What threat are camera cell phones?

Dear Editor:

Monroe County's judges and sheriff have sworn to uphold the U. S. Constitution. Why then are camera cell phones confiscated upon entering the courthouse in direct violation of the Fourth Amendment? What threat do camera cellphones pose to courthouse officials and staff?

If only a camera cell phone had been utilized at the Carbon County Courthouse on April 23, 2009 the illegal assault that deputies and staff launched against Mr. and Mrs. Senavitis would have been recorded and Mr. Senavitis would not have been wrongfully incarcerated for 10 months on fabricated charges of public drunkenness.

Thankfully, TV camera coverage of the Rhoades/Senavitis vehicular accident scene revealed the truth that Rhoades illegally crossed the center line into Senavitis's lane, thus exposing the accident reconstruction report concocted by PA State Police to be a farce, and exonerating Mr. Senavitis of the politically-motivated false charge of killing Rhoades.

Had TV cameras and personal recording devices been utilized in Luzerne County courtrooms, hundreds of juveniles might not have been abused by Conahan and Ciavarella.

Audio and visual recording of courtroom proceedings should be welcomed as an aid to ensure that justice is upheld in courtrooms and in the courthouse hallways. As it is, perjury is knowingly permitted, civil rights are violated, and perjured testimony is deleted from trial transcripts.

Monroe County Courthouse officials should permit camera cell phones, TV cameras, and other recording devices into the courthouse and courtrooms, thus discouraging corrupt courtroom practices and allowing truth and justice to flourish.

Debby Rabold

P. O. Box 451

Effort