Page 4
Opinion
University Daily Kansan, November 4, 1980
Don't hold your breath
With the anticipation of a starving man at Thanksgiving, the American people for the past week have awaited the release of their countrymen held hostage for nearly a year by Iranian militants.
Rumors about their possible release persisted, and an American military hospital in West Germany prepared to receive them, despite the Carter administration's warnings not to expect the captives' freedom for some time. Hopes were raised Sunday when Iran's parliament officially put a price on their freedom.
America must unfreeze Iranian assets, which were frozen when the hostages were captured, return the late shah's wealth to Iran, dismiss all claims filed against Iran in U.S. courts and promise never to muddle again in Iranian affairs.
Unfortunately, both the conditions and the people who would be involved with the hostages' fates preclude any hope of an imminent homecoming.
First, of all, the capriciousness displayed by the Iranian government in the past raises the possibility that once their demands were satiated, they would want more.
The demands, especially those involving the late shah's wealth and the dismissal of claims against Iran, present more complications. Crown Prince Reza Pahlavi became the new Shaf of Iran Saturday, and he no doubt will fight against the return of his father's assets to Iran with all the might his considerable wealth can muster.
As for claims against Iran, their resolution in the courts could take months, even if given supreme priority. And that's only if individual claimants agree to drop their suits.
The demands are tough, the Iranians are tough and America is apparently in for more waiting. Along with the waiting is the hope that the hostages will not be eating their second Thanksgiving supper in Iran.
By JUDY HOWARD Guest Columnist
They say you never discuss religion and politics.
One evening, I violated this sage advice by discussing the possible outcome of today's presidential election with some friends. We really got fired up. Now, however, I wander at the conversation's quality. For me, at least, the conversation degenerated to "you are conservative" and "you are liberal." This is dangerous labeling. Our country must throw this turd and when politics subtly determines the worth of a person's relationship with God.
Christians are free from political labeling because they share one identity in which there are no political divisions. However, that evening conversation and my general impression of the influence of Christian thought on the 1980 presidential campaign seems to be a good indicator for me, as cursory spiritual appraisal can develop among Christians.
Seemingly, if I support the Republican presidential candidate, Ronald Reagan, I am one of those "Moral Majority trooper Christians" who mask her conservative values by making a campaign pledge. I Democratic incumbent President Carter, I am a super feminist, perhaps a Democratic hedonist or one of the many backsliding brethren. If I support the independent candidates, John Anderson, I am unpatriotic or a flighty. My independent party affiliation is unimplicable.
Although I won't please everyone, I am urged to become a part of the massive roll call of the Christian vote. As far as Christians are concerned, prayer—not participation in politics—is the primary means of change in America. Human substitutes for a supernatural "moral rejuvenation" are not enough. Votes should not be cast without the conviction of personal faith. When we publicly scrutinize how a Christian votes, we are playing God as we attempt to determine another Christian's conscience.
It's hard to imagine God being reduced to puny liberal and conservative terminology. Because of this, Christians with Christ living through them should "determine to know nothing but Christ and Him crucified." With theological differences between Republicans, Democrats and independents, As Paul explicitly demanded of the Corinthian church, "Is Christ divided?"
When a Christian's relationship is determined by his party affiliation, he is judged unfairly. Christianity then is placed on the mediocre levels of radical liberalism and ultraconservatism. When single issues determine a Christian's moral integrity, we have invited him to politicize. We have invited the mockery of our witnesses. Our goal to be witnesses of Christ and the "abundant life" is overshadowed by our political bickering.
May the Christian who casts his vote today do so in the soundness of his own conscience. As J.L. Packer wrote in "Fundamentalism and the Word of God," "Right reason cannot endanger sound faith." Becoming too narrow or too liberal in our thinking to the detriment of Christian unity is really jumping a partisan bandwagon, while denying our identity in Christ and our responsibility to esteem fellow Christians.
Consequently, the vote cast in faith will be the vote that really counts. The acceptance of the allotted vote of individual Christians will reap a united peace.
Judy Howard is a senior majoring in
Education and a member of Campus
Crusade for Christ.
LAURAE.NEUMANN
EASE YOUR CONSCIENCE...
TRY PAINLESS VOTING.
The University Daily KANSAN
(UBS 689-049) Published on the University of Kansas daily August through May and Thursday and Tuesday and June except Saturday, Sunday and holidays. Second-class postage paid at Lawrence, Kansas or at the nearest post office. Postage for books of 65¢ or a year inside the county. Student underscriptions are a $2 per semester, paid through the student activity fee. For changes of address to the University Daily Klamath, Flint Hall. The University of Kansas, Lawrence.
