editorial
Was Goetz incident
really citizen justice?
Maybe it was a reflection of President Ronald Reagan’s
“get tough” foreign policy manifesting itself at home.
Maybe it was a reflection of public anger over the inability of
the strongest nation on earth to bring big-city crime under
control. Whatever it was, the shooting of four youths in a
New York City subway on December 22 turned Bernhard
Goetz into a national hero. He became a “modern
vigilante,” praised by the public for “standing up to crime”
and for having the courage to deal out justice when justice
was due.
But as the facts unfold, the story of Goetz is taking on a
new twist. Gone is the image of an innocent victim of street
crime who, in the name of self-defense, shot four street
punks who had asked him for five dollars. According to
Goetz’s police testimony, the youths displayed no weapons
and made no overtly threatening gestures. It was “body
language” that provoked him to shoot them. Goetz claims
that after shooting all four teenagers, he checked the condi
tion of each one carefully, and upon noticing that one of
them didn’t have any blood on him, Goetz put the gun
directly to his ribs and shot again. “I wanted to kill those
guys,” he said. The police report stated that “the shooting
frenzy stopped only because he ran out of bullets.”
The issue here is not whether the four youths had
previous criminal records or were acting in a suspicious
fashion. The issue is whether or not someone like Goetz, in
the name of “justice,” has the right, as the New York Times
put it, to become “judge, jury, and executioner.”
The only crime with which Goetz was charged was car
rying an illegal handgun. If one of the teenagers, Darrell
Cabey, dies (he remains in a coma) then it could mean that
Goetz may literally get away with murder. Because of this.
District Attorney Robert Morgenthau is considering asking a
new grand jury to decide whether to indict Goetz on charges
of attempted murder. It is unclear why Goetz chose to sit
next to the four youths rather than on the other end of the
subway where 20 other passengers were sitting. Further
more, if Goetz acted in self-defense, why then, according to
his own testimony, did he plan out how to best shoot his vic
tims even before he pulled the trigger. Finally, what kind of
self-defense is it when after already shooting them, Goetz
walked up to one of the teenagers, who was slumped in a
subway seat, and said, “You don’t look so bad, here’s
another,” and then shot him at point blank range?
We are not saying that the four youths were innocent.
Not by any means. But rather, did Goetz have the right to
shoot them? This question must be answered in a trial.
Unless it is, a dangerous precedent will be set. One that af
firms the right of any individual to judge a situation and
then deal out “justice” according to their understanding of
it.
Goetz has used his celebrity status since the shooting to
push for looser gun control laws and to criticize the criminal
justice system. But Goetz’s own case shows why the
availability of handguns must be tighly controlled. Easier
access to legally obtaining handguns does not mean more
justice, and as far as Goetz is concerned, it may prove just
the opposite. It’s easy to criticize the criminal justice system
for not controlling big-city crime, and to advocate looser gun
control laws as some kind of an answer to the problem. But it
would be far more constructive to take it a step further and
question some of Reagan’s recent budget cuts. According to
Alair Townsend, New York City’s Budget Director, Reagan’s
proposed financial cuts will cost New York City 4,800 police
officers. Increased street crime will be the price the public
has to pay. We all must realize that far from any kind of
answer, the Goetz incident is merely a symptom of a much
larger problem.
Oregon doily
emerald
The Oregon Daily Emerald is published Monday
through Friday except during exam week and vacations
by the Oregon Daily Emerald Publishing Co., at the
University of Oregon, Eugene, Oregon, 97403.
The Emerald operates independently of the Universi
ty with offices on the third floor of the Erb Memorial
Union and is a member of the Associated Press
General Staff
Advertising Director
Production Manager
Classified Advertising
Controller
Susan Thelen
Russell Steele
Vince Adams
Jean Own bey
Advertising Sales: Laura Buckley. Tim Clevenger, Jen
nifer Fox, Marcia Leonard, Rick Martz, Nancy Nielsen
Laurie Nobel, Roberta Oliver, Brett Pickman - Intern!
David Wood.
Production: Kelly Cornyn, Stormi Dykes, Julie Freeman
Kathy Gallagher, Dean Guernsey, Susan Hawkins, Rob
Kraft, Ross Martin, Karin McKercher, Lauri Neely, Kelly
Neff, Kara Oberst, Curt Penrod, Michele Ross, Alyson
Simmons, Peg Solonika, Tim Swillinger, Colleen Tre
maine, Hank Trotter.
