Regarding the Aug. 20 article on the pending demolition of Southways, the Pillsbury house on Bracketts Point on Lake Minnetonka:
I have a small book written by Mrs. Pillsbury — reminiscences of the property and how it came to be the family home. Here's a pertinent quote, "When I became a widow in 1968, I called Mr. Bolander, a contractor, who is famous for wrecking buildings and houses. He came over and looked the situation over and said he never destroyed anything which could not be replaced, and that my house could not be replaced so, therefore, he would not destroy it but said I must use it as long as possible. Consequently, I decided to make the house smaller."
Too bad sane minds aren't currently at work.
Steve Kelley, Long Lake
• • •
The imminent destruction of the Pillsbury mansion, while indeed shameful, pales historically in comparison to the 1980s destruction of Northome, Frank Lloyd Wright's Prairie School masterpiece also on Lake Minnetonka. It's truly only a matter of degrees between the Taliban's destruction of the fourth-century stone carved Buddhas of Bamiyan and the local destruction of our architectural heritage. But thankfully the Metropolitan Museum of Art in New York swooped in just before Northome's demolition, took the entire living room and reassembled it in the American Wing overlooking Central Park. As an afterthought, the Minneapolis Institute of Arts got ahold of a hallway. Oh, when will they ever learn.
Ronald Korsh, Minneapolis
KEITH ELLISON
The finer points involved in the presumption of innocence
The thoughtful Aug. 21 editorial "Still seeking the truth in the Ellison case" nevertheless contains a grave error: The presumption of innocence is not a guide or rule about evaluating evidence, but rather a legal ground rule to be followed in criminal trials to protect the accused from overreaching by the state. The state has the burden of proving guilt beyond a reasonable doubt, and, indeed, the accused need not testify at all. Any presumption of either innocence (or guilt) applied to, say, reading the newspaper or a historical monograph or original documents would simply lead to bias and general distortion.
The historian or newspaper reader should be evaluating evidence. This is all any reader or investigator can do and of course should do. If a state prosecutor decides that the evidence to justify a criminal charge is strong enough, he or she may file a criminal charge against the accused, knowing that now the presumption of innocence is one of the ground rules that come into play to protect the accused from tyranny. The jury in the case will be making no presumptions of innocence or guilt but will merely be evaluating quality of evidence and credibility of witnesses.
We readers of your newspaper rely on good quality reporting to help us make reasonable decisions about what seems likely to be true or false, and, as possible, we will also consider any other evidence we have. And of course we will have to make the most reasonable decisions we can, whether in the absence or not of a criminal trial.