Gloucester County Prosecutor Sean Dalton defends the timeline for releasing information about the officer's arrest.
To the Editor:
I was puzzled by the South Jersey Times' criticism ("Cheers and Jeers," Aug. 20) of alleged lack of transparency by the Gloucester County Prosecutor's Office for not issuing a press release immediately after the Aug. 10 arrest of a Monroe Township police officer.
(Robert E. Marzi allegedly sought a sex act in exchange for helping someone else facing criminal charges. The "Jeer" states that prosecutors did not disclose the arrest until after the Times inquired about it Aug. 15 from an anonymous tip.)
The item states "when it comes to allegations of wrongdoing, we expect (police officers) to be held to the same standard as anyone else."
The Times ignores that, during our criminal investigation, we signed criminal charges against this officer for official misconduct. How is this not holding police to the same standard as anyone else?
Gov. Christie Whitman's Executive Order 69 requires arrest information to be provided within 24 hours once a request has been made. When the Times made its request, the required information was provided within a few hours. This office not only complied with the law, but provided the information sooner than required. How is this not being transparent?
About 3,600 criminal cases are filed in Gloucester County each year. Each month, our office sends out 10-12 press releases on cases and community initiatives, many of which the Times does not publish -- which is its prerogative. While we respond to every request under Executive Order 69, we don't send out a release on every single case.
Apparently, the Times' real issue is that they believe, in a salacious case involving a police officer, they are entitled to immediate information without having to make a request. While the Times' concern is what is newsworthy, our priority is to conduct a thorough investigation to determine the extent of an individual's wrongdoing while protecting the rights of victims.
This office has an exemplary record of holding all citizens, including public officials, equally accountable under the law. To suggest otherwise ignores the facts and impugns the character of the hard-working men and women in this office.
Sean F. Dalton
Prosecutor
Gloucester County
Setting minimum wage hurts poor people
To the Editor:
Raising the minimum wage hurts almost everyone, but especially the poor. The example below should clarify the issue:
Imagine that there is no currency system, and services are compensated through bartering. Say that Johnny does yard work for Mrs. Smith for eight hours, for which Mrs. Smith gives Johnny eight certificates for apple pies. Sammy does yard work for Mrs. Pillsbury, for which she gives him eight certificates for peach pies.
Then, Sammy trades four of his certificates for four of Johnny's. Soon the community has all kinds of certificates, each equivalent to an hour of common labor. So the community decides to set up a bank that will issue a common certificate that equals an hour of common labor.
But the city council then decides to raise the minimum wage. Now, by law, two certificates have to be given for an hour's labor.
Well, Mrs. Smith and Mrs. Pillsbury are not willing to give two of their certificates for an hour of yard work.
So, Mrs. Smith and Mrs. Pillsbury decide to do the lawn work themselves. Johnny and Sammy are out of work. Mrs. Smith and Mrs. Pillsbury are greatly inconvenienced, and the whole town's economy is disrupted.
Eventually, Mrs. Smith decides to pay Johnny two certificates per hour, but each apple pie will now cost more than two certificates, because everything now costs Mrs. Smith more.
Politicians keep promoting minimum wage increases because they are trying to convince the uneducated masses that they are generous.
The "real minimum wage" can be, and has been, raised through free-market forces. That is why people flocked to the United States from all corners of the world before there ever was a legal minimum wage.
But the real minimum wage cannot be raised by tricking the market through legislation.
Paul Halley
Woodstown
Live by the motto on our coins
To the Editor:
I was wondering where and how the motto "In God We Trust" came about. Research tells me that Congress passed legislation in 1864 and 1865 to authorize placing this statement on several different coins.
By approving this action, our 19th century national leaders confirmed that America that our value system is founded on the God of Judeo-Christian values.
So how well are in this country doing in following the standards God has established? A short list of these standards would include those about marriage, parenting, leadership, employment, authority, morality and forgiveness.
If we trust God, we should employ His standards in every area of our lives. If you are an immigrant in America, these are the standards that the country values, promotes and lives by -- and so must you.
There have been debates over the years surrounding the motto and on which currency it should be placed. In July 1956, Congress and President Dwight Eisenhower approved a joint resolution approving "In God We Trust" as our national motto.
In the 18th-20th centuries, we became the greatest nation ever, but as we've slipped away from God's standards, we've become much weaker and less blessed. Let's return to believing and acting in accordance with "In God We Trust."
Tom Hanrahan
Mullica Hill
Send a letter to the editor of South Jersey Times at sjletters@njadvancemedia.com