Image provided by: Texas A&M University
About The Battalion. (College Station, Tex.) 1893-current | View Entire Issue (April 8, 1983)
Page 2/The Battalion/Friday, April 8,1983 i opinion Witness liability questioned by Maxwell Glen and Cody Shearer America’s recent incidents of specta tor rape have led some state legislators to a seemingly logical conclusion: There ought to be a law that makes witnesses at least part culpable for sexual violence. Yet proposals in the Massachusetts and Rhode Island legislatures to fine or imprison those who observe and then fail to report a rape stumble on their simplic ity. Simple solutions don’t necessarily make for good law or effective deter rents. As with most Americans, the horrible image of cheering rape-watchers at a New Bedford, Mass., tavern is foremost in the minds of Barbara Gray, a Mas sachusetts state representative, and Glor ia Kennedy Fleck, a Rhode Island state senator. Gray and Fleck have sponsored bills in their respective legislatures re quiring witnesses of a rape to report it within 24 hours or face one year in jail or a fine of up to $1,000 ($500 in Rhode Island). Gray’s bill would, in fact, cover all violent crimes. “It just doesn’t make any sense to have nothing on the law books to address the type of situation that allegedly took place in New Bedford,” said Fleck, 33, who has served in the Rhode Island legislature for seven years. Fleck modeled her proposal after a two-year-old Rhode Island law that re quires witnesses to report child abuse to the police. Otherwise, models are few. Some European countries, including France and the Soviet Union, hold that those who fail to assist someone in peril can be imprisoned or fined. In this coun try, only Vermont does and, according to the state attorney general, it has never even put its law to the test. By contrast, Fleck said, the Rhode Is land child abuse statute has led to two convictions since its enactment. She adds that her own conversations with law en forcement officials, as a member of the state senate’s judiciary committee, gave her hope of obtaining more rape convic tions and forestalling more New Bed fords. Yet the lack of precedent suggests the difficulty of devising ways to round up the witnesses. For one, different crimes generally involve different circumst ances. Child abuse prosecutions, for ex ample, practically demand evidence of harsh physical and emotional abuse over an extended period of time. Rape is more a crime of the moment. While the trans gressions are equally egregious, they place dissimilar demands on a witness’ judgement and sense of responsibility to alert the authorities. Moreover, some witnesses are better observers than others. Witnesses who come to the fore simply out of fear of prosecutions won’t necessarily speed the pursuit of justice. Those “who come for ward due to some requirement of the law don’t always make the best witnesses,” the Essex County (Mass.) district attorney told The Boston Globe. “We would pre fer to have people who at the outset de cide to be cooperative.” Such practical problems may only add up to a fundamental constitutional di lemma in the Massachusetts and Rhode Island bills. Does an individual have a constitutional responsibility to report a crime, or simply a moral one? If put to the test, too many courts would say the latter. Even when a criminal act can incite a cheering crowd, the law should defer to those whose obligations are less than clear. This isn’t a pleasing judgement to those of us who see New Bedford as a dangerously, and possibly contagiously, bad example. Only two years ago, a Uni versity of California survey disclosed that 35 percent of all men interviewed said they might rape a woman if they were confident of not being caught or punished. In the face of such statistics, our society hangs by a thread of social propriety. But the New Bedford incident and others like it would best serve as shock treatment for a nation that too often shuffles its feet on sexual violence. Letters: Gay genetics and abortion Editor: In my “Technology and Human Values class,” we had a discussion recent ly about homosexuality. Many students argued that homosexuality was not nor mal, nor moral. They used the same old cliches that have been used over and over again within the context of their argu ments. It is funny to note that a few, not all, of these students like to refer to the Bible when they argue such moral issues. As a