I have just read with some interest Albero's post concerning the handgun Davis Ruark had in his possession during his DWI stop the other evening and the fact that Joel Todd, States Attorney for Worcester County, has officially charged Mr. Ruark with that infraction of the law. I can't figure out where Albero stands concerning legal issues with public officials. For anyone in the City of Salisbury it would certainly be an “Off with their Heads” stance and yet with Mr. Ruark he denounces Mr. Todd for taking the high road. Albero’s proclamation of the guns location does not hold water either. It was in Mr. Ruark’s possession—period. The fact that Mr. Ruark declared its presence is irrelevant as well. That’s what he was supposed to do and by not doing so he may have incurred even more charges on himself.
Albero also proclaims that Mr. Todd is “desperate for attention after he totally screwed up the 4 dead baby case last summer….”. I would like for Albero to provide us with a resume of his legal education so that he can substantiate that statement. Possibly a synopsis on how he would have convicted those involved is also in order. Maybe Albero can offer counseling and guidance to the States Attorney’s office in Worcester County so in the future the staff there would not be so desperate. I feel it is quite safe to say that sharper minds than Albero’s determined the case was not winnable and therefore dropped the charges thereby saving thousands of dollars in taxpayer money. Albero also claims Mr. Todd’s actions are despicable. Again I ask Albero to please elaborate. Mr. Todd is well within the bounds of the law; indeed to ignore the fact the handgun was in Mr. Ruark’s possession would be far more reprehensible. Would ignoring the handgun issue not be also unlawful on Mr. Todd’s part? Would not then there be two States Attorney’s in violation of the law.
The charges can always be pled out. The States Attorney’s office can consider all the circumstances and determine if the handgun charge truly needs to be prosecuted considering the person involved and the co-operation offered. This, though not acceptable to some, is at least the overt manner to handle situation.