Advertisement

Law Enforcement and the Chief Justice

March 09, 1986

I read with surprise Chauncey Alexander's letter (March 2) about my remarks in Huntington Beach two weeks ago. He suggests my topic, Chief Justice Rose Elizabeth Bird, was inappropriate. I was asked to talk about law enforcement issues, and if he does not think the election of the chief justice is a law enforcement issue, we are certainly reading different newspapers.

There is an unfortunate tendency evident among Rose Bird's defenders: name calling. So far, her supporters have called her opponents John Birchers, McCarthyites, right-wingers and a number of other inflammatory names. She herself called us bully boys. Alexander adds to this by saying I engaged in "distortions and lies." He does not say in what way, because he cannot. I simply related the facts.

He mentions the California District Attorneys' white paper and the response of Anthony Murray, her (Bird's) principal spokesperson. Having built his straw man, Alexander blows it down. I did not discuss the white paper or its content.

In fact, I talked about a number of significant civil cases. I talked about the chief justice's misleading claim that 90% of the criminal cases are affirmed, her misleading statement that California has more prisoners per capita than any other state (we are 25th), the court's failure to follow the constitutional 90-day requirement within which to decide cases and the release of 11 reversals on New Year's Eve, contrary to the court's established procedure.

I'm sorry Alexander's mind was closed and he did not listen.

CECIL HICKS

District Attorney

Orange County

Advertisement
Los Angeles Times Articles
|
|
|