noncomitted person to the issue of homosexuality, I was wondering if somebody could answer this question for me: It has been pointed out that most “sci entists” do not know if homosexuality is genetic or psychological. If in four years, or so, some “scientists” discover it to be a genetic situation; and within the next 10 years, or so, (that would be approximate ly six years after the first discovery) some “scientists” found a way to test the genetic structure of a six-week-old fetus and that fetus was found to have the genetic struc ture of a homosexual — male or female — would it then be all right for the mother to have an abortion? Stephen Weiss ’84 Sex discrimination Editor: The only fault I can find regarding Ephraim Seidman’s letter in Thursday’s edition is that he apparently does not know that this is one of those parts of the world where attempts to limit expression are acceptable, at least to some. I hope he got a chance to see Ronald Claiborne’s letter at the bottom of the same page in which tha author demons trated his great tolerance for divergent opinion by suggesting that if one desires to attend a “great” university which (oh, horrors!) has women (gasp!) in the band, then that person ought to avail him/her self of the only viable option existing — skip town for good. It is reassuring to know that people of Mr. Claiborne’s cali ber are looking out for our interests. You know, I guess sex discrimination is fun ny, especially when it permeates tradi tional structures. Rest easy, Mr. Seidman. There are good Ags watching over you. Lain Ellis 306 Francis Yankee thanks Editor: I had the pleasure of visiting your campus last week and wanted to tell you how impressed I was with the people. Everyone was so nice, friendly and made this “Connecticut Yankee” feel right at home. I would like to particularly thank my good friend Warren “Spider” Simpson and the members of the Department of Health and Physical Education who made my stay even more enjoyable and rewarding. If ever any of you all drift into New Haven, please feel free to give me a call. Thank you. Ned Burt, President of Burt, Simpson, Brachocki & Kaiser Ads elsewhere Editor: In my opinion, the letters to the editor should be addressed to pertinent issues that relate to Aggie students and faculty. I believe that it is inappropriate to in clude lost and found ads in this section. If the lost and found column in the classi fieds seems insufficient, perhaps a lar ger, more noticeable column would be more effective. Mary Ann Wiley ’86 Berry s World \NHeTn6F. O' IS NOgUgf?. 1b SOffCK Tag. SnrA<2rS A^P AK^OWS OP OUT" RAseous TAxes, or. :o Reagan: Loyalty to all appointees by Helen Thomas United Press International WASHINGTON — President Reagan is known as a “loyalist” to his appointees. He sticks with them until the die is cast and he can no longer lend his support to a losing cause. But even then he has yet to admit a mistake in his appointments. And he often finds another government sinecure for those who fall by the wayside. In the case of his predecessor, Jimmy Car ter, all allegations, right or wrong, seemed to rub off on his White House. His aides were a closely knit group. They had made the long march with him from Georgia and they were a family. But then they could be counted on one hand: chief of staff Hamilton Jordan, press secretary Jody Powell, and before he was forced to resign, budget director Bert Lance. Allegations against Lance for his banking practices, Billy Carter’s personal problems and Libyan connections, and the troubles of Dr. Peter Bourne, his drug abuse expert, added to Carter’s woes. Throughout his presidency, Carter had to contend with one shoe falling after another under the relentless spotlight and publicity attending the allegations. The bad luck followed him in his close re lationships with family and staffers. Not so for Reagan, who manages to escape any taint when the activities of some of his appointees come into question. And yet many more of them have had troubles in public service. Although the Reagan White House laid down the controversial policies for the En vironmental Protection Agency — particular ly in terms of dealing with business with a lighter hand on matters of pollution and toxic wastes — the president has not been faulted for the fate that has befallen former EPA Administrator Anne Gorsuch Burford, and several other top-level assistants. One of them, Rita Lavelle, director of the toxic wastes division, was fired under a cloud of allegations. At least two of the EPA assistantswto forced to resign their positions in the) moved over to the Energy Departmem they were given jobs as consultants.