Government Entities Break the Sixth Amendment

   Does the way government entities deal with personnel issues run contrary to the Constitution?
   The Bill of Rights says that in criminal prosecutions, the accused shall have the right to "a speedy and public trial."
   Yet, nothing seems to make government bodies feel more justified to go behind closed doors than matters of personal misconduct. The argument is that they are protecting the privacy of the accused. Only problem with that is, many times the concerns covered in the news, anyway.
   You might argue that the Six Amendment was speaking of criminal prosecutions, and, specifically of those taking place in a formal court of law. I would only say that if a person is accused of misconduct, that borders awfully close on being criminal. And, in the cases where breaking a specific law is discussed and any type of retribution is in the balance, that falls in the middle of being a form of criminal prosecution, to me.
   The Sixth Amendment is part of the Bill of Rights, and the rights listed there are considered guarantees to our most basic of all liberties. Is not this right as important as the others? If the right to a speedy and public trial is to mean anything to us, if it was really meant to sit right along with freedom of speech and religion and keeping and bearing arms, then we must have our public entities apply it when they mete out justice to their employees. At least, it should be offered to the public employees, if not force upon them. The Constitution says they have the right to it, so give them their right.
   The Sixth Amendment is the forgotten amendment, the ignored amendment. Would that we would give it life.