Editor
Managing Editor
News Editor
Editorial Page Editor
Photo Editor
Sports Editor
Sidelines Editor
Friday Edition Editor
Entertainment Editor
Night Editor
Associate Editors
Administration
Higher Education
Politics
ASUO
Student Activities
Community
Features
Michele Matassa
Mike Sims
Michael Kulaga
Costas Christ
Michael Clapp
Brent De La Paz
Sheila Landry
Kim Carlson
Michael Duncan
Michael Kulaga
Jolayne Houtz
Michael Hosmar
Paul Ertelt
Julie Shippen
Oiana Elliott
Cynthia Whitfield
Lori Steinhauer
Reporters: Sean Axmaker, Dave Berns, Kirsten Bolin
Michelle Brence, Dave Carlson, Robert Collias, Thomas
Henderson, Robin Joannides, Allan Lazo, Capi Lynn
Scott McFetridge, Stasia Scarborough,
News and Editorial
Display Advertising and Business
Classified Advertising
Production
Circulation
686-5511
686-3712
686-4343
686-4381
686-5511
letters
Help available
Good for the Emerald for ad
dressing the issue of sexual
harassment. It’s a damaging
societal problem, and students
need to know that it will not be
tolerated on campus. Students
also need to know that
grievances can be (and have
been) resolved informally, con
fidentially, to the satisfaction of
the grievant, and without
retaliation.
Formal grievance procedures
are available to everyone as
well, but this raises a question
about Tuesday’s article.
One of the students inter
viewed spoke of having filed a
formal grievance with both a
department head and the Office
of Affirmative Action.
If this were the case, there
would be a written record not
only in the departmental office
and the OAA but also in the Of
fice of the Provost. Yet neither
the current nor the former
department head has any record
or recollection of the incident
described, nor does the Provost,
nor do I.
It may be that the particulars
of that incident were altered to
protect the student. But there
are other, and better, ways to
protect people. Nor did it help
to give misinformation about an
evening meeting on sexual
harassment.
Bean Comrada
Affirmative Action
Get some help
Never before have I been mov
ed to write a letter to the editor
until I read Vince Adams’ “Nice
Work?” in the ODE Feb. 22.
Adams must be greatly
troubled in mind and spirit to
spew forth that abominable gar
bage about ‘‘women
crap”. . . “opening doors". . .
“Playboy”... “WRRS.” What a
shallow fellow he is indeed!
What in the world did sen
ding roses and all of that
nonsense have to do with a
straightforward (although ob
viously more direct and
outspoken than some people
could handle) presentation
meant to make everyone stop
and think about the problem
and maybe become more aware
and better educated on this
unpleasant but very real matter.
Adams should stop hiding
behind his sweaty feet, lick
them off himself, and con
template his diseased attitudes
and bewildering ramblings.
Then he should look deep
within, find out what caused
his careless display of stupidity
and ignorance, and get some
help.
Adams, why don’t you, ya
know, quit knocking someone
else’s efforts at alerting our
community to an oft-avoided
topic? Are you threatened by
women who take charge and
make a stand on something they
believe should be brought to the
public’s attention?
To sum it up, all I can deter
mine is that you’re one of the
many that feel “If I ignore the
problem, criticize those who
bring the subject up, or act like
it isn’t there, maybe it will go
away and maybe, just maybe, it
doesn’t really exist.” “Nice
work” exposing your ugly, in
secure inner self to the world.
M. Kathryn Scofield
Eugene
Obnoxious
Vince Adams (ODE, Feb, 22)
made a few statements that I
find just too obnoxious to let go
by without replying. First off I
am sure that more women
would rather be treated with
respect than receive a single
rose every day of her life, and by
your use of the term “chick” in
reference to Laura Romano it
proves that you have very little
respect for them.
As for your feeling about the
display case on pornography, I
can understand your uncomfor
tableness since you sound like
one of the men that were hang
ing around the case. 1 believe
that if a child (no matter
whether it is a boy or girl) hap
pened to see the case and asked
me why there were pictures of
naked women bound and gagg
ed in the display case and why
there were so many men gawk
ing at them I would have told
him/her that in our society there
are people that buy the product
they sell which encourages
them to produce more of their
product thus more women are
exploited.
Your comment about the
Women's Resource and Referral
system is a good example of ex
actly why they exist. W.R.R.S.
provides a service to women in
our community who need help
in one way or another, one I am
sure is how to deal with obnox
ious men such as yourself.
Jim Shoemaker
Business/Psychology
Ludicrous
For fear of being promptly tar
red and feathered, I dare not
chuckle too loudly at the word
which follows “Oregon” in
referring to our fighting flocks.
However, that ever-so-cute web
footed mascot is hardly
synonymous with guts and
glory. Could any zoologist in
his right mind possibly applaud
the pitting of broad-billed birds
against vicious cougars,
wildcats and bears?
Nonetheless, by now that
five-letter word is as much a
part of the University spirit as
its green and yellow colors, so it
looks like it's here to stay. But
isn’t one ground bird enough?
The name of a university stu
dent union, like its mascot, is
an important reflection of what
the school stands for. The
acronym “EMU," when said
rapidly as one word, becomes
“emu" (pronounced e’ myoo).
Big deal? You’d better believe
it! An emu is nothing more than
a flightless three-toed
Australian bird. What else
could possibly be done to im
pede our school from ever "get
ting off the ground?"
Next thing you know, the
name of our most-cherished
building will mysteriously
transform from "Deady" into
"Dodo" Hall. Maybe then we’ll
finally wake up to this demean
ing trend of ludicrous labeling.
Charles Korns
Freshman