Kenneth Starr

Suzanne Garment (Opinion, May 5) dismisses Kenneth Starr’s critics as, at best, political and, at worst, a joke. The criticism of Starr goes far deeper than political disagreements. The American public, usually the media, and almost always the courts hold the enforcers of the law to a much higher standard of behavior than the accused. Prosecutors and investigators who cut corners or operate on ethical boundaries lose their cases when such behavior becomes known, because it introduces doubts about the entire case.

Starr and his apologists freely admit that he devotes considerable time to, and receives considerable money from, clients other than the people of the United States (who are his ultimate client in his duties as an independent counsel). Like the office of independent counsel, the governorship of Arkansas is also a citizen position with the expected outside interests.

The criticisms of Starr, which echo the accusations against the Clintons, attack the integrity of the whole investigation and raise serious doubts about validity of any outcome. By arguing that citizen Starr has done no wrong, Garment also argues that, as a citizen governor, Clinton did no wrong and thus her article should assert that Starr’s investigation should be ended. Any other conclusion is politically motivated hypocrisy.

KEITH PRICE

Los Angeles