:10 +0000

One good thing happened this week: The Fred Phelps clan ended up not protesting at the funeral of a Canadian man who was beheaded on a Greyhound bus. One Phelps group was barred at the border from entering Canada, but another, covert group supposedly entered Canada and had its hate signs mailed into the country. But none of the protesters showed up at the funeral this week, perhaps because they risked arrest under Canada’s hate-speech law. Just in case, uniformed Winnipeg police officers were posted at the doors and roof of the church. Phelps protesters also didn’t show up at the opening of a new theater production in Toronto titled “The Pastor Phelps Project” and subtitled “a fundamentalist cabaret.”

Crack down on problem bars

Randy Scholfield — Thu, 07 Aug 2008 11:00:54 +0000

In the wake of several recent bar-related shootings, it’s good to hear that the Wichita Police Department is getting tough on problem bars.

The Eagle editorial board and neighborhood groups called for a crackdown in the wake of a July 27 shooting death at Big Chub’s at 31st Street South and Seneca, the scene of numerous late-night problems such as parking lot brawls and shootings.

Over the weekend, police shot and seriously wounded a man in the parking lot of Max’s Club on South Rock Road. Wichita Deputy Police Chief Tom Stolz told The Eagle that both Chub’s and Max’s are among half a dozen clubs that are “on our radar” because of frequent violence and problems at closing time.

Stolz said the police would look at an ordinance change to tighten licensing requirements and provide an “accountability mechanism” for bars.

About time. Residents shouldn’t have to put up with these bad neighbors. And as Stolz pointed out, “to send, consistently, 10 and 15 officers to shut down a nightclub is not a wise use of resources and not a good way to spend tax dollars.”

Does Manson follower deserve compassion?

Randy Scholfield — Thu, 17 Jul 2008 18:07:26 +0000

Four decades ago, Manson cult member Susan Atkins helped murder actress Sharon Tate and eight others in one of most infamous crimes in U.S. history.
This week the California parole board unanimously denied a request that Atkins, who is dying of brain cancer, be granted compassionate release so that she can spend her final days surrounded by family at home.
Should the board have shown compassion to Atkins? I don’t think so. She certainly didn’t show compassion to Tate, who begged for her life and that of her unborn baby before Atkins viciously stabbed her to death and wrote the words “Pig” on a door with Tate’s blood.
It was years before Atkins expressed remorse for the nightmarish killings. And the family of Tate and other victims remain adamantly opposed to Atkins’ release.
In some circumstances, it might be appropriate for the state to show compassion to a prisoner at the end of life. It depends on the case. On some level, perhaps Atkins deserves a sense of Christian forgiveness and release. But I think a sense of justice calls for her to die in prison for her horrendous crimes.
What do you think, bloggers?

No death penalty for child rapists

Phillip Brownlee — Wed, 25 Jun 2008 18:01:26 +0000

The U.S. Supreme Court ruled 5-4 today that it is unconstitutional to sentence someone to death for raping a child if the victim was not killed. The majority said that imposing the death penalty violates the Eighth Amendmentâ€™s ban on cruel and unusual punishment, because the death penalty is disproportional punishment for the crime, as heinous as child rape is. The majority also cited â€œthe evolving standards of decency that mark the progress of a maturing society,â€ which drives constitutional originalists nuts. In 2002, the court blocked the execution of mentally retarded defendants, and in 2005 it banned the execution of people for crimes they committed before they were 18.

Death penalty hasnâ€™t delivered

Rhonda Holman — Tue, 20 May 2008 11:05:04 +0000

Itâ€™s a relief that the Kansas Supreme Court saw fit Friday to uphold the conviction of Gavin Scott in the 1996 murders of Doug and Beth Brittain of rural Goddard, even as it overturned his death sentence. That spares the victimsâ€™ family, as well as taxpayers, of having to go through another trial. But with the third man convicted under Kansasâ€™ 1994 death penalty now awaiting resentencing before completion of his case, something that could take several years, Kansans are left to wonder about the point of having a death penalty so complicated, costly to prosecute and prone to technical errors.

Turning family members into genetic informants

Phillip Brownlee — Wed, 23 Apr 2008 11:04:09 +0000

Wichitaâ€™s BTK investigation was featured in a Washington Post article this week about catching criminals by analyzing the DNA of family members â€” without their permission. Wichita police were able to link Dennis Rader to the BTK crimes in part through his daughterâ€™s DNA, which it obtained from her medical records through a court order. States want to expand this approach by doing DNA searches of criminal databases. If there is a near match with someone who is already in prison, that means a family member of that person may have committed the crime. Privacy advocates are concerned, the Post reported, that such searches turn family members into genetic informants without their knowledge or consent, and could subject thousands of innocent people who happen to be related to someone in a criminal database to â€œlifelong genetic surveillance.â€ Also, because minorities are disproportionately represented in the criminal justice system, minorities would face greater scrutiny.

Obstacle to executions out of way, but does that make them OK?

Rhonda Holman — Thu, 17 Apr 2008 11:04:30 +0000

Good news for those eager to see Kansas finally put its 1994 death penalty law to work: The U.S. Supreme Court, on a 7-2 vote, has upheld Kentuckyâ€™s lethal injection method. Opponents had argued that the three-drug protocol could cause an inmate terrible pain if its anesthetic failed. But Chief Justice John Roberts wrote that they did not show â€œthe risk of pain from maladministration of a concededly humane lethal injection protocol, and the failure to adopt untried and untested alternatives, constitute cruel and unusual punishment.â€ Kansas, where lethal injection also is the method of execution, was among the states that filed a friend of the court brief supporting Kentucky. But even though its method of execution has the green light, Kansas should still reconsider whether capital punishment is the best public policy, given its high cost, unequal application and possibility of mistakes.

OK to fight gangs, drugs with anti-terror law?

Rhonda Holman — Tue, 25 Mar 2008 18:19:15 +0000

Gangs and drugs so terrorize some parts of Wichita that many people will shrug off the article in Tuesdayâ€™s Eagle about the apparent local use of the USA Patriot Act â€” which is supposed to target terrorism â€” to do a secret search of the house of a man accused of being a cocaine supplier to the Crips gang, a search that happened 90 days before the man was notified of it. To obtain the search warrant, authorities said the secret search would protect evidence and prevent suspects from fleeing or intimidating witnesses. The courts will sort out whether the evidence was legally obtained in this case. But such use of the Patriot Act certainly raises questions, including about whether it reflects Congressâ€™ intent in passing the law post-Sept. 11. In a 2005 Eagle commentary, U.S. Attorney Eric Melgren assured the public that the Patriot Act â€œhas been used to disrupt terrorist cells and espionage, as well as assist in solving horrific domestic crimes.â€ Does this alleged criminal activity count?