Opinion: If we care about truth, require DNA testing

I couldn't believe it when I read this article by Alisa Ulferts. The Florida Legislature, justices and Chief Justice Charles Wells have to be asked to grant inmates the right to DNA testings! Lawyers are uncertain whether the "right" will be given to prisoners in Florida?

What is wrong with this picture? If truth is the goal in Florida justice, why would there be any uncertainty about inmates' rights to the test? This doesn't even make sense: The tests should be a duty, a requirement, a prerequisite to sentencing!

I would think Florida legislators, justices and citizens would demand that DNA tests be applied to all relevant cases. After all, if we are going to persist in the final act of execution, we sure don't want to make a mistake, do we?

A concern for truth seems to be sadly and shamefully lacking in the Florida system.
-- Kay Lee, Eau Gallie

'Analysis' offered a biased tone

Re: President clearly uneasy in first news conference, Feb. 23.

Rather than objectively report on the substance of President Bush's first news conference as did most papers you chose to present an "Analysis" by a reporter who seems to be afflicted with a terminal case of contempt for our president.

The entire piece is laced with negative and demeaning descriptions of the event based on the reporter's biased perception: "awkward lack of confidence" . . . "nothing especially newsworthy" . . . "halting performance" . . . "reputation for struggling with questions" . . . "alternated between bravado and humor" . . . "more nervous and less polished" . . . "dutifully followed his list." The reporter then claimed that Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton held a news conference "once again overshadowing the new president."

The headline set the tone for the rest that followed. Was the real news indicated by the headline?

Even though some of the substantive issues discussed were mentioned, the overall tone of the article was terribly slanted and biased.

As a long-time reader, I shouldn't be surprised, but I continue to be disappointed and angered by this kind of reporting. The Times is an excellent newspaper in many respects, but the liberal editorial policy and biased news reporting are a disservice to your readers.
-- Bob Bryan, Seminole

Misinterpreting the president

Re: President clearly uneasy in first news conference.

I was appalled at the opinion of Sara Fritz regarding President Bush's first news conference. She, in my opinion, clearly misinterpreted his candor, humor and tact. I thought he was warm to the reporters, totally concise and honest in every answer. And he occasionally injected some humble humor before an appreciative audience.

In summary, his delivery was a breath of fresh air compared to many past presidents' news conferences. I only hope he maintains this style.
-- Gene Barry, Palm Harbor

Matters of political perspective

Re: The Clintons' latest capers.

As the real estate salesperson is often quoted as saying: location, location, location, the voter is often quoted as saying: perspective, perspective, perspective

The Clinton haters are now saying: Those New Yorkers got just what they deserved, a conniving, devious and scheming person who will do anything to get what she wants and deny, or try to justify after being caught, the consequences of her actions.

The Clinton lovers, those who elected the senator, are now saying: I got what I wanted, a conniving, devious and scheming person who will do anything to further the fortunes of New York state.

Perspective, perspective, perspective. It all depends on which side of the fence you are looking over.
-- N. Williams, Pinellas Park

Protect conservation land

Re: Agencies covet state land, Feb. 18.

This headline should have read, "When are the people of Florida going to wake up?"

Let me get this straight. First, I have to be so concerned about water management that I can't so much as water my yard or wash my car on certain days, but our local governments will issue permit after permit to new housing developments that will require the pumping of more and more of water we are not supposed to have.

Now those same local governments, with the help of some of their allies in state government, have lobbied for some of the state's conservation land to be used -- get this -- "to fix the flooding problems of a subdivision."

Now that makes sense. They build a "poorly designed" subdivision, then when it floods, they want to take land away from its original intent, which is conservation, to deal with the problem they allowed to happen. In addition, to stay on track with our elected local and state government's thoughts, they think that taking environmentally sensitive land is a better choice than taking land from a golf course or unused land from a cemetery land to solve the problem. Way to go.
-- Ken Brown, Seminole

Land use involves balancing interests

Re: Agencies covet state land, Feb. 18.

This article concerning the use of public conservation land presented the challenge of balancing competing public interests. We agree with the author's premise that an exceptionally compelling case must be made before conservation lands are opened up to provide other public purposes. Indeed, our record as a state demonstrates this. For example, the Department of Environmental Protection does not support the construction of ballparks at Florida state parks. DEP maintains the long-held tradition that local governments should provide land for sports-related recreational facilities, like tennis courts and baseball diamonds, while state government should provide land for nature-based recreational opportunities, like hiking, camping and swimming.