Coral State Water
General Manager and Planned Administr
Kenton Advisory
Berkshire Manage
Business Manager
Ellen Morgan
Rick Munger
Mike Murphy
Legal aid helps in Municipal Court
By STEVE TREASTER
Guest Columnist
Many people have their first contacts with the legal system when they appear in a municipal court for a traffic violation.
The Lawrence Municipal Court only hears cases involving violations of city ordinances. Many of the ordinance states that the elements of criminal intent, knowledge, or delibateness are not essential for a conviction. These ordinances only require proof that a prohibited act occurred.
Some ordinance violations can carry relatively serious consequences. In Lawrence, two or more convictions of "drunk driving" (operating under the influence) will result in a sizable fine, suspension of one's driver's license and a short jail sentence.
Lawrence Municipal Court Judge George Catt usually will sentence offenders to jail when they are convicted of speeding 20 mph or more over a speed limit. He also can accumulate eight or more moving violations.
The legal power, or jurisdiction, of the municipal court extends solely to determining whether the defendant has committed a municipal ordinance violation within the city limits. The filing of a complaint initiates court proceedings.
A complaint often is issued to an accused when there is a traffic stop or arrest. The complaint also will contain a notice to appear in court. If a complaint is filed but is not given to the accused at the time of the incident, it will be served. It may be served by leaving it at the defendant's home or with a relative or roommate, or by mailing it to the accused's last known address.
The serving of a notice to appear is not an arrest. An arrest warrant will be issued if the defendant fails to appear at any scheduled court appearance. A warrant also may be issued if there is a reasonable belief that a defendant will not appear in response to a notice to appear.
If arrested, defendants have the right to post bonds for their release. If the officer has probable cause to believe that a defendant will cause some injury, then the defendant may be held in protective custody for as long as six hours.
Defendants may be released on their own personal recognition, without posting security for a court appearance, if they show evidence of close community ties. A person required to post
bond who is unable to peat that bond or has not released the resin whose hours must be released on his own receptionist.
At the first appearance, or arrangement, the judge will read the charges against the accused. The defendant will be asked to plead guilty, not guilty or "nolo contendere" (no contest). If a nolo contendere plea is entered, the judge will find the defendant guilty after accepting the plea.
The advantage of a point contour plate is that it may not be used as an admission of guilt in any case, but it may be used to show the depth of injury.
A trial date will be set if the defendant pleads not guilty.
A defendant may appear at the arraignment with or without an attorney. If he cannot afford an attorney but needs legal assistance, he should inform the judge. The Judge must appoint legal counsel if it is likely the defendant will go to jail and if the accused is unable to afford an attorney.
In Lawrence, Judge Catt normally will refer an indigent defendant to Douglas County Legal Aid. If the defendant does not qualify for legal assistance, a lawyer may be prepared to waive his right to legal counsel.
The defendant decides how he should plead after he has consulted with his attorney. Remember, a defendant is innocent of all charges until proven guilty beyond a reasonable doubt. With the help of his attorney, the accused should evaluate the circumstances of the case, his previous record if any, and the seriousness of the charges before deciding how to plead.
The use of "plea bargaining" with the prosecutor is commonly used to reduce or dismiss charges. A defendant, representing himself on a minor violation, may discuss a proposed plea with Mike Glover, city prosecutor, seven or eight days before the trial date. A defense attorney, often offered, is able to obtain a better plea, particularly if more serious offences are involved.
Plea bargaining often is used because it provides a quick, sure method of disposing of a case, without the time and effort expended by a lawyer to arrange for it. The city, which has extremely heavy case loads,
Where multiple charges stem from one incident, the defendant may be able to get charges dismissed in return for a guilty plea to one of the charges. If the defendant is found not guilty, may be obtained if the violation is a first offense.
A deferred prosecution is simply a written agreement between the defendant and the city.
Prosecution of all charges is stopped for three or six months. If the defendant has not violated the law and has complied with the terms of the agreement, then all charges are dismissed. Restitution of damages to victims is a common additional requirement. Prosecution of the charges will be reinstated should the defendant violate the terms of the agreement.
If a case goes to trial, a defendant should obtain legal counsel. Constitutionally guaranteed rights in criminal trials are applicable to the plaintiff. All trials are heard without a jury in this court.
