LETTERS: SWINGLE PROVIDED INCORRECT INFO

To the editor:

Upon reading the Feb. 26 article, "Prosecutor says he is tough on perjury," I was shocked at the information presented in the article. I would hope that if you were to only contact one side regarding this case, then you would make every attempt to ensure that the information provided is accurate. Clearly, the information contained in this article is not accurate and has dealt a substantial blow to my client's ability to receive a fair trial.

In particular, the article quotes Margaret Rose Gilmore's defense attorneys as acknowledging that she "testified falsely under oath." This statement is clearly incorrect. We do not take the position, nor have we ever taken the position, that Ms. Gilmore's testimony was false. How can you quote Ms. Gilmore's defense attorney without speaking to him?

This mischaracterization of my client's position in your newspaper has effectively announced to prospective jurors in this county that my client has openly acknowledged that her testimony was false. After reading your article, it will be difficult for impossible for a perspective juror to keep an open mind in this case. Therefore, my client has effectively been denied the presumption of innocence which she is entitled to under the Constitution.

In all of my days as a prosecutor or assistant attorney general, this is the first instance in which the media has reported on a pending case without getting both sides of the story. Perhaps if you had contacted my office regarding this matter, I could have straightened you out regarding the facts. I would like to know who the source of this story was and, in particular, who provided the information regarding my client's position. Clearly, this is not reflected in the court documents filed on behalf of Ms. Gilmore.

The timing of Morley Swingle's "press release" involving this case is not a coincidence. It was no accident that all of this information was released to the press at a time when he has announced his candidacy for re-election. It is unfortunate that Mr. Swingle sees fit to litigate pending cases in the news media rather than the courtroom, particularly in light of the fact that he has provided incorrect information regarding my client's position and affected her constitutional right to a fair trial.

The presumption of innocence and right to a fair trial before an impartial jury are cornerstones of our judicial system. Perhaps it is time for the judges in this circuit to adopt local court rules which would ensure that cases are decided based upon evidence presented at trial rather than in the press.

ALLEN E. MOSS JR.

Finch & Moss Law Firm

Cape Girardeau