If anything, verdict showed weakness of jury system

Monday, July 29, 2013
Text Size: A | A

If anything, verdict showed weakness of jury system

Contrary to former town justice Bruce Trachtenberg’s July 19 letter, “Zimmerman verdict affirmed justice system,” I believe the verdict proved again the jury system is as vulnerable to human frailty as any other human institution.

As a jurist, I would rather have had Mr. Trachtenberg address his thoughts on the role the “Stand Your Ground” law played as a backdrop in this case, the jury’s apparent dismissal of the fact that George Zimmerman was directed by a police officer to not confront the Martin youth, the jury’s acceptance of the defense’s case that the whole affair commenced when Martin turned on Zimmerman, and the short time the jury deliberated its verdict. Not to mention the consensus that the defense attorneys were more effective in their presentation than was the prosecution.

That said, I did watch key parts of the trial and was convinced that the prosecution still presented a sufficient case for a manslaughter conviction.

Robert K. Corliss


No justification for ethnic slurs of any kind

I read with interest and a great deal of dismay the July 23 follow-up article regarding the ouster of the “Wandering Dago” food truck from the Saratoga Race Course.

Make no mistake about it, despite the comments by the various individual quoted in the article: The term “dago” always has been, and still is, a derogatory and demeaning ethnic slur.

The truck owner stated that his grandma affectionately used the term when referring to him as a youngster. Unfortunately, grandma was unwittingly perpetuating a derogatory slur. Blacks sometimes use the N-word when referring to each other. Does this make the term acceptable? Of course not, it still remains a derogatory, demeaning word.

I was particularly dismayed by the comments of the former public officials of Italian descent. The logic behind the comment that dago used to be a slanderous term but is no longer, escapes me.

Apparently, the thinking is that if one uses a slanderous term often enough and long enough, it becomes acceptable. I think not.

Peter Sparano


The writer is president of the Sons of Italy, Lodge No. 321.

Temperature’s rising whether we feel it or not

During the recent heat wave, I was reminded of the joke going around of the frog in a pot of slowly boiling water who doesn’t know what’s happening until it’s too late.

If, as some say, the heat wave was a product of global warming, at least we got a hint of what is happening. But is it too late?

David Childs


Share story: print print email email facebook facebook reddit reddit


July 29, 2013
2:01 a.m.
Fritzdawg says...

Peter Sparano:
Perhaps you would like to share with the class, what the definition of that word is.
I found at least a dozen different definitions, and found none of them to be offensive.

I'm not entirely sure that you know the definition of the word "slanderous" either.

I am a white, 3rd generation male that is 3/4 Italian (just enough to be waterproof), and I define myself as being an American, and not some displaced Italian longing for home.
If it was that wonderful, why are you still here?

My grandparents didn't leave because Italy was just the greatest thing ever.
Granted, someone that would name their business "The Wandering Dago" is most likely a groundling, and yahoo, but I think that was their idea of self deprecating humor.

While I was looking up definitions, I looked up the word "honky" as well, and still failed to be offended.
Stop grasping for things to be offended by.
It doesn't make you special, it just makes you annoying.

July 29, 2013
7:47 a.m.
muggy says...

Three of my four grandparents were immigrants from Ireland. I'm 100% Irish. Should I be "offended" by the fighting Irish leprechaun caricature used by Notre Dame? We're oh, so sensitive nowadays.

Log-in to post a comment.

columnists & blogs

Log into

Forgot Password?