Opinion Wednesday, Aayuet 2S, 1993 I
Nebraskan
Editorial Board
University of Nebraska-Lincoln
Jeremy Fitzpatrick.Editor, 472-1766
Kathy Steinauer.. Opinion Page Editor
Wendy Mott...Managing Editor
Todd Cooper.....Sports Editor
Chris Hopfensperger .Copy Desk Chief
Kim Spurlock......Sower Editor
Kiley Timperley...Senior Photographer
Justice served
Detroit juries bring forth just convictions
There will be no justice in Detroit as long as Malice Green is
dead, according to Green's sister.
Green was killed Nov. 5 on a street comer in a poor
neighborhood in Detroit Two policemen were convicted Monday
of his murder.
While convicting the policemen cannot bring Green back to
life, the juries in the trials of the policemen did their best to make
sure justice was served.
An autopsy showed Green died of at least 14 blows to the head,
and part of his scalp was tom off. Witnesses said the policemen
beat Green with their metal flashlights.
The beating of Green began when he would not show the
policemen what he was holding in his hand. It’s now believed he
was holding either cocaine, keys or a piece of paper.
Even if he were holding cocaine, that alone is not worth killing
a man. . .
While nothing indicated the beating was racially motivated, the
racial aspect of the case had raised tensions in Detroit. The
policemen are white; Green was black.
One of the policeman’s ex-wife said the guilty verdict was used
just to pacify the people of Detroit, which is 75 percent black.
Before the verdict was handed down, many feared that if the
policemen were acquitted, rioting and violence, as what happened
in Los Angeles, would occur.
But reports are that Detroit is rather quiet Possibly the people
of Detroit and those around the country realize justice has been
victim s 14 or more head injuries, sustained primarily from
policemen’s flashlights, show the excessive violence in this
country. Society is in a sad and desperate situation when police
men think they can get away with beating a man this severely.
Especially when they only believed Green was holding cocaine.
One of the policemen told a Detroit newspaper, “I honestly...
thought this jury would put aside all the pressures ... and listen
to the facts But obviously, they didn’t.”
But the facts were in the gruesome photos of Green’s bloody
head. While Green’s death cannot be reversed, the judicial system
has performed its duty with the policemen’s conviction.
What’s the point?
U.S. forces need tangible goal in Somalia
The 400 additional U.S. troops President Clinton is sending
to Somalia this week can serve only one purpose — target
practice for Somalian warlords.
A defense official quoted by The Associated Press said the
troops were being sent to help deal with “the level of violence in
Mogadishu” after three separate attacks on U.S. soldiers this
month.
The most recent attack came Sunday when a mine exploded
beneath a truck carrying American soldiers. None of the six
Americans in the truck were injured.
But four Americans have been killed while on duty in Somalia
along with at least 35 other U.N. soldiers. In addition, more than
165 others in the multinational force have been wounded there in
peace-keeping duty.
There will be 5,600 American soldiers in Somalia after this
week. The troops have no clear role or mission other than to hunt
down fugitive Somali warlord Mohamed Farrah Aidid, who is
being pursued by U.S. and U.N. forces in the country.
President Clinton needs to clearly define the role of U.S. forces
in Somalia or remove them from danger. Leaving U.S. forces
indefinitely in the country can only lead to more deaths with no
tangible results.
Staff editorials represent the official policy of the Fall 1993 Daily Nebraskan. Policy is sat by
the Daily Nebraskan Editorial Board. Editorials do not necessarily reflect the views of the
university, its employees, the students or the Nil Board of Regents. Editorial ooiusnns represent
the opinion of the author The regents publish the Daily Nebraskan. They establish the UNL
Publications Board to supervise the daily production of the paper. According to policy set by
the regents, responsibility for the editorial content of the newspaper lies solely in the hands ol
The Daily Nebraskan welcomes brief letters to the editor Awn all readers and interested others.
Letters will be selected for publication on the basis of clarity, originality, timeliness and space
available. The Daily Nebraskan retains the right to edit or reject all material submitted. Readers
also are welcome to submit material as guest opinions The editor decides whether material
should run as ag^^n^^ U^^gue^opinions sent to the newspaper become toe
nuhlished Lettera should included the author's name veer in school major and group
affiliation, if any. Requests to withhold names will not be granted. Submit material to the Daily
Nebraskan, 34 Nebraska Union, 1400 R St.. Lincoln. Neb 68588-0448.
s
_I
-T?\fc=
Prize-winning photos of the
week to the contrary, I’m go
ing to go out on a limb here
and say the court in the Baby Jessica
(alias Anna Schmidt) case probably
did the right thing. They applied the
law, which clearly allows for a bio
logical father to file for custody with
in two years of the child’s birth. That
same body of law also presumes in
favor of biological parents in custody
the case of Kimberly Mays (or
Ariena Twigg, depending on which
side you were rooting for), the court
may have done the right thing, but it
set the legal system up for a challenge
to basic assumptions in family law.
