Letters

<< Previous   of   Next >>   ADVERTISEMENT   HAVE YOUR SAY Feel strongly about something? Share it with the community by writing a letter to the editor. You’ll need to include your name, address and daytime phone number. (We’ll only publish your name and hometown.) We reserve the right to edit letters, but if you keep yours to 250 words or less, we won’t ask you to shorten it. If your letter is published, please wait 30 days before submitting another. Send it to: E-mail: letters@heraldnet.com Mail: Letters section The Herald P.O. Box 930 Everett, WA 98206 Fax: 425-339-3458 Have a question about letters? Contact Carol MacPherson (cmacpherson@heraldnet.com or 425-339-3472).   Published: Wednesday, July 23, 2008 RAPE CASE Cross-examination a constitutional right As the defense attorney in the case, I have been troubled to read the automatic assumptions that the judge did something wrong, the prosecutor was incompetent and, most shocking of all, that a juror involved in the case behaved "lecherously." None of this is accurate. The witness testified on the stand that she had a tattoo across her lower back large enough to cover up injuries so a nurse would not have seen any. I asked the witness to show the tattoo to the jury. After discussing the issue at side-bar, the judge ruled the evidence was appropriate to be shown to the jury since she had raised the issue. As court transcripts show, the witness was instructed not to lower her pants. The witness simply turned and flipped up the back hem of her shirt for a second. The juror seated at the end of the box was unable to see, so the judge instructed the witness to turn slightly and she again flipped up the hem of her shirt so that juror could view the evidence. It is unfortunate that the witness was embarrassed by this but the tattoo was not in a private area of the body. If it had been, the showing of the evidence would have been handled in a different fashion. It is one of the most valued parts of our judicial system that inaccurate testimony may be challenged at trial. Cross-examination is a constitutional right that I would certainly hope this country never chooses to take away from its citizens. The defendant was acquitted, not because of the evidence of the tattoo, but because the complaining witness never, at any point during the investigation or trial, identified the defendant as her attacker. oline Mann Snohomish County Public Defenders Office Everett

1. Emory’s owner fears fire was arson 2. Monroe honking case makes it to state Supreme Court 3. Vatican ponders the souls in space 4. 81 veterans' names, 81 meaningful lives honored in Snohomish 5. Hope dims that Olympics will boost region 6. Student hit in crosswalk to return 7. Smokey Point to celebrate end of roadwork 8. Death on Edmonds waterfront ruled a suicide 9. Help for young moms may continue 10. Semifinal slate sealed on ‘Dancing With Stars’ 2 - Top 10 Stories Most Talked about 3 - Top 10 Stories Most Emailed

• Bazaar Fever • Hawks proud of historic season • Olson always put Edmonds first • Honoring student veterans • ‘Wheedle' author comes to Lynnwood bookshop • Mavs build early lead en route to easy win • Prep football games of the week (state playoffs) • Tears of laughter, tears of grief • Death on Edmonds beach likely a suicide • Boeing will build, flight test and deliver 787s in South Carolina to spe ... • Snohomish County EDC promoting job growth in key industry clusters • $4 million grant to advance brain tumor research has Everett links • Providence medical center construction tops off its 12-story steel frame ... • Tulalip affordable housing project to be financed by KeyBank, Raymond Ja ... • Arlington's Lak of Ink has a growing following for Luke Kooyman's creati ... • Bank of the Northwest formed • Cascade Bank earns $1.6 million