To the editor:

In a letter (Public Forum, May 21), Charlotte Hastings claims to believe in due process everyone except “the vile person that makes a choice to harm a child.” Her indignation is understandable, but the remedy she proposes is mistaken.

“Due process” means the legal procedures that guarantee a fair trial before anyone is found guilty of a crime or deprived of property. Hastings wants anyone accused of harming a child for sexual gratification to be deprived of a fair trial including the right to an attorney, the right to question witnesses, the right to make a statement and the right not to be tortured into self-incrimination.

How would we know that a person had made the choice to harm a child if there were not a trial? The actual criminal could have accused an innocent person or there could be mistaken identity. The presumption of American justice is that you are innocent until proven guilty.

In recent years more than 100 people on death row have been proven innocent by DNA tests. Some of them were accused sexual predators, but they were innocent.

American justice requires that due process be granted to every accused person. Otherwise, any accuser becomes judge and jury and even executioner. That would be a return to lynching.

Mary Davidson,

Lawrence