Letter to the editor - Boston Globe

On August 20th, you published an op-ed piece entitled "KERRY COMRADES HAVE CREDIBILITY ON THEIR SIDE" in which the writer argued that Bill Zaladonis and Patrick Runyon are the ones who have credibility on their side in the ruckus over Kerry's first Purple Heart. The writer closes with this, "...until there is clear and compelling evidence to the contrary, any fair-minded person has to credit the account offered by Zaladonis and Runyon."

If the Boston Globe isn't willing to look for "clear and compelling evidence", then how does the Globe expect to find it?

I have done extensive research on the Swiftvets' claims, and I am convinced that Bill Zaladonis was not on the Boston whaler that night. Zaladonis, according to military records, was stationed in An Thoi at the time of the incident, not in Cam Ranh Bay where Kerry and Runyon were stationed and where the incident took place.

How really difficult would it be for the Globe to ask Zaladonis for a record of his service? Having not done that, all the Globe is doing is taking Zaladonis' word for his presence. Why is Zaladonis' word more weighty than RADM Schachte's word? Is it not good journalism to investigate and resolve conflicts in witnesses testimonies?

Or is good journalism not something that interests the Globe?