Letters to the editor (09/29/12)
Taxpayers shouldn’t have to pay for Aragon
When I was in grade school, our class used to make field trips to our courthouse to learn what the law was all about.
Afterwards, our class would visit the judge in their chambers and we had the opportunity to ask questions. The answers to the questions that all judges gave us were the same: “It really doesn’t matter what type of crime was committed, or if anyone in the general was harmed by the crime or not. A person will always have money in their pockets to pay for their infraction.”
Needless to say, I never took a question any further than that point, for I knew the law is supposed to be about justice.
Sad to say that as the years went by and I saw what the judicial system was all about, I came to the conclusion that the law is just a business, and its only intention is not to punish the guilty, but to convict as many people as possible for meaningless crimes that hurt no one.
Judges need to understand that regardless of the circumstances of how a person is provoked into court, that person is innocent until proven guilty. They are also entitled, according the to Constitution of the United States, to enter a plea of guilty or not guilty, in their own case, and they are entitled to an attorney, if necessary, when a defendant requests one.
I don’t think I need to give anyone a lesson on the Constitution and Civil Rights, but those are the rights that Jeff Aragon loved to violate … That is why I strongly disagree with the comments in the Aug. 22 edition of the News-Bulletin in which Genovia Chavez stated that “Aragon’s mistakes in office were acceptable.”
To Ms. Chavez I would have to say, “Wake up and smell the coffee.” What Jeff Aragon did in several cases was unacceptable and disrespectful to the innocent.
… I wish people who were subjected to the “judicial terrorism” of Jeff Aragon would step forward and tell the village of Los Lunas and the Supreme Court that he does not deserve one penny for his legal fees.
I believe Jeff Aragon owes several hundred other people a written apology … Jeff Aragon was a disgrace to the bench and the judicial system he represented.
Ms. Chavez also stated that “In the future coverage of this nature, please use discretion, respect and best wishes to anyone who is looking for employment. We do not appreciate the negative and insulting opinions. Thank you.”
Well, to Ms. Chavez I must ask who she is referring to, when she stated “we” and her comments must be targeting Ms. LeDoux and the Judicial Standards Commission.
I would expect that the Judicial Standards Commission provide more details and clarity. I know that there are many complaints about Jeff Aragon before 2010. It’s time for the people to demand answers and take back their judicial system.
In the same edition of the News-Bulletin, Ms. Anna Mae Wood also states that the “village of Los Lunas should pay for Aragon,” unto which I say to Ms. Wood that the village of Los Lunas and its taxpayers have already paid too high of a price for Jeff Aragon’s mistakes. Jeff Aragon thought he was above the law.
I’m not sorry for what I’m about to say Ms. Wood, but there is nothing honorable about abuse of the law. The truth of the matter, Ms. Wood, is that a lot of people didn’t get a fair hearing, or any hearing at all.
You, Ms. Wood, even go as far as to say that “Could it be that those whom he trusted” had failed him for their own self interest. If you believe that, then that comment alone is more of a reason for the people to be involved in what goes on in their local government. Face the truth, and don’t mask it with religious rhetoric.
People need to tell the village council, the mayor and the Supreme Court, “Absolutely not. Do not give Jeff Aragon one dime for his legal fees, or any monetary reimbursement of any kind.”
Let your village officials know that Jeff Aragon has abused enough people. With the atrocities he has committed against the people of Los Lunas, everything should remain on his record — permanently.
People learn from their mistakes. Apparently, Jeff Aragon did not. The Judicial Standards Commission should have acted sooner, and they should become transparent with their records.
People, please sound off about the disgust and corruption that exists in our judicial system. Get involved.
How I risked my life for a girl
I like a girl. I was passing her old car and noticed she had a hubcap missing. I nonchalantly went to her door. She smiled. She is always smiling.
I told her there were two hubcaps at the main railroad crossing. She said not to run over by the train.
I went walking at midnight. To build up my courage, I sang where there were no houses.
I was having second thoughts. I sang Spanish church songs at the car wash. The cleanup man at the handi mart probably though I was crazy.
The big thing I had to worry about was trains from both directions. The trains have bright white lights in front.
Then I had to watch the four crossing gates. Then there was a big mud puddle on the side. Then the railway rock bed was unstable.
The rails were slippery as ice. Then the lighting was poor.
I managed to find one of the hubcaps and put it in my backpack. I looked and looked for the other one, but someone must have gotten it.
Boy, I was so happy to get away from there that I sang on the way home.
A sleepy guy told me to shut up, which I promptly did. I got home.
I found the hubcap unusable. I never told the girl about the danger, but I hope she reads this.
Martin Frank Kirtley
If Ryan is elected, so are his lies
Referring to my previous letter “attacking” the fear-driven and dishonest methods used by the leadership of the NRA, Mr. Paul Rockhold trumpets, “Let me reply to Terry Mehaffey’s emotional tirade against our Constitution and our Bill of Rights.”
Of course, and in spite of the many self-announced accomplishments heralded by Mr. Rockhold, he failed the test of reader comprehension and truth-telling; his accusation is totally dishonest (no supporting quote evidence).
When very much in fact, I truthfully honored the Constitution and Bill of Rights by accurately quoting the Second Amendment with its Preamble because clause (For the reason that; on account of), “A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State….”
But I suppose in Mr. Rockhold’s world, cropping the complete language of the Second Amendment for the disingenuous purposes I mentioned is a standard “emotional tirade” procedure, especially in the present state of American conservativism.
To add to Mr. Rockhold’s disconcerting world with one example from the Republican convention, wherein, in response to Paul Ryan’s speech, one journalist from the regularly prostrated Fox News was so dumbstruck by the dishonesty, and in shock, the journalist publicly lamented all “the blatant lies” spoken.
Even worse than the lies, the entranced conservative audience cheered loudly as each lie was spoken. If Paul Ryan is elected, the lies are elected.
Oh yes, Mr. Rockhold, as a small “i” independent, I did actually attack the fear/rumor-driven methods of the NRA, CPAC, the Republican Party and Fox News. But I hope you don’t, in your wildest state of mind, relate attacking those reality twisting organizations with or as equal to attacking the Constitution and the Bill of Rights.
Then too, to show you the power of using accurate quotes, here are more of your words, “That is the reason I joined. I heard rumors that a plot was afoot to deny our ownership of firearms.”
Gee whiz, you were talking about 1964. So, just think, for nearly 50 years, you have been an ideological prisoner of a “rumor,” the same rumor, in its many twisting variations, that was recently used again by Wayne La Pierre in his mentioned CPAC speech. Then too, just think, the number of privately owned guns has more than tripled since 1964.
Which, with all other constantly promoted, dishonest, but cheered, illusions and delusions, it brings a ton of fear for a nation seemingly headed for an American dark age and Fascism with a capital F. Or, consider the biblical story about the very traditional, conservative priests/elders and money changers, who, together in an political/ideological/moneyed authoritarian bed, and along with a donkeyed-in conservative multitude shouting Barrabas,
Barrabas, caused the terrifying, crucifying conservative aftermath. Helluva mental picture with labeling, huh! Or, were those priests and money changers actually the liberals?