In contrast, DEP understands the importance -- both to the state and the nation -- of the U.S. Navy being able to monitor military traffic in the Gulf of Mexico. Allowing the Navy a minor expansion of an existing facility for this purpose at St. Andrews State Park, providing one-half acre of land near Panama City, makes sense.

In other examples, our conservation agenda can actually be enhanced when we are willing to swap property with other landowners. Such is the recent case at Jonathan Dickinson State Park. This exchange of land will ultimately result in improved water quality and better environmental management. Previously planned road rights of way that currently crisscross the natural landscape will be eliminated, allowing the park to manage the consolidated scrub area. Left in its current state, we would lose the ability to restore this important scrub land forever.

An added benefit will be improved water quality by treating stormwater runoff, which is currently emptying directly into the Loxahatchee National Wild and Scenic River. Florida does not allow a willy-nilly use of conservation land, however, we also recognize there are limited instances where the public interests can best be served by collaborating with other important governmental missions. It is what the public expects and what the public deserves.
-- Bob G. Ballard, deputy secretary, Land and Recreation, Tallahassee

Visitor finds INS less than welcoming

As a retired British subject with substantial means and significant assets here in St. Petersburg (including a house, two cars, two boats, etc.), I am required by law to have a valid passport and B1/B2 visa in order to reside in the United States for up to a maximum of six months annually. I have both. Conversely, U.S. citizens do not need a visa to visit the United Kingdom, only a passport. They can, within reason, stay as long as they wish, provided, like me, they do not work.

Everything I spend here, including taxes, is paid for with funds transferred from England. I cost you nothing. On the contrary, the American taxpayer and business community gain economically from my presence (unlike the costly presence of Social Security beneficiaries from some other nations).

Last year I entered the States on Oct. 3. My passport has an Immigration and Naturalization Service card clipped inside, informing me that I must leave no later than April 2 this year, a period of six months to the day.

Imagine my astonishment, therefore, when upon contacting the INS to seek permission to extend my stay to visit Washington, D.C., on my way home to England, I was informed that I must complete a four-page questionnaire and return it for scrutiny along with a check for $120. In other words, I may or may not be allowed to spend more of my money, for an additional six days, during a visit to your beautiful capital. But if I am, there is a charge!

As a pro-American "non-resident alien" (a somewhat offensive title), I am glad the UK authorities have a much more friendly attitude toward similarly placed "overseas visitors" (as we call them) from your country.

I wonder how many U.S. taxpayers are aware of this unfortunate situation.
-- C.A. Gillett, St. Petersburg

Consider the dog's suffering

Re: Boy injured in vicious dog attack, Feb. 20.

The story said that the 5-year-old boy was attacked after he hit the family dog with a broom. What on earth are people thinking? That there is something wrong with a dog that doesn't like being hit with a broom? That the dog should, because he's not a human, just "grin and bear it?"

Perhaps we should be thinking of what abuse that poor dog probably took before finally deciding it could no longer take unwarranted punishment. Now the dog will be put down because the child decided, for whatever reason, to beat the dog.

What are we humans coming to? The cases of animal abuse I read about are becoming so commonplace it terrifies me to think what our society will be like in 20 years.
-- Joyce Moore, Hernando

Learning to ride the waves

Re: Meditations on the media.

I always read Niela M. Eliason's commentary in Seniority with great interest. Her Jan. 30 article had me nodding vigorously in agreement throughout. Being almost 72 years on this earth and facing so many changes in every facet of our lives, I find it's becoming a struggle to keep up. That is, I felt I must keep up with life's new, fast pace. Then, because of these reflections and comparisons, I begin to ask why? Why must I keep changing. I don't think one should be rigid, but let the newer generations find their own way.

Our time was filled with many good things, Casablanca heading the list. We've lived long enough to sense when economy and values will go up, then down and then up again. And we have learned to ride the waves and be selective. Niela Eliason just confirmed my thinking in so many ways.

Thank you, and keep up the excellent writing.
-- Margaret McKeand, St. Petersburg

Share your opinions

Letters for publication should be addressed to Letters to the Editor, P.O. Box 1121, St. Petersburg, FL 33731. They can be sent by e-mail to letters@sptimes.com or by fax to (727) 893-8675.

They should be brief and must include the writer's name, address and phone number. Please include a handwritten signature when possible.

Letters may be edited for clarity, taste and length.

Back to Opinion

Contact the Times | Privacy Policy
Standard of Accuracy | Terms, Conditions & Copyright

From the Times
Opinion page