Booze Train; In Defense of Defense; No More Excuses | Letters | Salt Lake City | Salt Lake City Weekly

Booze Train; In Defense of Defense; No More Excuses 

Pin It

Booze Train
Recently, I boarded a Utah Transit Authority train and smelled brews on some of the passengers and heard much loud talking.

After I got off the train, I approached one of the UTA officials and told her what happened. I was so angry that I told her that I would write a letter to the governor and ask that UTA be shut down for allowing patrons who use alcoholic beverages to ride the trains.

This is not the kind of transit service that we need. UTA needs to be shut down if they are going to allow this.

Douglas Cotant
Salt Lake City

In Defense of Defense
I grew up in a law enforcement family, so I have a very pro-police, pro-prosecution bent. My evaluation of Salt Lake City chief prosecutor Padma Veeru-Collings ["My Rule Is Law," Aug. 7, City Weekly] should be considered in that light.

Collings' criticism of defense attorneys for their refusal to accept "reasonable" plea offers is misplaced. Perhaps this misunderstanding stems from the fact that she apparently has little, if any, criminal-defense experience.

I am not an attorney. I am a certified paralegal. Thus, I'll willingly defer to any member of the bar who disagrees with me; anyone with questions about legal ethics should consult a licensed attorney.

Utah Rule of Professional Conduct 1.2(a) states, "In a criminal case, the lawyer shall abide by the client's decision, after consultation with the lawyer, ... as to a plea ..." (emphasis mine).

Further, Rule 2.1 states, "In representing a client, a lawyer shall exercise independent professional judgment." Thus, he should not allow any other consideration—such as a heavy caseload, a desire to resolve cases quickly, or his interest in not "burning bridges" with prosecutors—to interfere with his judgment.

Finally, Rule 3.1 states, "A lawyer for the defendant in a criminal proceeding ... may ... so defend the proceeding as to require that every element of the case be established." Thus, if the law says that in order to commit crime [x], one must do [a], [b], and [c], and I believe the prosecutor can prove only that my client did [a] and [b], I'm entitled to make that argument.

Ken K. Gourdin

No More Excuses
It is time we did something about the useless entities using "homeless" and "bipolar" as an excuse to exist on this planet.

I have been a very spiritual person—forgive and forget—but now I'm a headhunter. When they take my only means of transportation, my bicycle, in exchange for their broken-down piece-of-crap bike, that is the last straw.

We are spending too much money assisting them while we law-abiding citizens are struggling to make ends meet. Our jails, prisons andcities are full of dumpster-diving food hunters, cardboard-house-living, river-camping, panhandling losers. The majority on the streets have no wish to do anything but live on the streets for free. They get on Trax and ride anywhere they want for free.

Everyonecomplains about them but nobody does anything. If all you so-called Good Samaritans would stop feeding the animals, they might disperse and disappear. I am all for amendment rights, but it appalls me to see them panhandling at the exits of fast-food establishments.

I am in search of an advocacy group, or am starting one,to actually do something to either help them become useful in society or eradicate them completely.

Mark Bowers

Correction: The article "Smash Brothers" [Aug. 21, City Weekly] erroneously included the name of a Montgomery brother who was not involved in the incident. Chase, J.D. and Robert were the sole Montgomery brothers involved.

Pin It

More by City Weekly Readers

Latest in Letters

Readers also liked…

© 2022 Salt Lake City Weekly

Website powered by Foundation