European Stars And Stripes (Newspaper) - May 29, 1986, Darmstadt, Hesse                                Page 10 the stabs and stripes thursday May 29, 1966 columns mar Mcgrory Caspar Weinberger is very ilk this  president. He displays the same indifference to reality dismisses or ignores his own mistakes and when Hie occasion Calls for it repeats them. Another Secretary of defense might be defensive in the Light of the waste fraud and abuse revealed within his Domain. Not Weinberger. He stoutly  his own Alert watchdogs unearthed the scan dals although this has rarely been the Case and the record shows that Penisoni on who bark. About Highway robbery among contractors or defects in weapons systems Are regularly exiled to Alaska or reassigned to desks where hey can t see the books of the duds. Like Reagan Weinberger Sticks to u few simple themes the soviets Are ahead they Are cheating. After five years and a trillion dollars in Pentagon spending we lire dangerously  share common Gas methods he n and his principal differ Only in Lii tics. While the president is almost always a Model of gee Whiz amiability Weinberg or is like a defense attorney in a criminal Case. He fights for every Inch of ground. He treats his adversaries to a bristling edgy hostility and when challenged suggests with crinkly that his questioner is someone who is willing to put the country at risk from soviet domination. Members of Congress rail against Weinberger s obduracy. But predictions that Reagan will have to divest himself of Weinberger As is often re Mored Are hollow and raise when Reagan listens to Weinberger he hears himself talking. The Secretary of defense is anathema to arms controllers he shares the presi Dent s aversion to accords and paradoxically the last Best Hope of those who want to avoid a hoi War in the Here and now. He is the one member of else Cabinet who has demonstrably Learned the lesson of Vietnam the joint chiefs of staff have old him that we must never again Start a War without popular support. While some Hothead want to invade Nicaragua and fill it Over with Weinberger demurs he was opposed to the dispatch of the marines to Lebanon. -. He May collect weapons the Way Imelda Marcos acquired shoes but tie docs not want to use them. Weinberger likes to look at his Arsenal. But he hates to hear shots fired in anger. He is probably the Best Secretary of de sense that could be honed for in a Reagan  is presently engaged in a new and epic struggle against the facts. The whole government is facing drastic cuts under the Gramm Rudman Law. He is asking far u 12 percent increase. Weinberger will not designate a single gun Bullet or body that can be Given up he says that the solution is to adopt the president s budget which As Severn Mem Bers of the House defense appropriations subcommittee pointed out got 12 votes on the floor. But he says briskly he has authority Only to talk about the increases rep. John p. Murtha d-pa., a Hawk told him that he should be out peddling i tax raise to cover the rising costs. Weinberger paid scant respect to that i Haven t heard anybody say a new Levy would go to defense. We Don t have to have Gramm Rudman there is simply no Way we can absorb cuts of this kind one Way to reduce the Pentagon purse of course would be arms control. Wein Berger will have none of it. Rep. Norman d. Dicks a Wash. Brought up the possibility and was Brus quely put Down by the Secretary he turned to the chairman of the joint chiefs of staff adm. William j. Crowe did he know if the president would abide by the Salt ii treaty the Admiral said the chiefs had Given their advice to the president but declined to say what it was. It is pretty Clear that the soviets Are violating Salt ii. 1 am convinced of it he said while Weinberger beamed Al him. Had t the soviets dismantled 14 Yan Kee class submarines Dicks asked. I Don t know the exact number said the Admiral negligently his tone indicating that the Pentagon has no time for such Fri Peries. Rep los Alcoin d-ore., an inveterate arms controller and author of the one arms control Advance of the last five Yean an amendment Banning anti satellite weapons testing asked if Star wars was realty  is extremely important,7 said Wein Berger tile soviets have been working on it for 17 years.". And he Laid echoing one of Reagan s biggest whoppers we Don t want it for unilateral advantage. When we , we will share  Star wars will Cost another trillion dollars. But with Weinberger As with the president on defense there is Nett enough. James k1lpatrick on balance preventive detention Law working Ricardo m. Armstrong insisted All along that he never robbed the two Banks. He said he had solid alibis. He said the witnesses who identified him from oed photos were wrong he was right. When his Case came to trial it took a jury Only 30 minutes to vote for acquittal. But he spent two months in jail anyhow How come Armstrong was held in jail for two months before trial under the preventive detention provisions of the comprehensive crime control act of 1934, a Federal magistrate concluded that Arm Strong was potentially dangerous to the Community. Therefore he could not obtain release on bail the act culminated 11 years of study and debate on Capitol kill. It passed the Senate 91-1. The vote in the House was 316-91. President Reagan signed the Mea sure on oct. 12, 1984. The act was in fact comprehensive but the provision thai caused the greatest Contro Versy was the one under which the 29-year-old Armstrong was locked up in Ohio. The problem As Congress perceived it was the matter of Loo easy Bai. Federal magistrates were virtually compelled to re lease defendants on Low bail or no bail at All upon a superficial showing that the suspects would show up for trial. In a num Ber of highly publicized cases the defendants went out and committed new crimes while awaiting trial. Congress decided the time had come to end that Folly and preventive detention was the result. The National Law journal recently look a look at 17 months of operation under the 1984 Law and found the results mixed. Fed eral prosecutors have asked for preventive detention in 2,853 cases. Federal Magis trates have granted their requests about to percent of the time. Roughly 1,100 defendants have been de Nied bail because of the High risk of their flight 381 Hare been held As dangers to the Community and 70s have been locked up under a combination of Bath findings. In this period crime rates generally have been dropping but there is no convincing evidence to prove that preventive detention has been a contributing Factor. It s hard to say one Way or the other but common sense suggests that the Law is working. Surely incarceration has served to prevent at least some of the revolving door crimes that were committed under the old system of lenient bail. But critics ask Haw can a magistrate reasonably predict future criminal behaviour does t preventive detention turn of rules of criminal Law on their head under our system a defendant must be presumed innocent until proved guilty if n magistrate locks up a potentially danger Ous defendant before trial in t this effectively a finding of guilt Public defenders charge that the Law simply is not working As proponents had hoped it would. In a typical criminal Case an arrested person is brought before a magistrate charged Wico a major drug offence or other serious crime. An Over worked prosecutor must decide almost on the spot whether to ask for preventive de Tention. The temptation is to ask for detention in every doubtful Case. Often such hearings Are perfunctory. No thorough investigation has been made of the suspect s work retard or of his prior arrests or convictions. Critics say Magis trates must rely in the end on their own gut hunches that a defendant is or is not dangerous and that he will or will not show up for trial. The program of preventive detention has increased costs of criminal prosecution the Federal prisoner population has gone up by 32 percent. In All probability these costs have been offset More than offset by a higher degree of Community safety. Getting a thou Sand dangerous criminals off the streets strikes me As a pretty sound idea. This columnist strongly supported preventive detention when the crime control act was pending. I support it still. Granted As Ricardo Armstrong could testify the is tem works wrongly and unfairly in some cases. No system is perfect. The old system of lenient bail bad its drawbacks Loo and the Adverse consequences were worse. In univ troll pm of Roluti