WW welcomes letters to the editor via mail, e-mail or fax. Letters must be signed by the author and include the author's street address and phone number for verification. Preference will be given to letters of 250 words or less. You're Not Alone I read with interest Maureen O'Hagan's article ["Why Hasn't Gov. Kitzhaber Set Him Free?" July 7, 1999] As a professional and as an advocate and friend of people with mental retardation and developmental disabilities for all of my adult life, I, too, take exception to the incarceration of Clifford Frey. Hundreds of adults with cognitive limitations become entangled with the justice system in our own community each year. It is important to know, however, that people with mental retardation and related disabilities are far more likely to be victims of crime than perpetrators. When they are accused and/or convicted, the process they encounter usually does not accommodate their disability, as is so vividly illustrated by Frey's experience. The Arc of Multnomah County's adult-case coordinator sat in on Frey's trial. It was not difficult for him to predict that this vulnerable man would be abused in prison, both by the system, which initially failed to acknowledge his cognitive level and his health issues, and by inmates. The case reinforces our belief that mental retardation should be a mitigating factor in sentencing. The Arc has advocated around this issue nationally and on the local level. We helped formulate and continue to participate in a training used for all Portland Police Bureau personnel to help them deal with people with cognitive disabilities. We also assisted the Portland Police Bureau in formulating "Safety Zone Cops Talk," a nationally recognized personal-safety and police-awareness training for adults with developmental disabilities. We hope that these two trainings prevent more cases like Frey's by developing awareness levels in law-enforcement personnel and in individuals like Clifford. We will continue our advocacy within the system of law enforcement to make certain that those we serve are treated in a manner that does not compromise them as human beings. The issue at hand, however, remains the incarceration of Clifford Frey. A commutation of his sentence would resolve this case. However, serious questions remain about mandatory sentencing. A change at the legislative level would be required to prevent a recurrence of such a case. Gretchen A. Yost Executive Director, The Arc of Multnomah County Correct The System While your article ["Why Hasn't Gov. Kitzhaber Set Him Free?" WW, July 7, 1999] was effective in highlighting the debate over Measure 11, it skimmed over an important point for Cliff Frey and the approximately 300 inmates in Oregon prisons who have IQs below 80. Had Cliff Frey received the sentence that the district attorney felt appropriate, he still would have received three years behind bars. You report that "prison hasn't been easy for Frey"--he has been beaten up, improperly medicated and repeatedly raped. Shouldn't our corrections system be providing greater protection for inmates like Cliff Frey? As of August 1998, 3.4 percent of prison inmates in Oregon had an IQ under 80, and 15.8 percent had severe and persistent mental illness. These disabilities can make individuals more susceptible to victimization by staff and other inmates. While the debate over Measure 11 continues loud and clear, are we to silently accept rape and abuse as a normal part of the Oregon prison experience? Ben Joondeph Executive Director, Oregon Advocacy Center Let Them Judge Clifford Frey might be a worthy cause celebré for Willamette Week ["Why Hasn't Gov. Kitzhaber Set Him Free?" WW, July 7, 1999]. However, I question WW's attack on the Governor. While Frey's situation seems compelling, it is not unique. Oregon incarcerates many first-time offenders who, as in Frey's case, rejected pretrial offers, risked going to trial, and were sentenced under Ballot Measure 11. Moreover, in 1994, the voters stated through BM 11 that a person convicted of first-degree sexual abuse shall, without exception, receive 75 months in prison. Now, the very people who supported BM 11 (Frink and Mannix) are asking the Governor to circumvent the law. I laughed at Mannix's accusations that the Governor was playing politics. Shame on you, WW, for not questioning the political motives of Mannix and Frink. They probably do not want Frey's mitigating circumstances to erode public support for mandatory sentences. Frey's plight is a product of a sentencing scheme that is inflexible and often unfair. The real issue is whether judges should have some discretion at sentencing. Frink and Mannix argue that the only safety valve for "infrequent cases" should be the Governor's clemency power. They are asking the Governor to make a decision that historically has been left to judges. This is the same downstream logic that brought us BM 11 in the first place. If we want to prevent other similarly situated defendants from receiving a sentence like Frey's, we need to repeal BM 11 or at least allow judicial discretion for first-time offenders. Fritz Paulus, Attorney at Law Southeast 34th Avenue No Means No Maureen O'Hagan's pro-release approach to Cliff Frey's sentence does an injustice by telling a one-sided story involving an attacker and a victim ["Why Hasn't Gov. Kitzhaber Set Him Free?" WW, July 7, 1999]. Frey is semi-retarded, but he is also a convicted sex abuser. This fact is watered down by O'Hagan's premises in the story. Frey's sentence of six years and three months under Measure 11 is debatable, but the story takes an unnecessary turn by bringing the 17-year old victim's sexual history in as admissible "evidence" that a sexual assault didn't likely happen. The story sides with Frey's lawyer, who says the victim's "mixed signals" were why the sexual abuse took place, though the victim is quoted as testifying in court that she screamed repeatedly and broke free. Why is the burden of proof placed on the victim, and her testimony rendered invalid when past experiences and "mixed signals" are mentioned? In an age when 84 percent of those raped know their attackers. WW is helping justify a rape-tolerant culture by downplaying the crime Frey committed because he knew the victim. The article goes on to use the district attorney's hearsay that the victim wants Frey released, and the cover's text screams that the victim wants Frey out of jail as well. This is a leap that, ethically speaking, should not have been taken in print when the victim wasn't interviewed for the story. Should Kitzhaber set him free? Maybe. But the fact that Frey committed a crime against another person--and he knew he did something wrong--should not be a debatable point in an article that serves to question the governor's lack of granting clemency. Angie Suchy Southeast 18th Avenue - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Willamette Week | originally published July 21, 1999