Learning Curves To the Editor, To preface, I am a senior at Salpointe. In addition, I am also a faithful reader of the Tucson Weekly. Within the past year juxtaposing these two characteristics has almost become a contradiction. Even after last year's fiasco, I still found myself coming to The Weekly for entertainment and a different spin on news events in Tucson. Even though I believe the articles were tantamount to yellow journalism, I understand you are one-sided; you have to be. Collectively, you have to serve a political agenda; that is why you exist. Just as I wouldn't trust the Star or Citizen to give me the whole story, I wouldn't trust The Weekly. As a member of the school newspaper, The Crusader, I would like to think I have learned a little about journalistic ethics. We strive to be objective with everything we write, but it is a lofty goal to expect everyone to do the same. The difference between us and you is that we aren't attempting to sway opinions, simply inform. Truth be told, I rarely take exception with the content of your magazine. Actually, my budding political views and cynical nature often coincide with that of The Weekly's, but your recent snippet in The Skinny headlined, "That Salpointe Spirit" (February 25) was repulsive. I am serving my own interests when I say that your rash generalizations and puerile insults only worked to further lessen your credibility. Not all Salpointe students are spoiled; as a matter of fact a large percentage are of the middle to lower class--even I myself provide for my own livelihood. Attending Salpointe is not a status symbol, it is the enactment of a conscious choice to provide your children with a quality education and environment they may not find elsewhere. What strikes me as almost ironic is that four years ago, The Weekly had no problems with Salpointe. Your columnist Tom Danehy even coached freshmen girls basketball and wrote encouraging remarks about Salpointe, but the moment the Star and Citizen started giving us press coverage, your support was gone. You couldn't possibly agree with them could you? I am by no means a spirited Lancer, but I do get offended when some tells a slanted version of a story, with no proof, quotes or objectivity, and then proceeds to use it as a basis to call me and people I'm associated with "assholes." People make mistakes. Not everyone learns from them. One of us obviously hasn't. --Travis Thomas Scales Of Justice To the Editor, Regarding Robert Annenberg's letter ("Travesty Of Justice," February 25) in response to my article about Salena Kahl's murder ("Maelstrom of Justice," February 18): I met Annenberg. More than a year ago I walked him down to the river bed to the spot where I found Salena's body. He has a reputation as a first-rate investigator. I am sure this case looked very different to him. As a witness I could not discuss, much less investigate, this murder, nor was I permitted in court proceedings prior to trial. Other feedback I received this past week came from readers who understood from my article that all evidence presented in court was circumstantial. They asked whether I was convinced Givens was guilty. This was high praise for my work. Most also expressed gratitude that they were not on that jury. Would you have known about the jurors' over-riding of the forensics experts concerning the footprint if I had not reported it? My account was my personal experience as a witness and a reasonable representation of events in a complicated, month-long trial which I attended and Annenberg did not. I am sorry he didn't like it. As for my students: I teach them grammar, paragraph structure, and to write their own thoughts in a considered and logical way. I thank Annenberg for his comments. --Norah Booth To the Editor, There's no forensic evidence that the Nazis gassed millions of Jews with louse disinfectant and diesel exhaust and the prosecutor admitted that there's not much forensic evidence to convict Jaime Givins of murdering and raping a 15-year-old girl ("Travesty of Justice," February 28). I don't believe the Nazis murdered millions of Jews but I do believe Givins murdered Salina Kahl. Here's why: Even though Givins said nothing at his trial (I was there for most of it), I found Givins guilty because he kept putting his foot in his mouth. Innocent people don't threaten to "kill the snitch." Givins confessed (bragged) to a cellmate that he killed and raped a 15-year-old girl (corpse). The defense alleges that the cellmate read Givins' court papers and concocted the elaborate "confession." But then, other cellmates testified that Givins offered them money to "kill the snitch." Givins called him a "snitch," not a liar. If Givins didn't masturbate on a towel in his jail cell (the prosecution obtained the towel, had it forensically examined and found the semen was aspermatic like the semen found at the scene of the crime) and listened to his attorneys, who told Givins to throw out his court papers in his cell and not talk to anyone about his case, he wouldn't be where he is today; he'd be out murdering and raping more women and girls. --Bruce A. Friedemann Vic's Formula To the Editor, Regarding "Mel Hell" (February 11): As one of your no-doubt vast Internet audience I was moved, nay, moved to tears, by the recent article about Vic Tayback (noted thespian). Since Tayback has, unfortunately, been dead for a decade now (easily the loneliest 10 years of my life), I despaired of reading his name in the "popular press" ever again. If only more movie reviewers would display the intelligence and fortitude that young (I presume) Mr. James DiGiovanna, evinced by referring continually to Tayback in his review of a movie not at all connected with Tayback's once-vital oeuvre. Whilst I abhor DiGiovanna's "liberal" attitudes towards Tibet and his unthinking condemnation of China's kind rule (itself a topic of some controversy in your paper I believe), I must certainly congratulate him for his supremely good taste in actors. When I first arrived in the States many years ago, Tayback's performances ably served as my introduction to American culture. Reading your article brought back many, many fond memories of Tayback's work: his frown, his scowl, his deep yet mellifluous shriek, his stare, his rage, his hectoring, his bullying, his sullenness, his gravitas, and, in short, his full and utter versatility. The joy that Tayback occasioned in me and countless others is priceless. His legacy must never be forgotten. --Sam Slote We Want Letters! Thrilled by our brilliant insights? Sick of our mean-spirited attacks? Need to make something perfectly clear? Write: tucsonweekly@tucsonweekly.com

Home | Currents | City Week | Music | Review | Books | Cinema | Back Page | Archives

		© 1995-99 Tucson Weekly . Info Booth