Schoenthaler's only crime was being too trusting
By ALAN PEACOCK

The Scott Peterson media issue continues to grow on a weekly basis. First the hunt for Laci, the arrest of Scott, the gag orders, the pursuit for justice, and finally the crushing blow to the criminal justice program at California State University, Stanislaus.

I have known Stephen Schoenthaler for more than 20 years. As a matter of fact, I was responsible for getting him involved in jury venue issues during the early 1990s in this county. He has dedicated his adult life to pursuing justice for all. I have attended his classes, I have taught his classes in his absence, I have attended his lectures and I have listened to his drawn-out descriptions of his belief in justice.

I also know Deputy District Attorney Dave Harris, attorney Kirk McAllister, Judge Al Girolami and attorney Mark Geragos. I have worked with all of these people with the exception of Geragos. Not one of these people acting in their professional arena would ever resort to knowingly presenting false information to accomplish a means to an end. I have heard each of these people talk of justice, honesty and integrity in some form or another during the past year.

Everyone involved in this case, including the media, should stand back and look at what has really occurred here. During the past year, The Bee has reported on many hot stories, including one about police officers teaching other police officers how to cheat and lie. At the police academy, officers in training were allowed to cheat on tests. Those are the people being trained to represent truth and justice in the community. Who got fired? What became of the dishonest police officers. Who was responsible for that problem? The Police Department? The Sheriff's Department? The state?

Schoenthaler has his faults; we all do. I also know that he has such faith in the criminal justice system that he finds it hard to believe that a criminal justice student -- or any student -- would cheat.

The dishonest students -- those who lied and cheated on a simple college class assignment -- should be identified by the university and expelled from the program. They should not become our next set of police officers or probation-parole officers. They can't be trusted. It might even be interesting to exclude the "data" they submitted to see if there is a difference in the outcome.

Schoenthaler has a right to expect honesty from the students.

Each has been cautioned about dishonesty. It is part of the college experience; it is written in the rule book. It is time the criminal justice community gets behind Schoenthaler and supports him in this moment of disbelief.

He has always been there for everyone, including The Bee, many times at no cost, and he has always preached justice.

Peacock is a private investigator in Modesto.

No excuses for either professor or students
By CLAUDE DELPHIA

While it is important to know that Scott Peterson will get a fair trial under our judicial system, the admission that at least eight criminal justice students at California State University, Stanislaus, falsified data used in a survey on the potential bias of jurors in the Peterson trial has broader implications.

Considering that these are criminal justice students, the veracity and ethics of future law enforcement professionals look scary.

Setting aside the issue of whether their faked survey results might have affected the due process of a person on trial for his life, what is it that these students of criminal justice didn't understand about the ethics of cheating to obtain a grade?

Professor Stephen Schoenthaler said, "It seems impossible that I could have missed something like that." Yes, Professor Schoenthaler, it does seem impossible that you missed what was happening. But then you admit that you didn't verify the data by calling some of the phone numbers in the students' reports. That was a pretty serious failure on your part.

You further failed when you set up the premise that "they (students) could expect people farther away to know less about the case." Isn't that the same as leading the witness? You basically told the students what you wanted the report to show, and they went out and made the data match your premise.

That doesn't make these seniors less culpable, but it sure puts you in the hot seat as far as teaching ethics and process are concerned.

As for the students, what was so difficult about doing what was required? According to The Bee, it involved 20 phone calls with four questions. If you don't understand the value of what you have been asked to do, you should at least have had the ethics not to falsify a report in order to get a better grade. Apparently at least one student knew better.

The eight-page questionnaire looks doable within the bounds of the time students were warned it would take to complete the assignment.

Some students indicated they would have done it differently if they had known how the survey was going to be used. That's a pretty stark admission that they have no idea of the ethics of their classwork.

There ultimately is no excuse for the professor or those students who falsified the information. They flunked this course, and their careers may be in jeopardy. They have failed at the very essence of getting at the truth or understanding what criminal justice is all about.

The cheating students brought dishonor on their classmates and their university. This incident may dog them for decades to come. No matter how hard the students try, there can be no rationalization for falsified survey data.

Delphia lives in Ceres.