Re: "Death on Union" [June 7]: Thanks to Parrish and Anderson for giving voice to questions residents of the Central District are asking and


". . . I can say with confidence that making Aaron Roberts a martyr for the cause is wrong."


Re: "Death on Union" [June 7]: Thanks to Parrish and Anderson for giving voice to questions residents of the Central District are asking and that the rest of us in Seattle need to be asking. Once again, the Times and P-I fail to do this most basic kind of reporting.

Patrick Daugherty

Mercer Island


Rick Anderson and Geov Parrish's article ["Death On Union," June 7] is one in a line of articles that does nothing to help quash the racial divide in our city. It is true that racial profiling occurs in Seattle, with the incidence far higher in the Central District than probably anywhere else in town. It is more than likely that Aaron Roberts was pulled over because of this. While I wholeheartedly agree that the police department here and departments all over the country need to seriously reexamine the way they handle themselves in black neighborhoods, this is not the case to rally around. Aaron Roberts was a violent criminal, a man who fled a work-release program, and, most importantly, a man who dragged a police officer with his car as he tried to escape.

Still, his death is a shame and a horrible tragedy. My sincere condolences go out to his family. But for the so-called leaders of the black community to imply that, should the mayor and the chief of police not attend a rally on Saturday, Seattle could be in for another "Cincinnati" is at best silly and at worst grossly irresponsible. This is the wrong direction, and Anderson and Parrish's article helps to reinforce this. I can offer no solutions to the problem of racial profiling as a whole, but I can say with confidence that making Aaron Roberts a martyr for the cause is wrong.

Jason Davidson

via e-mail


Perhaps if the Black Man had not tried to drag the cop to death he wouldn't have been shot, but maybe that's a "White" attitude? Of course with proper sensitivity training the white cop, aware of and "feeling" the burden of the history of oppression and racism and all the other "isms" to rationalize the logic of dragging a cop to death, would have cheerfully accepted being dragged to death as a symbolic gesture to the oppression of Black Men because it certainly was not the fault of the Black Man dragging him to death. It was WHITE FOLKS fault he was being dragged to death.

The only solution is for the cops to stop patrolling the "Black" community. Respond to 911 calls maybe. But don't stop anybody. You see a guy acting suspicious outside a store ignore it. You see any muggings, stalkings, dealings, etc., ignore it. Let the NAACP deal with it. Let the several vocal preachers deal with it. Hell, send Rick Anderson. He's likely sensitive enough to deal with it even though he is a honky. Of course this throws to the wolves the vast majority of the people of ALL hues living there. But apparently they are disposable?

It must be a bitch to be a black skinned man or woman, holding a regular job, paying taxes, living as normal a life as we all try to do, to listen to the sort of drivel that is being sounded about this incident.

George Buehler

via e-mail


In the article by Rick Anderson and Geov Parrish ["Death On Union," June 7], the writers' repeated use of the terms Black and White demonstrates the backward spiral of American race relations. At one point the writers begin a paragraph with the description "Black Central District resident." What does this mean? That Black is the Central District itself (which is not entirely African-American) or the Central District resident? The point is how the use of the term Black or White affects the reader. America is so ingrained with these terms that instantly they conjure up images and stereotypes in reader's minds.

The ethnicity of Aaron Roberts should not be defined as simply Black. There is so much more complexity to every human being, regardless of what color their skin is deemed, to continue to classify all people with dark skin as one thing, while all people with pale skin are another. This continues to separate people by putting a person's skin color at the forefront of thinking, instead of working to unify this country. Physical segregation was based on the color of one's skin. Today mental segregation (as created and stimulated by the descriptions found in the "Death on Union" article) is based on the same thing.

How sad that these writers are not more conscious about their use of language. Black and White is a symbol of our segregated past, not the present day dialogue of inclusion and unity. Even if the reality of unity is still far from being true, every document written dealing with race should rise above the past and carry the torch forward, not return the reader to the language of racial segregation.

Anthony Yaeger



I feel that Mark Sidran will drain the taxpayers' pockets by putting homeless in Jail [see Geov Parrish, "The Electors," June 7]. He said he "Is against building more homeless shelters" & he will take the homeless off the streets & where do they go? To Jail! Or Prison! Or if these people go to missions to eat or just hang around downtown they will get picked up by the police and end up in jail.

Mark Sidran even said "homelessness is caused by drugs & alcohol." I think he's 100% wrong, because when he places people in jail, they end up losing their homes, their stuff, etc. So when these people get released from jail, where do they go? Back on the street, with no money from any source of agencies, and what about people who get out of prisons. They get free bus ticket back here and $40 cash and still have nowhere to go but the streets. That's called homelessness. I wonder why a lot of people go on a rampage or flip out and end up going to prison for a long time!!

Tell me how Mark Sidran is going to take all the homeless people off the street and now this jail is packed to the hilt! How much more people will he put in jail?

I'm voting for Greg Nickels, not Paul Schell or Mark Sidran, they are too greedy and want more money from our taxpayers' pockets.

William E. Roberson

King County Jail


What is a Seattle sports fan supposed to do? First, Andrew Bonazelli ("He Shoots, He Scores," May 24) recommended watching the M's from the bleacher seats of Plutocrats' Park—I mean Safeco Field. Then, the following week, Mark D. Fefer (News Clips, "More Safeco Subsidies," May 31) reported that the greedheads still rule SoDo land; the new tribute being a $2.3 million "gift" of taxpayer's property from the Public Facilities District to the Mariners.

Thus reminded of why I vowed in 1995 never to spend another penny on the corporate welfare-grubbing Baseball Club of Seattle, I went to Memorial Stadium to see the some soccer. The tickets were affordable, the lads played hard, and every cent of franchise profit is donated to local charity—all of which makes for a business model that must be giving Seattle's other team owners nightmares. Gotta love those Sounders!

Matt McCally


Send your racist diatribes to Letters Editor, Seattle Weekly, 1008 Western, Ste 300, Seattle, WA 98104; fax to 206-467-4377; or e-mail to Please include name, location, and phone number. Letters may be edited.

comments powered by Disqus

Friends to Follow