After reading the June 13 article, “Questions linger after fatal shooting by Everett officer,” I am amazed how reporters manage to dig up dirt on a victim and make him out to be the bad guy. His marital problems and everything that was going on in his life were moot. Let’s talk about the real issue: an execution.
Let’s take a look at some of the options the Everett Police Department had in the trunk of their cruisers. Let’s start with a beanbag gun. How about rubber bullets if you see a need to shoot the guy? How about a flash-bang device to distract him, or tear gas? Maybe pepper spray. That stuff shoots a stream up to 15 feet. How about de-escalating skills to try and calm the guy down? It’s called Verbal Tactical Skills, which every policeman learns at the academy.
What I’m reading here is akin to being on an armed transport of an offender, and as we take him out of the vehicle, he starts running in leg irons and cuffs and we back-shoot him. I wouldn’t want to explain that one to my supervisors.
These officers had all the time in the world to consider their options; instead they went from number one option of use of force to the last option, lethal force and forgetting most everything in between.
EPD needs to seriously review their use of force policy and the training methods used to make sure something like this doesn’t happen again. I wonder when it was that this officer last reviewed his use of force directives. Never aim your weapon at anything you don’t intend to shoot. This crime fighter evidently had something else in mind. I hope the truth comes out.
Bill Knudsen
Monroe
Talk to us
> Give us your news tips.
> Send us a letter to the editor.
> More Herald contact information.
