|
Jason Gorary aka "Phaedrus" is correct.
No matter what your personal feelings on the issue, Biernat is entitled to due
process of law. To deny him such smacks a little of the witch hunt. Accuse
someone and then have them punished before they are even tried? A judge and
jury will decide this case, and if convicted he may never hold office in this
state again. Until that time folks should not be calling for the
punishment to be inflicted before the conviction. Otherwise what
prevents any person from being also punished on the basis of charges rather
than convictions. Didn't we, (at least in popular fiction and history) fight a
revolution to not allow such.
I viewed with amusement Michael Atherton's
suggestion that Biernat's confession at the least showed such poor judgment that
he should be removed from office. I do not believe we would have many sitting
council people if that criteria were the common practice. Poor judgment has
never been a criteria for removal from office. Do the words Target, City
Center, and Sax, have any meaning ? In my opinion these were cases of
incompetent behavior on the criminal level at the best and actual criminal
behavior at the worst. Maybe Joe should have burned the incriminating "House"
when he was under suspicion, you know like some others burned the
"incriminating" disappearing files. So the question is, since the others
showed good judgment by getting rid of incriminating evidence, should they be
returned to office? I don't think so.
Of course everyone agrees Joe Biernat's
possible crimes, even if convicted, are not as bad as Herron's bribery
conviction. Wasn't Brian guilty of trying to extort money from Ortega and taking
bribes? Also, wasn't Brian on television tape with Basim Sabri making an
offer to bribe Brian to help with Sabri's Real Estate development on,
and just south of, Lake Street? Poor Brian sits in jail while Basim, the person
who allegedly arranged the crime, goes on with a version of the project he
allegedly tried to buy Council influence for. Makes you wonder about
justice in this world.
Part of "remedial ethics" might be to teach Council
Members the bad form of participating in public celebrations of projects where
criminal conduct is alleged. You know, the old adage about "avoiding even the
appearance of wrong doing". I could not believe my eyes when watching
coverage of the event this weekend. There might not be any legal compulsion not
to participate, but there are certainly some public-relation questions.
How is the public to believe in the ethics of Council Members when the next
generation of them seem to be crawling back into the same old warm
beds?
I have some trouble understanding the lack of
comment in this "Forum" about the possible actions of present council members
with Basim Sabri. Isn't Basim still under indictment for charges of bribery of
Minneapolis City Council members? I have heard that the only surprise is not
that local politicians can be bought, but how cheap they can be bought. I
wonder if a neighborhood's residents pooled their money they could compete
by paying politicians to do the correct thing?
Interesting possibilities.
Jim Graham,
Ventura Village
|
