From: Cyclered@aol.com Date: Wed, 6 Oct 2004 15:28:43 EDT Subject: Public Defender's Office: To: phoenix copwatch Suzanne Sanchez & Eleanor Eisenberg: After reading the article in today's Arizona Republic, I feel I have to reply. First of all, I should mention that I am a retired Police Officer with over thirty-five years experience. It has been my pleasure over the years to work with Public Defenders, most of whom I respected and in my opinion were professional in the court room. However, this article has me confused. Let me see if I understand you correctly. It appears you have a problem with the suspects talking with the police. What's wrong with this picture? It sounds like you couldn't care less whether the suspect is guilty or innocent, as long as your office can get them acquitted. So it doesn't matter if the suspect may have committed one, two or even three homicides, lets get him back on the street, so he can continue his life of crime. Correct me if I am wrong. However, I was under the impression that the duties of the Public Defender's office was to see that the accused obtain a fair trial, and in doing so, making sure the police and anybody else connected with the case, operate legally and within the scope of the law. But then I guess using this procedure, too many suspects would be found guilty. I don't know why you have a problem with suspects being found guilty, after a fair trial. You don't have to worry about job insurance. There are plenty of criminals to go around and keep you in business. Sincerely, Lavern J. Link cyclered@aol.com