Posted on: Monday, May 9, 2005

Letters to the Editor

Military research has yielded bounty

Those who have stormed President David McClain's office protesting a Navy research center at the University of Hawai'i have made their statement. They are not for any agreement that allows the university to partner with the military to pursue any research objective, even though classified research is probably already occurring on-campus.

Past military/university research relationships have yielded technology and science that have become commonplace in our society, including fuel cells, radar, wireless communications and GPS. I don't know anyone who is against these technologies. It has also uncovered the splitting of the atom.

While all of these technologies have dual purposes and were originally developed to enhance the war-fighting capabilities of the United States military, they also have become technologies that we rely on every day for fuel, for communication and for science.

It does not seem right to disallow a "research" university, and its graduate students in scientific fields, the opportunity to create the next best thing. What is the future path of UH as a research institute?

'Unique style' driving doesn't risk your life

I was surprised as well as pleased when I read the article in Sunday's Advertiser about how the driving techniques, practices and mannerisms vastly differ from the Mainland.

As someone who has experienced the unique driving style here in the Islands and has expressed sharp criticism of it, I don't look forward to driving on the Mainland because of the lack of tolerance for "unique style" driving practices.

Here you might get a horn beep or "stink eye," whereas on the Mainland you would be met with a "one-finger salute," verbal threats or even the "Smith & Wesson" response.

So, although driving here may be a bit different, it's tolerable and for the most part not hazardous to your health. Let's just learn to practice courtesy and good driving skills.

Most people don't understand Akaka bill

I think a vote taken at this time would be highly premature as most people do not understand the Akaka bill or its ramifications or its hidden agendas.

And most people do not understand the "nation within a nation" concept and all that it entails.

I feel this way because of all the people I talk to (friends, family, acquaintances), maybe 1 percent even know anything at all about the Akaka bill; yet they know it has greatly divided the Hawaiian people — even families.

Recently, a couple of friends told me that their employers tried to get the staff to support the Akaka bill as an entity; they refused, saying it is too political, too divisive and too vague — no one truly understands it or what it would truly accomplish.

Police program puts you through the loops

Recently, journalist James Gonser did a great article on the Chinatown HPD station, complete with cameras throughout the area that were connected to monitors in a room that was virtually unmanned due to lack of manpower.

The article noted that a volunteer program was being restarted, so I, as a new member of the Chinatown community (Harbor Court) stopped by the station, spoke with a young officer, met with Miss Lillian at the employment office of the HPD on South King Street, scheduled a second interview to meet with a detective, a psychiatrist and a lie-detector test person — provided I had filled out all the paperwork and included my tax returns for the last two years, the least invasive of all the paperwork I was sent home with.

If the HPD wants "volunteers," why does a person have to apply to the HPD as if she were applying for a job?

I just want to be a volunteer. I want to lend my eyes to those monitors, tap the officer-in-charge on the shoulder if I see something that needs to be handled, or be trained to call for assistance to a nearby officer.

Yes, I expect some sort of determination of my abilities, but a full background check (opening up my entire 62 years to be scrutinized)?

Our legislators make the laws and they don't have to undergo a full background check. I just don't understand. And, yet, I still want to help.

Justice will happen when both get fairness

How can the Akaka bill be about justice when Sen. Akaka himself says his bill is not a claims bill? There is no justice without claims settlement.

This legislation creates a process all right — a process leading to the perpetual victimization of the Hawaiians who will directly benefit and the Hawai'i taxpayers who will directly pay. Amend the Akaka bill to: (1) settle claims, once and for all; (2) require Hawaiians to vote acceptance of the proposed settlement; and (3) require a majority approval by Hawai'i voters before implementation.

Justice will happen when we have fairness to both the beneficiary and the benefactor.

Agbayani's 'apology' left sour aftertaste

Concerning Amy Agbayani's "apology" (Letters, May 2): She says she was wrong in what she did, but continued to say that "Any inference that purchase of the fund-raiser tickets had a bearing on the confirmation process for any nominee is totally false, irresponsible and unfair."

I agree with the part of inference to a nominee. It is her judgment that is in question. It shows the naivete of someone who still will not stop. In her position, she should have been very much aware of the consequences of and reactions to her actions. Don't plead dumb to the people.

Just apologize, as she did, and then keep her mouth shut instead of trying to rationalize it and showing how false an apology it was.

Maybe she shouldn't even be in her "full-time university position and community work supporting access, equity and diversity" when she cannot even show a little bit of common sense in not doing what she did in the first place.

Who are Cardinals to judge Chang's offense?

An Arizona Republic reporter mentioned that Tim Chang has to adjust to the NFL and the Arizona offensive schemes. Looking back at the Arizona Cardinals records for the past several years, the Cardinals had boring and nonproductive offensive weapons. A lot of NFL teams had mediocre offensive coaching, and the Cardinals were one of these.

