WW welcomes letters to the editor via mail, e-mail or fax. Letters must be signed by the author and include the author's street address and phone number for verification. Preference will be given to letters of 250 words or less. THANKSGIVING Thanks for publishing the "Battered Truth" article [WW, Nov. 18, 1998]. I don't know anyone involved in the events that led up to the Jenkins trial, but I do read The Oregonian and listen to TV news. The mainstream media has made a regular practice of reporting innuendo, hearsay, hype, commentary and speculation rather than go to the effort to determine and confirm facts. WW won some credibility when it conceded that WW itself "occasionally oversteps its bounds." Thanks for having the courage to keep the rest of the local media accountable for sloppy journalism. Also, kudos for exposing Wyden for his failure to have the courage to support light rail. Don't call Wyden "cautious." That is too generous. His failure to support the light rail cause is a matter of political cowardice and a complete absence of leadership. Smith certainly rose in my esteem. So did WW, given that WW has repeatedly endorsed Wyden as its preferred politician. Sometimes it is more important to elect someone who has the courage of convictions and the qualities of leadership, even if you do not agree with that person on all the issues. Please keep that in mind the next time you endorse the various candidates for political office. (If you were wondering, I am a registered Democrat.) Daniel R. Barnhart Southeast 57th Avenue A JURY'S DUTY Some of the letters that Willamette Week have received after Maureen O'Hagan's article ["Battered Truth," WW, Nov. 18, 1998] have made it clear that many people still have no idea what happened at the trial of Jenkins and Bryant. It is also clear that many people are clueless as to the what a jury can and cannot do. We could not "step outside of the facts and see the big picture" (as one of the letters proposed). We also could not "send a message." And by acquitting Jenkins and Bryant, we did not "condone or encourage" their actions. All we did, and all we could do, was use the evidence to reach verdicts on the charges that were filed. The State's case was so weak and their witnesses so inconsistent that I don't think anybody sitting through that trial would have voted for conviction. Many people also think that the "boys should have been convicted of something." Well, the system doesn't work that way. We could only reach verdicts on the charges that were actually brought by the State. A jury can't make up its own charges. We also were bound to follow the jury instructions when reaching our verdicts. The instructions were crucial in this case, as they spelled out the circumstances where "deadly force" can be used. The public reaction to the verdicts clearly illustrates how powerful and pervasive the influence of the media is in our society. People were primed for a conviction and couldn't conceive of an acquittal. The jury must have screwed up. I guess this reaction should be expected when a credulous public is misled about the facts involved and is ignorant of the rules of the judicial process. Michael Siegel, Juror Southwest Dover Street A DREAM TEAM? Bob Young's article ["Civic Lesson," Nov. 24, 1998] was important for revealing the real players behind the projected overhaul of Civic Stadium. And the real game. Which is, of course, scoring a construction contract, followed by a stadium management contract. What the writer failed to mention, however, is more startling. The reconstruction will be done behind the guise that a Major League Baseball team will move to Portland, even though there will never--ever--be an MLB game played in Civic Stadium. Why is that? For starters, no principal stakeholder would dare to place a major-league team in such a small stadium. And equally as important, there is no parking. The irony behind all this, however, is the real kicker. Playing baseball in downtown Portland is just another one of Mayor Katz's nitwit fantasies, but like covering the 405 freeway, it's taken on a life of its own, a sort of white elephant waiting to rise up and shaft the taxpaying property owners. Bill Kidd Southwest Clay Street BEHIND THE SCENES Kim Morgan's praise of the "bravery" of the Clinton Street Theater's "Pornovember Porn & Beer Fest" [Screen, WW, Nov. 24, 1998], which included the movie Deep Throat, struck me as particularly feeble. Linda ("Lovelace") Marchiano was a victim of severe and serious crimes against every aspect of her person by her ex-husband/pimp/ perpetrator Chuck Traynor and the film made by him. Deep Throat is a film of her rape. At the time of the publication of her book Ordeal Marchiano underwent extensive lie-detection testing by criminal specialists (which she repeatedly passed) at the behest of her publishers, who wanted no liability lest she were lying. Morgan herself writes that "even Chuck Traynor admits that much of what Lovelace reported in the book Ordeal was true." And yet Morgan continues to give credence to the notion that Marchiano somehow was "into it." To assert, as Morgan did, that Deep Throat's artistic merits outweigh any possible doubts that it might represent the filming of Marchiano's rape is laughable and cruel at the same time. I sincerely hope that Morgan never has such "art" made of her real humiliation and abuse and then has to listen to people defend their right to see it and profit from it because they liked the groovy cinematic colors and the "ideas" it represents. I say Linda Marchiano is brave and the protesters were brave, and I wonder is it too much for women to expect that their stories will be believed? Gina Qualliotine Southeast 28th Place I SAW THE LITE Planet Art Network? ["Y2K Hippies," WW, Dec. 2, 1998] PAN? I get it. Interesting. The year 1000 occurred during the Dark Ages, and the year 2000 comes during the Lite Ages. Bob Short Southwest Boundary Street STILL COMMITTED... Your story about increasing numbers of people with mental illness ["Blind Injustice," WW, Dec. 2, 1998] illuminates an area of growing public concern. However, the reader is left with the sense that state policy is changing with respect to the role of the state hospital in responding to the needs of the mentally ill. In fact, for the past decade Oregon has shifted its focus from institution to community-based psychiatric care. This policy has more than doubled the number of people in services (from less than 40,000 to nearly 85,000 per year), increased total public psychiatric hospital admissions by nearly 30 percent, and dramatically improved both access to and quality of community crisis and residential programs. Nonetheless, problems facing the mentally ill have worsened. Housing is much less affordable, drug and alcohol use are rampant, and the demand for care has grown much faster than the funding for county mental health services. Opening a new ward at Oregon State Hospital responds solely to the state's statutory obligation to assume care and custody of court mandated patients. It does not diminish the state's commitment to community treatment or our desire to assist Multnomah County in responding effectively to growing numbers of mentally ill persons with no other place to find the help they need. Barry S. Kast, MSW, Administrator Mental Health and Developmental Disability Services Division Salem ...BUT COULD DO BETTER As an intern last summer with the Citizens Crime Commission, I heard about Peter Klarquist's clawing his own eyes out while sitting in the Justice Center jail ["Blind Injustice," WW, Dec. 2, 1998]. After studying and examining the mentally ill population within the Oregon prison system, I came to realize that Oregon clearly needs more in the way of care for the mentally ill. Klarquist is only one example of the problem. It is time to stop shoveling mentally ill offenders into the prison system; likewise, it is not an option anymore to simply send them to state hospitals, like Dammasch. Oregon needs to develop productive ways to care for mentally ill offenders. Forcing mentally ill offenders to take medication is not an option either. As stated in Maureen O' Hagan's article, it is against the law to force them to take medication. Likewise, I was disgusted by Sheriff Noelle's belief that "mentally ill people tend to deteriorate because we can't force them to take medication." The mentally ill do not deteriorate because we can't force them to take medication. It's because our own messed up belief system that we must force others to do as we say. If a system was set up which rewarded the mentally ill for taking their medication, we would see more positive results. This method has been proven in Milwaukee, Wis., a city quite comparable to Portland in size. The problem with the mentally ill jail population is a deeply rooted one which has many complex avenues. I don't hold the grand answer to this complex problem, but hopefully by changing our attitudes about the mentally ill, we can be more candid and open in our way of examining the problem within the jail population. Kelly Wallace Aurora, N.Y. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Willamette Week | originally published December 9, 1998