What these cases represent is the
sorry and inevitable result of advoca
cy groups in collision. Children’s
“rights” run up against fathers’
“rights,” and both jostle against birth
parents’ “rights.” As new ‘Tights” are
minted, they are bound to clash and
cause trouble for everyone—except
the lawyers. In the end, the children
end up getting treated as property.
There is a legal maxim that “hard
cases make bad law.” The DeBoer/
Schmidt custody battle and the Mays/
Twigg termination proceeding are
prime examples. The facts in the Mays
case are not likely to repeat them
selves with any great frequency.
The facts giving rise to the Baby
Jessica fight are more common,
though. Private adoptions are a big
business in this country as infertile
couples seek a quicker way to bring
home a baby. As more couples take
this avenue, and as more lawyers buy
more Porsches and need to make pay
ments, more “rights” will be discov
ered and more lawsuits scared up.
Why should this be troubling, oth
er than for the seeming injustice ol
tearing a child away from her psycho
logical parents (and making for a greai
tear-jerker on the five o’ clock news 01
the morning edition)?
I
ft
l r*y
-I I
Court ruling may breed chaos I
The Schmidts and the TWiggs are
the biological parents, and as
such under the law they have
paramount interests in their
children.
The Schmidts and the Twiggs are
the biological parents, and as such
under the law they have paramount
interests in their children. The law
protects them because it aims to pre
serve and promote stability in fami
lies by presuming those parents who
genetically contribute to a child will
be most adamant about its welfare.
Absent any gross physical abuse or
neglect, or criminal misbehavior such
as drug use, courts routinely uphold
biological parents’ rights against all
others.
It’s easy to look at the shady back
ground of Dan Schmidt or see Regina
Twigg as one step from going off the
deep end, and proudly proclaim that
they should have nothing to do with
their children. The next case, though,
might not be so black and white, and
therein lies the danger. Not all foster
parents are model citizens, and not all
biological fathers, lied to by biologi
cal mothers, are support-skipping cads.
Are we then to do what conserva
tives are often accused of: measuring
everyone against a culturally stereo
typed “ideal” parent (usually those
personifications of evil to liberals,
Ozzie and Harriet Nelson), with those
who do not measure up losing custo
dy? Not everyone can be young, up
scale ami enlightened. And everyone
will admit that no parent is perfect—
especially the parents themselves.
The dangerous thing about setting
all these precedents, even if they’re
confined to a small circuit court in
Florida, is that we are doing away
i
with a standard, umc-wom and
perfect though it is, and replacing itB
with chaos. Allowing the “best inter- ■
ests of the child” maxim to rule in ■
place of the presumption in favor of I
Biology is to turn such hearings into ■
battles of experts, consuming ever- ■
increasing amounts of time, energy I
and money to little avail. Hired guns I
can he found to support even the most I
outrageous proposition.
The question at the heart of this I
matter is twofold. How much adult- I
like autonomy should a child receive? I
Children are not fully-formed adults I
capable of logical decision-making
— as is evident when the subject of
drivers licenses comes up. Parents
often have to protect children from
themselves as well as the outside
world.
And, more importantly, should
courts do away with the legal pre
sumption in favor of biological par
ents, further weakening families? Bi
ology is not always destiny, as psy
chologists will tell you, but it is a good
standard to run on in a world increas
ingly devoid of them. What we saw in
the Schmidt and Mays cases was an
attempt to whip the public into a self
righteous frenzy, directed at less- than
perfect birth parents, the better to
fling away centuries of legal tradi
tion.
KspfltM ti ■ gr*d*ata stadMt la ktotory,
alnnMi af tbs UNLCaBflf* of Law *•& *
Daily Nebraska* csluabt.
P.S. Write J*ack_
MS ^ ^ ;
The Daily Nebraskan wants to hear from you. If you want to voice your opinion
about an article that appears in the newspaper, let us know. Just write a brief letter to
the editor and sign it (don’t forget your student ID number) and mail it to the Daily
Nebraskan, 34 Nebraska Union, 1400‘R’ Street, Lincoln, NE 68588-0448, or stop by
the office in the basement of the Nebraska Union and visit with us. We’re all ears.
