I was surprised and disappointed by the front-page coverage given the sentencing of Paul Violette. The juxtaposition of a prison cell with the Chateau Frontenac seemed petty and vindictive, gloating over a good man’s misfortune.

I use the word “misfortune” advisedly, since Mr. Violette’s “crime” injured no one. The fraction of a penny that his use of Maine Turnpike Authority credit cards cost Maine taxpayers was reimbursed by the sale of all of his assets. In the normal run of events, the amount recovered by court-ordered restitution totals approximately zero.

In fact, Mr. Violette’s stewardship of the authority, well-run and profitable, saved taxpayers much more than the cost of a castle in Spain.

If his expenditures can be considered a crime, what of the lavish lifestyles of bankers who defrauded millions and have never been punished? Or the multi million-dollar salaries of health insurance executives, whose job it is to deny medical care?

Mr. Violette, compared to such people, received a mere pittance for salary. What executive, seeing the lifestyles of the rich and criminal, is not tempted to pad the expense account? Let he who is without sin cast the first stone.

Oh, but he violated the public trust! The public trusted him to do a good job and to make them money. Maybe vacations and decent food and accommodations were necessary for him to accomplish that.

When I was in business, I always insisted on flying first class and staying at the best hotels. Companies accepted that because otherwise they would not have had my services.

Paul Violette’s life is ruined and his family devastated over a petty crime for which he has made restitution. A three-and-a-half year jail sentence in addition is merely vicious, and the coverage given it by the Press Herald uncalled for.

Judith Hopkins

Pownal

 

While I wholeheartedly agree that Paul Violette should be punished for abusing his position and the public’s trust, I wonder why we are wasting precious resources on this man. After reading about the “amenities” at Windham Correctional Center, I am aware of many poor people in this state who would love to have a solid roof over their heads, guaranteed three healthy meals per day, opportunity to recreate on a daily basis and watch cable TV as well. Never mind the free wardrobe that is issued.

I propose that he try to finance his own incarceration by working at a minimum-wage job while trying to pay for rent, food, clothing and other daily expenses. That is what many people in this state are forced to do. Heaven forbid that he develop a chronic illness and try to finance his medical expenses as well.

While white-collar criminals need punishment, why should it be at our expense? I would much rather see those resources used for hungry families, elder services and other issues. I work in a doctor’s office where I often am told by patients that they are delaying the trip to the doctor’s office because of high gas prices, unreliable transportation, loss of insurance coverage and so forth. These are the people who we should be spending our precious financial resources on.

Suzanne Murawski

Westbrook

 

Cyclist responds to drivers who voice their complaints

 

As I was bicycling to work on Johnson Road in South Portland this morning, waiting in line at the red light to Western Avenue, I experienced yet another “drive-by comment” from a motorist passing us in the right-turn-only lane to Maine Mall Road: “There’s a bike lane, you know,” accompanied by a sour look.

All I had time to say before she was out of earshot was, “I know that!” Had I had more time, I could have added: “and it’s about two feet narrower than it’s supposed to be next to a curb (of the pedestrian island), there’s no bike lane to receive me on the other side of the intersection, only an even narrower shoulder with a drain grate, which I can either try to use or merge into traffic in the intersection, which is dangerous, oh and there’s also a very helpful “Bike Lane Ends” sign after it does so, and the bike lane is not mandatory, so all in all, I’d rather not use it, and that’s legal, so thank you for understanding.”

To the man who told me to “Get out of the road” on outer Congress as I was traveling home after work, riding in the middle of the right lane to ensure passers fully change lanes, I would say “Sorry, but it’s too narrow to share side by side, I’ll get buzz-passed if I try, there’s no shoulder at all, not even a sidewalk, not that I would use a sidewalk, so I don’t really have any other choice, and that’s legal too.”

I’m confident in controlling my space on the road, I obey traffic rules and I know what my rights are. For the 98 percent of you who give me plenty of passing room without complaining, thank you.

John Brooking

Westbrook

 

Reader prefers word ‘military’ over ‘defense’

 

The word keeps coming up: “Saco defense plant,” “defense contract,” “defense spending.”

But is the General Dynamics Armament and Technical Products plant really engaged in “defense?” What about the ships built at Bath? Are other military contracts in Maine really providing defense?

I don’t believe so. This is the topic for a good debate, and it won’t be settled quickly.

Meanwhile, I’d urge the Press Herald to stop using the word “defense” as in “defense plant,” “defense contract,” or “defense spending.” The more accurate terms would be “military plant,” “military contract,” or “military spending.” These leave open just how defensive all of this technology really is.

Arthur Fink

Peaks Island

 

Copy the Story Link