Letter Submission

To submit a letter to the editor, please email us at This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.. Letters must contain the author's name, hometown (state as well, if not in New Hampshire) and phone number, but the number will not be published. We do not run anonymous letters. Local issues get priority, as do local writers. We encourage writers to keep letters to no more than 400 words, but will accept longer letters to be run on a space-available basis. Editors reserve the right to edit letters for spelling, grammar, punctuation, excessive length and unsuitable content.


Kidnapper Castro is now convicted murderer thanks to Ohio law

  • Published in Letters

To The Daily Sun,

Ariel Castro has been sentenced by an Ohio court to life imprisonment plus 1,000 years without parole based on 937 criminal charges occurring over a period of a decade. These charges include kidnapping, imprisonment, assault, and rape perpetuated upon three young women, Michelle Knight, Gina De Jesus and Amanda Berry. But it is two counts of AGGRAVATED MURDER that forced Mr. Castro to accept a plea bargain and plead guilty to ALL charges in order to avoid a possible death sentence. These charges were based on Castro's purposeful assaults on a pregnant Michelle Knight, forcing her to suffer at least two miscarriages.
Please note that the unborn children carried by Michelle in these two instances had to be recognized as living human beings in order for the two murder charges to be valid. In principle, this clashes directly with the landmark 1973 Supreme Court rulings in Roe v Wade and Doe v Bolton that dehumanized and rejected the personhood and right to life of the unborn. Murder cannot be charged for a lethal assault on a blob of tissue that has no legal claim to personhood or right to life. By these case law precedents, the Roe and Doe Court also removed the legal protection for a woman's right to CHOOSE to carry her pregnancy up to the birth of a live child. Before unborn victims of violence legislation was passed on the federal level in 2004 (by Congress on the fourth try, valid within federal jurisdiction, including the military) and before similar legislation was passed in some individual states, the perpetrator of an attack on a mother that harmed or terminated the life of an unborn child was NOT held legally culpable for the harm to or the demise of the unborn. This caused a number of grossly unjust rulings by various courts when assaults were made on pregnant women that resulted in the deaths of their unborn children. In these cases the perpetrators were held culpable for harming or killing the mother but not in any way held responsible or culpable for the demise of her unborn. The mothers in these cases had no right by law (Supreme Court case law) to legal protection to carry their unborn children to birth because the unborn had been dehumanized and granted no right to life by the precedents of Roe and Doe.
The charges in Ariel Castro's case, however, were made possible by way of an Ohio statute (not case law) dealing with unborn victims of violence which, in part, states that the killing by assault at ANY STATE of pre-natal development of an unborn member of the species Homo Sapiens carried in the womb is AGGRAVATED MURDER. The statute also provides for varying degrees of charges for different circumstances resulting in harm or death to the unborn. The state of Ohio recognizes that it is not anyone's right to terminate a woman's pregnancy against her will and the perpetrator is held criminally culpable as if he had done the same to a living, breathing person.
There are still a number of states that do not provide ANY statutory protection for a woman's CHOICE to carry her pregnancy to birth. In these states, the dehumanizing case law precedents of Roe and Doe prevail and no culpability and punishment can be applied to the perpetrator for harming or killing the unborn.
There has been an ongoing battle to secure justice for wanted unborn children who have been harmed or killed against the mother's will. Many hardline pro-abortion forces have fought tenaciously to prevent the slightest encroachment into the edicts of Roe and Doe that support denial of the right to life for the unborn. These forces include presidents such as Clinton and Obama, liberal federal, state and local politicians, and numerous pro-choice organizations, notably Planned Parenthood and the ACLU. Their actions to prevent the enactment of the various unborn victims of violence acts are quite revealing.
There is a long list of assaults on pregnant women resulting in death to their unborn. Many of the perpetrators have tried to escape culpability by appealing the convictions for these acts, seeking immunity in the courts by arguing the non-human, non-right to life principles of Roe and Doe. All of these appeals to date have been dismissed. In the states that do not have protective statutes, the principles of Roe and Doe prevail and there is no way to hold the perpetrator culpable. Does a pregnant women represent one life or two? This saga with examples is for another letter!

George Brunstad