SOLICITING JUSTICE?

In his May 3 column, Dan Rodricks writes that City Solicitor Thurman W.
Zollicoffer Jr. owes the Police Department an apology for his actions on
behalf of his sister and nephew ("Zollicoffer owes police apology for his
remarks"). But Mr. Zollicoffer doesn't owe any more of an apology than he
has already given.

Mr. Rodricks gets the small picture - a city official should not get
between a relative and the police, especially when the city official
represents the police in civil matters.

However, Mr. Rodricks completely missed the big picture: What were the
police doing inside a home where they were not wanted without a search warrant?

It is impossible to overstate the importance of a search warrant in this
instance. It isn't a document that allows police already inside a home to
search that home. A warrant is the means by which the police may cross the
threshold of a home, enter and search it.

Mr. Rodricks writes: "Utterances made in heat often reveal something that
lies within a person's psyche and belief systems. Utterances made in heat
have ended the careers of a lot of otherwise well-meaning people."

But Mr. Zollicoffer's utterances simply revealed the frustration many black
men in this country feel because of encounters with police, who sometimes
come off like the Gestapo.

His attitude, his frustration, is a direct result of police policies and
procedures that do things such as stop every black male near a bus stop to
catch a rapist.

I'll conclude with a query: Where else in this great nation can a homeowner
expect to have his or her home invaded by armed men with no right to be on
the premises? Answer: Every inner-city in this nation.

Thank goodness the suburbs, where the majority of the drug dealing and drug
use takes place, are still safe.

Darrell Chambers

Baltimore

The Sun's news articles, Dan Rodricks' column "Zollicoffer owes police
apology for his remarks" (May 3) and the letter "Mayor shouldn't back the
city solicitor" (May 3) have implied that the city solicitor was seeking
preferential treatment for his nephew.

But freedom from illegal search and seizure is a right guaranteed to all of
us, and it seems to me that all Thurman W. Zollicoffer Jr. was pushing for
was the proper administration of the legal process.

What my white brethren seem unable to comprehend is that the elections of
some black officials and African-Americans winning a couple Oscars and the
Masters in no way change the way most less-well-off blacks are treated by
those who control the society.

Let me correct one part of that statement - poor white people understand.
In certain parts of the city (Hampden, Pigtown), they experience the same
arrogant disregard for their rights that blacks do.

The difference for us is that improved socioeconomic status does not mean
increased respect from law enforcement.

Few, if any, black males who live in metropolitan areas have not
experienced rudeness and disregard for their rights by police officers. We
are all suspects because of our skin color, and most of us have no one with
authority or influence to ensure that we are treated correctly.

Maybe Mr. Zollicoffer should have been less contentious in the way he did
what he did.

But as far as I know, being competent, confident and outspoken and
requiring adherence to the law are not crimes.

David J. Ghee

Baltimore