(k I'Thc described the department as a “duiijtoges ground” for EPA staffers who hadbetMlworl out. Among the several appointees win been subjected to public scrutiny art recently Thomas C. Reed, who heldtk of assistant for national security: although he allegedly profited front information on a stock trade. Among others forced out of the House was former national securityal Richard V. Allen for accepting a$l,0()( a Japanese magazine that had beengt an interview with Nancy Reagan. Alltt added to the Foreign IntelligenceAdnI panel, and he has become the foreignpl expert on the Republican National(f mittee. Publicity has also focused on Will Casey for failing to disclose his holdiitjt comply with other financial regulatios fore he became CIA director. Former Reagan aide Dennis E. LtHI who earns $58,500 a year as directoro! National Telecommunications Offices. Commerce Department, still accompaae president on his trips to his mounni ranch near Santa Barbara, Calif., to Reagan chop wood and clear brush. In most cases, Reagan has against the critics and has stronglydefe his appointees as victims. He told Mrs. Burford thatshecould with her “head high,” and since thenhii he never would have asked her tote agency. He also blamed environment)! tremists” for the upheaval at EPAandj ped that they would like to turn thet House into a “bird’s nest.” In short, Reagan fights backandisloil drop anyone until his top White Housot tell him the handwriting is on the wallaf has to cut his losses. In such cases, his aloofness and del style of governing serves him in The Battalion USPS 045 360 ,. Member ot Texas Press Association , Southwest Journalism Conference Editor Diana Sultenfuss Managing Editor Gary Barker Associate Editor Denise Richter City Editor Hope E. Paasch Assistant City Editor Beverly Hamilton Sports Editor John Wagner Assistant Sports Editor John Lopez Entertainment Editor Colette Hutchings Assistant Entertainment Editor. . . . Diane Yount News Editors Daran Bishop, Brian Boyer, Jennifer Carr, Elaine Engstrom, Shelley Hoekstra, JohnaJo Maurer, Jan Werner, Rebeca Zimmermann Staff Writers Melissa Adair, Maureen Carmody, Frank Christlieb, Connie Edelmon, Scott Griffin, Patrice Koranek, Robert McGlohon, Ann Ramsbottom, Kim Schmidt, Karen Schrimsher, Patti Schwierzke, Kelley Smith, Angel Stokes, Joe Tindel, Kathy Wiesepape Copyeditor JanSwaner Cartoonist Scott McCullar Graphic Artists Pam Starasinic Sergio Galvez Thompson, Fernando Andrade Photographers David Fisher, Guy Hood, Eric Lee, Irene Mees, Barry Papke, William Schulz Editorial Policy The Battalion is a non-profit, self-supporting news paper operated as a community service to Te0 , l University and Bryan-College Station. Opiiw# 1 pressed in The Battalion arc those ol the editor author, and do trot necessarily represent thcopirix 1 Texas AXrM University administrators 01 fecuM Ircrs, or of the Board of Regents. The Battalion also serves as a laboratorynetifi for students in reporting, editing and photograph' ses within the Department of Communications. Questions or comments concerning am tS 1 matter should be directed to the editor. Letters Policy Letters to the Editor should not exceed 300" length, and are subject to being cut if they are The editorial stall reserves the right toeditleUe 1 * style and length, but will make every effort to nii [lS the author’s intent. Each letter must also be signed' show the address and phone number of the Columns anti guest editorials are also welcome 1 are not subject to the same length constraints as It* 1 Address all inquiries and correspondence to: The Battalion, 216 Reed McDonald, Texas AIWI' versity, College Station, TX 77843, or phone (7131^ 2611. The Battalion is published daily during Texas fall and spring semesters, except for holiday ande* nation periods. Mail subscriptions are J16.75perse 91 ter, $33.25 per school year and $35 per full year. Ad 1 ' tising rates furnished on tequest. Our address: The Battalion, 216 Reed Building, Texas A&M University, College Stalior 77843. United Press International is entitled exdusi't!' the use for reproduction of all news dispatcheserfdt to it. Rights of reproduction of all other matter Im® reserved. Second class postage paid at College Station, 1 77843.