It would be wise for the Cardinals' offensive coordinators to let Tim Chang create some of June Jones' wide-open pass offensive plays. Kurt Warner is a good quarterback but unfortunately he was the victim of having bad offensive coordinators. Tim's offensive mind can help correct Kurt's misfortune. Use Tim to create a more passing offensive scheme for the Cardinals.

The New England Patriots have copied some of June Jones' plays, and look at where the Patriots are today. Norm Chow will also bring his wide-open pass offense to Tennessee, and you all will see the improvement.

Another proof of this wide-open passing offense will be when the University of Hawai'i plays USC without Norm Chow this coming September. UH has a good chance of winning this game. UH fans, please wear all black for the USC game.

Arizona needs to adjust to Chang, not Chang to the Cardinals' boring offense.

What of Second City?

It looks as if we're about to be "gifted" with a tax increase to support a rapid-transit system from Kapolei to downtown and Waikiki. I thought the "big plan" was to develop Kapolei as a "Second City" where people would both live and work. If that's still the case, why are we pushing a transportation system whose principal aim seems to be transporting workers from Kapolei into Honolulu?

There's no Big Brother at libraries, booksellers

American Library Association President Carol Brey-Casiano unfairly criticized the FBI, and specifically Section 215 of the USA Patriot Act, as a law enforcement mechanism designed to "violate the privacy of thousands of innocent people by combing through their (library) records on a possible wild goose chase" (April 26 commentary, "Privacy in jeopardy for library patrons").

Section 215 deals with the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA) business records. It allows the FBI to obtain business records if the records are relevant to an ongoing national security investigation, which in the case of a person residing in the United States cannot be based solely on activities protected by the First Amendment.

Many layers of approval are required to obtain a FISA business record, including the signature of a neutral and detached federal judge who serves on the FISA Court. Prior to reaching the hands of the federal judge, several FBI and Department of Justice attorneys review the request, as does the special agent in charge of the relevant FBI field office. Accordingly, FISA business record approvals take time and undergo rigid scrutiny — and that is done to ensure we protect the civil liberties of people residing in the United States, including Hawai'i's residents.

In practical terms, the FBI has not served a single FISA business record on a library or bookseller since the passage of the USA Patriot Act.

On April 27, the FBI director testified before the U.S. Senate Intelligence Select Committee to advise that the FISA Court issued 35 business record orders from the time of the passage of the USA Patriot Act through March 30, 2005. The director emphasized that none of those 35 FISA business record orders was issued to libraries or booksellers.

Section 215 has only been used to obtain business record orders for the production of driver's licenses, public accommodation records, apartment leasing records, credit card records, and subscriber information for names and addresses captured through court-ordered pen register devices.

The FBI does not engage in wild goose chases. If the FBI develops specific information that a terrorist or spy is using libraries or booksellers to communicate with other co-conspirators, then we should have Section 215 of the USA Patriot Act as an investigative device to bring these criminals to justice and perhaps prevent another tragedy such as the events of Sept. 11, 2001.

The truth about Civil Law juries

Shackley F. Raffetto, chief judge for the Second Circuit Court of Hawai'i, claims that "Civil Law nations do not feature trial by jury; consequently, there is no citizen participation in the justice process unless a person is a party to the case" ("Common Law set basis for jury trials," May 1).

Both parts of this claim are false. Civil Law nations such as Austria, Belgium, Denmark, Germany, Italy, Norway, Russia and Spain either have jury systems or else permit other forms of citizen participation in their justice processes.

Judge Raffetto is hardly the first American legal professional to make this misstatement of fact. Indeed, his mistake reflects the widespread ignorance of American legal professionals about how law and justice operate in other countries.

There is, unfortunately, an even more serious problem in Judge Raffetto's commentary. He argues that "because of citizen participation, our (American) justice system is transparent, fair and accountable." This, too, is misleading. The American jury has given birth to plea-bargaining, a form of decision-making that is decidedly opaque and coercive.

The most striking fact about criminal justice in Hawai'i (and virtually every other American jurisdiction) is that over 90 percent of defendants who get charged with a crime do not receive a trial by jury. Their cases are plea-bargained. Considering the Sixth Amendment's guarantee of the right to "a speedy and public trial by an impartial jury," it is reasonable to wonder why jury trials are such rare events.

The core of the answer is that American jury trials are so unworkable — so costly and time-consuming to the judges and attorneys who process cases — that those actors have produced a system that pressures defendants to abandon their right to trial by jury. Some offers (as "The Godfather" recognized) "cannot be refused." This is not a principled way to make decisions about life and liberty.

Thus, the most common form of American criminal justice is justice without trial. As many studies have documented, "transparency, fairness and accountability" are hardly hallmarks of the American way of plea-bargaining.

Finally, I applaud The Advertiser's willingness to devote space to law-related articles during the annual Law Week. In the future, however, it would be instructive if Law Week authors spend less of that space engaged in public relations and more of it attending to the serious problems that characterize our legal system.