I truly respect our criminal justice procedures, but in this case of Dontae Morris, who has already been convicted of murdering one person and is awaiting trial in the killing of two others, why do the families of Tampa police officers Jeffrey Kocab and David Curtis need to be subjected to the evidence that is so compelling as to his guilt? Where do we go from here? This person needs another life sentence, which would be better than the death penalty since he would live with the general population and not alone for 25 or 30 years.
Our most important concern is the welfare of the families and the college education that we provide for the spouse and children of these heroes lost too early in their careers. Save the taxpayers the expense of these trials that inevitably accomplish what we already know will be the outcome.
The writer is the executive director of the Gold Shield Foundation.
The meanings of ‘Latin’
The author of “The inspiring sounds of Latin” (Letter of the Day, Nov. 12) has a limited understanding of the term “Latin.” Perhaps he has never heard of Latin America, the numerous countries south of the United States, where the primary language is Spanish (as well as some Portuguese). Latin Americans do not speak Latin, but are still referred to as Latins.
As a baby boomer born and raised in Tampa, I frequently heard the locals of Spanish and Italian heritage refer to themselves as Latins.
The article about the Latin Festival at Al Lopez Park the writer referred to correctly mentioned Latin music and Latin rhythms.
The word “Latin” does not exist solely to describe the language we hear in Catholic churches.
Regarding “Obstacles mire Iran nuclear deal” (Nov. 10): This so-called deal is nothing more than capitulation to the mullahs in Teheran. The U.S. is already funding Hamas, so it makes perverted sense for the U.S. to be Iran’s nuclear proponent.
When France is the voice of reason when it comes to major geopolitical issues, it is a clear signal that the U.S. has lost relevance in the world.
Jeffrey P. Meyer
Worthy of a promotion?
The AP story you ran about the blocking of Cornelia Pillard to fill a vacancy on the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit omitted some crucial information (“GOP blocks Obama pick for judgeship,” Nation & World, Nov. 13).
Besides reading the usual lament about the under-representation of “qualified” women on our federal courts, we didn’t read that President Obama’s nominee Cornelia “Nina” Pillard holds the bizarre notion that abortion saves women from “conscription into maternity.”
In a 2007 law review article, Pillard wrote that “[r]eproductive rights, including the rights to contraception and abortion, play a central role in freeing women from historically routine conscription into maternity.” She believes there is an “equal protection” right to abortion — a position never adopted by the U.S. Supreme Court.
Given Pillard’s perverse views on equal protection and abortion, she would likely find most laws enacted to protect unborn children and their mothers and such widely-supported measures as late-term abortion restrictions, parental involvement and informed consent requirements invalid. This would certainly include the currently debated Pain-Capable Unborn Child Protection Act that would limit abortions to 20 weeks gestation, when a fully formed baby is capable of feeling severe pain from dismemberment and other barbaric means to kill it.
Only politics was singled out as the “villain” in this story. None of Pillard’s extremist, repellent views were mentioned. Does this sound like someone objective and worthy of a job that could ultimately be a stepping stone to becoming a Supreme Court justice?
Regarding “Veterans battle high tuition costs” (front page, Nov. 11):
This article derides states for charging out-of-state tuition for people who don’t meet the residency requirements for in-state tuition.
Tyler Garner was evidently a resident of Illinois when he joined the Army. If Garner returned to Illinois and attended one of the state universities or colleges, his tuition and fees would be free as a veteran from Illinois. Many other states provide the same benefit to veterans.
If a veteran chooses to relocate to another state after his or her service, that is their choice, and they must meet the same requirements as any other student.
I am a 27-year veteran of the U.S. Air Force, and as a taxpayer I see no reason that we should cover the out-of-state tuition for anyone. My daughter attended Illinois State University, and her tuition and fees were covered by the state of Illinois because she was a resident of Illinois when she joined the Navy.
I suggest there are enough options for veterans wanting to attend college, and that waiving out-of-state tuition should not be an option.
I say that supporting HR 357 is morally wrong.