Robin Starr has a job to do and she does it very well. She has lost her dog due to a tragic accident and her reputation is on the line. The key word here is accident, or the key phrase is bad spousal communication. Louie is gone and the family grieves. That's it! Done! Richmond's commonwealth attorney has no reason to investigate and yet the academics weigh in (“Fallen Starr,” News & Features, Sept. 2).
Ethics professors at the University of Pennsylvania, University of Richmond and a national syndicated ethics columnist from The New York Times form opinions and propose strategies to uncover the truth. Do we need Perry Mason to uncover a last-minute emotional admission of guilt that Starr has committed pet homicide? That her husband was her partner in a pet death that could have been avoided if an accident did not occur. There's that pesky word again. The law enforcement professionals recognize this as a tragic accident and yet the academics offer the following: “The point is she's got to get punished for her to even be able to carry on with her job. Otherwise, if there is no punishment and she goes on with her job, she may as well quit because she has no credibility anymore.” Who are these folks kidding? Common sense says nonsense.
Michael T. Byrne