Candidate may be suspect in murder, but isn't it premature to talk of removing his name from ballot?
There's an underlying assumption in today's Daily News story on murder suspect Scott Doll's mayoral candidacy in Corfu that Doll shouldn't be on the ballot.
Two phrases related to America's judicial system spring to mind: presumption of innocence and innocent until proven guilty.
Doll hasn't even been indicted yet for the beating death of Joseph Benaquist.
The evidence against Doll, as reported so far, is pretty damning. But none of us where there. None of us yet really know what's going on. There could be as yet some undiscovered or unreleased piece of evidence exonerating Doll.
I'm not saying or even suggesting that such evidence exists. The issue to me is it seems a violation of due process to remove Doll's name -- a punishment of sorts -- from the Corfu ballot until he's convicted. Shouldn't we just drop the question of whether his name is on the ballot until he is either convicted or admits the crime? If neither happens before the election in March, it's up to the voters of Corfu to decide whether they want to stand behind a man suspected of murder.