Liz Mathis did not receive preferential treatment

A writer makes unfounded accusations regarding an April 13 rear-end collision involving state Sen. Liz Mathis (“Mathis case handling, coverage botched,” Paul Tranter, June 14 letter). The writer accuses the media of refusing to report on the accident, despite his learning about this no-injury accident from The Gazette's Internet site!

The writer criticized the Cedar Rapids Police Department's failure to conduct a sobriety test or issue Mathis a ticket, claiming this was a result of preferential treatment. These allegations, like those against the media, have zero merit.

In more than 26 years of practicing law, I've represented hundreds of rear-end collision victims. In the 1980s, almost 100 percent of drivers responsible for rear-end collisions received a ticket. Now fewer than half of drivers responsible for injuring my clients in rear-end collisions were issued a traffic ticket by the CRPD. The officer's decision not to ticket Mathis wasn't preferential treatment, but normal practice.

The writer's criticism of the lack of a sobriety test inappropriately implies Mathis might have been driving under the influence at 2 p.m. and that the CRPD would ignore an impaired driver. CRPD officers are highly trained in determining the signs of driver impairment. If Mathis had a single sign of impairment, the officer would have conducted a field sobriety test. Given no one, including the drivers or passengers in the cars involved in the rear-end collision, have claimed Mathis appeared under the influence, the writer's unfounded allegation appears to be politically motivated.

Sara Riley

Cedar Rapids