Plea bargain leaves plenty of questions

To the editor:

This letter is in response to the July 26 article about the woman who pleaded guilty to theft from schools. The article sets out the facts of how the case was handled by the court system, but it leaves me with a number of unanswered questions and some anger over the lack of regard for money stolen from taxpayers.

If the prosecutor, Morley Swingle, knew that 10 checks were stolen, why would he settle for prosecution on only two of them? Since it is the public's money, the public has a right to know this.

I am willing to bet that Robin Michelle Whitson will not spend all eight years of her sentence in prison. Why, then, did Judge Ellen Roper not order restitution? It was taxpayer money intended to help at risk-students in alternative schools.

What about commonsense procedures in the juvenile office to check on a bookkeeper handling thousands of dollars of public money? What about the schools who were submitting requests for the funds? Didn't they notice that they weren't getting their money?

Superintendent Mark Bowles of the Cape Girardeau School District stated there wasn't any way to get back from Whitson the money she stole. Why not? The $97,000 was spent for something. Why can't those things be seized and sold and Whitson be held responsible after she gets paroled from prison? If she isn't, its almost like she is being paid $97,000 to serve a few years in prison.

CHARLES SCHROEDER

Jackson