Laws don't apply to everyone

Dear Editor
In response to statements made in letters to the editor by Julie Postai (July 19) on cases in Crawford County being “washed” and by Devon Krusich (July 7) if Mr. Romanzi had had drinks, and drove the county attorney may have prosecuted.
In Crawford County, IF you have the right name and possibly the right amount of money the laws of the state of Kansas Do No Apply!
Kansas Statute 22-2908 (b) (1) (C) Says a county or district attorney Shall Not enter into a diversion agreement for DUI if during the time of the alleged violation was involved in a motor vehicle accident or collision resulting in personal injury or death.
Kansas Statute 74-7335 States that the victim or the victims family of a crime is to be notified of the right to be present at any public hearing concerning the accused person.
Kansas Statute 8-1019 Prior to sentencing of a person convicted of an alcohol or drug related offense which resulted in personal injury or death shall be given the opportunity to make a victim impact statement.
As the victim of this type of crime and not having the right name we were never given our rights as a victim to a DUI driver. My daughter for 2 to 3 months after being hit in the rear end by a DUI driver, that happened to have more “prominent” name than ours, was picking shards of glass from her face, suffered several surgeries and physical therapy with the loss of quality of life for better than 2 years.
In the diversion agreement signed by the county attorneys office and by the defendant, the Diversion Eligibility Criteria states that the defendant states that the following is true: #6 That the current DUI charge does not involve an accident resulting in injury or death to any person (the injury includes yourself) #7 He/she was not charged with any offense arising from this incident Other than traffic infractions:
Count 1, a drug severity level 3 non person felony. Count 2, Drug severity level 4 felony. Count 3, class A non person misdemeanor and Count 4, DUI Class B non person misdemeanor. I have to wonder now, does this set a precedence for future DUI and drug charges?
We were never contacted as a victim, according to the laws and the charges filed this person should Never have gotten the diversion. In a complaint to the Administrator of the Attorney Disciplinary board Mr. Gutierrez stated that on the day the charges were filed and on the date of the defendants arrest, that he attempted to make contact. My daughter and I have had the same phone number for over 15 years and is listed in the local phone books, have lived in the same house for 17 years, we have caller ID, call waiting, voice mail and snail mail. We get tax statements, jury duty notifications, junk mail and God knows everything else. All I can figure is that my mental telepathy system was down.
Mr. Gutierrez, in his response to the Attorney Disciplinary Board indicated he had no idea that my daughter was injured. Had he done his job, made the contact, We certainly would have been in the court doing our part as the victims to the crime.
This defendant was arrested 2 times in two days for DUI. This same defendant is still hitting the bars on a regular basis. I pray to God that his next victim isn’t killed and he gets to walk Again because of the “prominent” name.
Here again the police departments did their job, the KBI did their job and the ball was dropped again in the county attorneys office. I have spoken to Michael Gayoso. I think that he is the right man to take over and Do The job that he gets elected to don (at least he knows the law and is willing to prosecute accordingly). I too have to wonder, like Julie Postai, how many others have been “washed?”
Cindi Adamson
Pittsburg