The headline in the June 13 Gazette was “Rosenberg names spouse as pension beneficiary,” and the subheadline read “Hefner, accused of felony sexual assault, stands to receive $58,000 annually in taxpayer-funded benefit.”
That the Gazette chose to make this your lead story says three things to me:
1. It must have been a glacially slow news day, that day after the Singapore summit with North Korea. How is this news? Stan Rosenberg could have arranged that, after he passes on, his cat would get caviar three times a day for life, until the money runs out. The public has no say — and should have no say — in what Rosenberg does with his hard-earned pension benefit.
The story implies that people should be outraged that public funds would go to someone accused of a crime. My outrage is instead at the implication that the public should infringe on the survivor-benefit right.
2. Can we please not try, sentence and convict someone who has only been accused of a crime? Hefner will have his day in court, and he and we need a trial process free of presumption of guilt.
3. My heart grieves for Rosenberg, for the pain that he has endured over the past several months in his private life and then in full public view after serving our area and the entire commonwealth so honorably and so spectacularly well for so long. What’s the point of inflicting even more pain on someone like Stan?
Ralph Faulkingham
Pelham