•••
I read through Deputy Hennepin County Attorney Mark Osler's defense of Hennepin County Attorney Mary Moriarty ("Moriarty's vision, not critics' fears, has been fulfilled," Opinion Exchange, Oct. 25). In it I found criticism of Moriarty's political opponents, an attempt to credit her administration for statistical drops in crime and a somewhat patronizing, stereotyped view of the attitudes of victims and their families. It was an insider's view, but insiders often reveal their own blind spots. Working in constant, close engagement with all parties in a legal fracas, they can miss the forest for the trees.
Osler focuses much on the assumed feelings of crime victims. He makes the argument that many, but not all, victims are looking for retribution or revenge. He makes the argument that young offenders need rehabilitation, not prison time. Neither of these arguments, ironically, relate to the basic foundation of the justice system. Law was instituted as an alternative to vengeance, but its central premise is this: If you offend or outrage the moral norms of law-abiding society, there will be consequences. Lawbreaking results in punishment. The outraged families of victims are not looking to salve their feelings or bring back their loved ones: They are demanding basic justice.
Oftentimes Moriarty and her cadre present the situation as an either/or problem: either punishment or humane rehabilitation. It doesn't have to be one or the other. Our justice system is always in need of reform — sometimes drastic reform. But serving a prison sentence as a consequence of crime on the one hand and rehabilitation on the other should not be separate options. We need to remake our justice and prison systems so that both basic justice and the rehabilitation of young offenders are not only possible, but standard.
Henry Gould, Minneapolis
•••
I disagree with Wednesday's letter on criminal justice "Prison sentence won't bring back the dead" (Readers Write, Oct. 25).