After the trial, the judge may find the defendant guilty or innocent, depending on the evidence and legal arguments presented. The defendant's conviction in imposing a sentence after a conviction.
Any mitigating factual or financial circumstances should be described to the judge if the defendant is found guilty. The fines and court costs imposed may be delayed, paid by installments or worked off through community service work, subject to the judge's order.
When two or more years have passed since the satisfaction of the conditions of the defendant's sentence, he may petition the court to have the conviction expunged.
Expunging a conviction allows a person to state in an employment application and other situations that he never was convicted of that offense. Exceptions where prior convictions may be cited are sentencing purposes, upon conviction for a subsequent offense and in apportionment for employment as a private detective, security officer or with a criminal justice agency.
An exemption petition is filed in the same court as the original conviction. A five-year waiting period is required in the case of an offence where a certain serious offences. A filing fee is not required.
A hearing then is held. The court grants an expungement if there are no subsequent violations of the law and the expungement is consistent with the public welfare.
A knowledge of municipal court can save time, money, convictions and a lot of emotional stress. People should seek legal assistance if they are charged with a serious violation, have prior convictions or need general advice on how to deal with the charges.
Letters to the Editor
Steve Treaster is an attorney for the Doughas County Legal Aid, Inc.
A vote for Anderson is vote for Anderson
To the editor:
It ammazes me that our two major political parties should offer us Jimmy Carter and Ronald Reagan as presidential fare. I am further amazed that voters are taking them seriously. And I am disguised when I hear people say they must vote for John Anderson because he cannot win.
Of course he can't win if people don't vote for him!
What is this nonsense that binds us to a two-party system, that drives liberals to vote for Carter although they prefer Anderson? Fear that they might refuse their votes if they gave them to Anderson?
The only wasted vote is a vote for a candidate in whom you can't believe. Like one who has been president for four years and under whose administration (one certainly can't call it leadership) the economy has suffered double-digit inflation. Who has two reasons to an international job offer, who now wants to buy your vote with a $27.6 billion tax cut.
Or like another candidate who co-starred in a movie with a chimpanzee named Bonzo. A man who wants to buy your vote with a 30 percent cut, but simultaneously balancing the budget and increasing defense spending. A man who has earned a lot of words: "America has an abundance of energy."
A vote for Carter, who already has proved himself incompetent, is a wasted vote.
And a vote for Anderson is a vote for Anderson. A man who realizes the complexities of our national problems and is willing to face them. A man who is willing to speak out and tell the voters the truth. A man who doesn't have his head buried in the sand, who knows that the world is changing and that the days of gluttonous energy consumption must pass.
A vote for Reagan, who actually longs to start the arms race with the Soviet Union, is a woman's vote.
Don't waste your vote Nov. 4 on a clown who would turn this country into a cirus. Cast it for a drag queen.
Scott E. Landgrai Oklahoma City junior
Vigilantism disgrace
To the editor:
I was thoroughly amazed and disappointed with Bill Menezes' editorial praising vigilism. Even if the basic theme wasn't so repugnant, the argument was so poorly presented that I wonder how it ever managed to make it to the pages of the Kansan.
Menezes claims the judiciary is supporting vigilantism because of its programs helping victims of crime. How is this, in any way, connected with vigilantism? Menezes purports to know what was occurring in his mind when he made this far-fetched comparison.
The first examples of New Yorkers detaining thieves for police and anonymous witness programs definitely are not examples of vigilantism. They show citizens working and cooperating with the law, not citizens forming their own law groups.
Menezes admits vigilantism has been lynch mobism. He mentions that besides killing criminals (we assume they are criminals as they have not been tried and dead men tell no tales) vigilantes also are killing themselves. He adds that "trigger-happy types" just waiting to blow away would be looters the backbone of the vigilante concept. Then, for some obscure reason known only to him, he calls this a "community working together."
Perhaps his reason can be determined by examining his use of the metaphor of cowboys and Indians. This assumes all things can be classified into black and white, for example, cowboy—good, Indian—bad, which in itself is a grave misconception.
Menezes concludes his editorial by saying crime control must be practiced logically, which his editorial certainly managed to avoid doing. He completely ignores the question of who is going to decide whether a crime has been committed, who is guilty and, above all, who is innocent. Menezes argues that a system is inadequate in many areas, but it's far better than anything Menezes could propose.
Jeanne Foy Manhattan freshman