Government funded defense can't lose

By Letter to the editor
Published: June 25, 2009

» 0 Comments | Post a Comment

Editor:

Wow, a Madison County resident [“Al” (Alexander) Cuppett in the June 4 Eagle] has somehow turned a response to a letter into a sermon. I didn’t realize there were now two sections in this paper for religious articles.

This will be my last letter on the subject of Sheriff Erik Weaver and his use of county funds. I have several times spoken to Erik Weaver and seen his work in the community. I truly believe he is a good person.

However, I also believe that he made a mistake by taking community funds that are already depleted for use in a personal matter.

I do not believe that appealing a case can be considered defending yourself — that is takingg the matter further for your own personal gain or loss depending on how you look at this case.

I have also concluded that just because he finally got a not guilty verdict, that doesn’t justify the means of how he got it.

Let’s not forget that in order to appeal a case you must first be found guilty.

I also believe that the woman [Leigh Purdum] that sought to have him exposed for what she felt was wrongdoing subjected herself to the scrutiny of the public and still stood on her own two feet to go after what she believed was right. Regardless, my point is that anyone who has limitless [government] funds to stand on can get a non-guilty verdict.

Why not give [Purdum] access to the same funds?

We have already thrown away in excess of $12,000 for Erik Weaver’s lawyer. Why not give everyone else the same amount of money and see what verdict results?

April Cowan
Aroda