August 31, 2009
Monday

The story, "Teen charged with theft", on A-2 of the weekend edition of the Ketchikan Daily News, was at best a weighty psychological slant designed to put words in the mouth of Patrick Doherty... to ensure he looks guilty? All pulled out of "the complaint". Was on the grand jury earlier this year, and respect the DAs, the citizens who served, and our humanly imperfect process... but this article has built a prejudicial case against a 19 year old boy who can't challenge his alleged accomplice, or the authorities.

If I may quote from the article, Para 7; Police interviewed Doherty, also 19, who reportedly confirmed that he and Peura were given the card and PIN number and were asked to withdraw $60, said the complaint.

The next [run on] Para 8; "They decided to withdraw an extra $200 beyond the amount authorized, and split the proceeds," the complaint said.

This does not clarify, but rather implies Pat said this in the interview... and further down, Doherty allegedly said he grabbed the card, but later said [still allegedly?] that he wasn't sure who actually took it, said the complaint. -- and; "He [Patrick] indicated that he knew Mr. Hoyt had a lot of money and that it was his intention to repay him later," the complaint said.

Not seeing a confession in saying or knowing Mr. Hoyt had a lot of money. This is prejudicial cherry picking of words to put them in context with a crime. When is it a fair judgment when a unknowable story is tacked on to a plea bargain?

Okay, the article goes on seemingly to make Patrick look like he was cogently involved... but after seeing his celebration of life, his parents, his family, and plethora of friends -- I get this strong sense Patrick was trying to reign in his friend. Pat's intention to repay Mr. Hoyt, seems like the mind of someone trying to steer a wayward friend away from an abyss -- that instead he was caught up in, and put him in that dark corner that inevitably brought him to that terrible moment on the beach.

I'd like to know if his friend's story fits the facts or are designed to cushion his fall. Is the release of this story an attempt to bury an annoying guilt, of poor judgment, a deflected investigation, or to the ends of burying this boy and his reputation that appears to be impeccable... up until this out of character and suspicious deviation. Is it about money? Who believes this story? Why was it written? Unconvincing. Ugly and Unnecessary, is what KDN's apology should read.

Ken Bylund
North Point Higgins,
Ketchikan, AK

Received August 31, 2009 - Published August 31, 2009

Viewpoints - Opinion Letters:

Webmail Your Opinion Letter to the Editor

SitNews ©2009
Stories In The News
Ketchikan, Alaska