LETTERS TO THE EDITOR

[June 14th, 2006] YOU'RE ALWAYS LEFT, I'M ALWAYS RIGHT

Schools are closing because the student population is shrinking [Winners & Losers, WW, June 7, 2006]. If you have a picture of a starving homeless person, I'm sure we would all love to see it. Otherwise, the editorial staff might want to do a little remedial journalism work and look up a term called "hyperbole" (see also "Unadulterated Leftist BULLS**T").

Next time, you might want to have a thinking adult review your copy and they would probably point out the incongruity of writing about the cash-starved schools, and a school district auditor quitting over access to the financial data...all in the same essay. Maybe you were absent from class the day they explained that auditors check up on things like how the money is spent. (Hint: Why would the school officials not want the auditor to see the data? Hmmmmmm?)

By the way, you forgot to mention the elderly that have been thrown out in the streets and run over by the evil, mean-spirited, homophobic, misogynistic, not-yet-dead white Republican males in their gas-guzzling SUVs. (Look up sarcasm and that sentence will make more sense to you.)

I must say, you leftists certainly do love your pet little issues and clichés. Too bad you don't have the same warm feelings for the truth or reality.

Keep trying, kids.

Chris Hawes
Boring

EVERCLEAR HANGOVER

Stephanie Greig is one of my best friends and was my roommate while she was trying to get her life back together and deal with this nasty divorce since she left Arthur [Alexakis] two years ago ["Starving Art," WW, May 17, 2006]. She has very recently (early May of this year ) relocated to Los Angeles. There are a lot of nasty rumors and lies floating around this town, pro and con for both sides. Fact is, there once was a love; now it's over. It's an ugly and sad thing, rife with terrible and nasty details...that are none of your damn business.

Suffice to say: If Steph Greig was EVER a gold-digging bimbo, I'm a Republican, mute dwarf. Leave the outcome of all this to the IRS, the law and the people directly involved. The rest of you hyenas can go find your own fucking lives to fix or ruin, your choice.

Storm S. Large
Southeast 18th Avenue

VICTIM RECOVERING? NOT SO FAST

I appreciate the difficult case Angela Valdez makes on behalf of the juvenile sex offender in "Unforgiven" [WW, May 24, 2006] Still, the glossing over of the lifelong effect on his victim with a perfunctory "The girl, now 14, is no longer in therapy and doing well" is disturbing. As long as the victim's side of the story is not available, allowing other people...to speculate about her state of mind is irresponsible. I know the WW tries for controversy, but this is sloppy.

Valdez's attempt to counter the bias against sex offenders leads readers towards an equally damaging bias about victims: that they often recover fully and do well. We like to think the victim recovers and goes on to live a life free of past emotional trauma, but what is this expectation based on? My experience as a rape victim tells me family and friends want a quick recovery, but it isn't real. Society doesn't like to identify with victims any more than it likes to identify with perpetrators, so true empathy is hard to come by for both.

We hear from the mouth of her rapist that she was willing (at 9) to be sodomized, it seems, and from the mouth of [his] father that she is well. Her voice is missing, and she is powerless again. She can't defend her position or know the damage done to her yet. Allowing others to speculate about her is an ignorant disregard for her life and feelings, and completely unnecessary.

Laura Robbins
Southeast 32nd Avenue

NO SYMPATHY FOR THE DEVIL

This offender [Jon Maack, "Unforgiven"] thinks having his every move scrutinized is not easy to deal with and having trouble finding both a job and a place to live a daily struggle and just wants a fair chance to redeem himself?

Too bad!

I hope he ends up getting "bored" again and finds some way to violate his probation that doesn't involve a child. The prison population is rumored to take a dim view on people convicted of sexually abusing a child.

I see no reason to show you compassion or understanding in any way.

Say goodbye to that girlfriend when she finds out your little secret.

Sam Taylor
Wilsonville

THE SCARLET LETTER

Angela Valdez's thoughtful article about Jon Maack's effort to rebuild his life highlights Oregon's vengeful and schizophrenic attitude toward sex offenders. Despite his successful completion of an 18-month, $80,000 treatment program, Jon is still expected to re-offend: Therefore, he must stay away from all minors, confess his crime to potential employers, and adhere to a strict regime of probation conditions.

On one hand, he is a child, under the age at which he can legally drink alcohol or buy cigarettes; at the time of his offense, he could not drive, or vote or join the military. Youngsters do not have the same mature judgment or impulse control as adults. But, on the other hand, they get an adult punishment. Under our One Strike law (Measure 11), a first-time offender of 15 gets the same "package" of conditions as a repeat rapist of 35.

Young people are less likely to re-offend and more amenable to treatment, but they get no more breaks than adults. For a young man, the restrictions may be worse: Jon needs to complete his education, yet he is barred from libraries and community college because he might encounter "minors." These rules ignore not only his successful treatment but also the fact that his offense [and those of most young offenders] was not with a stranger. There is no credible support for the notion that banning such folks from libraries, parks and schools makes anyone safer. In fact, because these sanctions are unrelated to the offense, they may simply discourage and embitter a probationer.

Although Jon's victim is out of counseling and "doing well," he—as he says—is marked for life because of one youthful mistake. But he is one of the lucky ones. Without his family money and support, he might be spending more than 75 months in prison. There, he would receive no treatment and no good time, but he would learn how to fight those who prey on him because of his age and his offense. Upon release, he would have the same conditions and be expected not only to find a job and a home but also to pay for and complete a treatment program—years after the offense he committed.

When we greet back in our communities those who have endured Measure 11's harsh realities with only stigma, shame and more sanctions, we can look forward to a new breed of disappointed, angry and dangerous ex-convicts. We shall reap the whirlwind.

Susan Elizabeth Reese
Trial Lawyer
Southwest Columbia Street

MARKED FOR LIFE

I was surprised to find myself empathizing with Jon Maack in the WW article "Unforgiven." I, too, have been marked for life by events that were unfair, and have made it difficult for me to have a normal life. I was sexually abused as a child, and because of this I suffer from depression at age 43.

I, too, have been "in treatment." I have been to many therapists and have been on countless anti-depression medications. I can't begin to count the cost that this treatment has amounted to. I am presently paying $100 a week for therapy and medication, so that I can leave the house without having a panic attack.

Like Jon, I am lucky because I have had my family to fall back on; financially, that is, as there is an unfortunate tendency to victimize the victim in sex crimes.

Jon has been victimized by a system that fails to look at his individual traits in considering if he would be likely to rape again. He may be unlikely to re-commit this crime, especially if one is to believe the recidivism rates quoted by Angela Valdez (from 5 to 20 percent), but according the U.S. Department of Justice's Center for Sex Offender Management compilation, the recidivism rate for sex offenders runs from 9 to 52 percent.

For sex offenders who can be rehabilitated, continuing to punish them after their sentence has been served (as has been argued that the sex-offender registry does) can seem excessive. For now, the criminal system is not that just, and potentially rehabilitated people like Jon are marked for life.

Being marked for life is hard. I know.

I am.

Anonymous
Southeast Portland