Wyoming Valley West 
Performs Like Champion

Acc Struggles 
Continue For 
Sura, 'noles 
Florida State Falls To Maryland

Thursday, January 13, 1994 &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;Page: 





The Cottam verdict has almost lost its meaning &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; 
 Say the words ``innocent until proven guilty.'' The phrase rings like the &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; Liberty Bell; the words are as pure and as fulfilling as ``We the people of
the United States,'' or ``We hold these truths to be self-evident.'' &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; 
 Now say ``innocent until exhausting every appeal.'' &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; 
 That heavy phrase thuds like a gavel hitting a block of lead. But that's
exactly the sound echoing in too many courtrooms these days -- including
Luzerne County's, where a couple found guilty of murder almost five years ago
have yet to serve day one of their sentence. &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; 
 Larry and Leona Cottam of Nuangola were convicted of third-degree murder in
September 1989. Their victim was their own teen-aged son. They let him starve
to death. &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; 
 But the couple has tasted sweet freedom ever since, appealing from one
court to the next as their bail money "serves" in their stead. On Monday they
were granted still more months of fresh air, home cooking and sunsets over the
Endless Mountains, as Judge Gifford S. Cappellini generously let them stay out
of jail while the great mill of the U.S. Supreme Court grinds slowly toward
their case. &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; 
 Is that fair? Is that right? &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; 
 No. It's sad. And it's as demoralizing as watching convicted rapists or
child molesters smile and wave goodbye after serving only a fraction of their
sentences -- assuming they get around to serving at all, of course. &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; 
 Suppose one of the Cottams passes away of a heart attack or stroke during
the next year of waiting. Suppose, in other words, that he or she never serves
time, not even half-a-decade after the tipstaff intoned "Guilty" for the deed. &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; 
 Would justice have been served? Would "innocent until proven guilty" have
been upheld? &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; 
 Or would the principle have been, "innocent to the point of tragicomedy"? &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; 
 This is both a criticism of Judge Cappellini -- who, it seems to us, is
unusually sympathetic to the desires of third-degree murderers -- and a gripe
about the system that encourages such decisions. &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; 
 Americans are justly outraged that so few felons serve their full
sentences. Both the state and federal governments may crack down on the parole
system, and try to keep crooks in jail for longer periods of time. &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; 
 Why don't they reinforce the front end of the prison pipeline as well? &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; 
 Americans convicted of crimes have the right to appeal. But as far as we
know, they have no absolute right to freedom while conducting those appeals --
let alone almost five years of freedom, which is more than even our slow and
creaky system of justice should allow.

The Cottam Verdict Has 
Almost Lost Its Meaning 
Say The Words ``innocent Until Proven Guilty.'' The Phrase Rings Like The 
Liberty Bell; The Words Are As Pure And As Fulfilling As ``we The People Of 
The United States,'' Or ``we Hold These Truths To Be Self-evident.'' 
Now Say ``innocent Until Exhausting Every Appeal.'' 
That Heavy Phrase Thuds Like A Gavel Hitting A Block Of Lead. But That's