Letters for September 26, 2002

The real story …

Re “Is This a Lethal Weapon?” by Stephen James (SN&R Cover, September 12):

Your story: Rehab patient victimized and murdered by rogue cops. “High, cut, bruised and bleeding,” he approached his house and the officers due to his homing instinct and need for comfort. He was totally misunderstood and didn’t stand a chance. Moral: The police must have overreacted, and why can’t we just all get along?

The real story: Drug addict, on the road to perdition, grapples with police at night, then approaches within 10 feet of officers brandishing a weapon and is justifiably shot in defense. Moral: Don’t do drugs; obey the police.

You can parse the procedural manual and dissect the police department’s public statement, but [deputies] Underhill and Marshall were there and had to make a split-second decision. It was not a moment for kumbaya and further counseling. [Steven] Wallen himself made that call.

Don McLeod
Sacramento

… and the other real story

Re “Is This a Lethal Weapon?” by Stephen James (SN&R Cover, September 12):

We can’t thank you enough for writing the truth about what happened to Steven B. Wallen.

Steven was our cousin, our uncle’s only child and my grandparents’ only grandson. He was a sweetheart of a person and didn’t deserve to die in this manner. We have read every story on his death, and they have all been sensationalized and have misrepresented our cousin’s life, which has only added to the grief our family is suffering. At least, with this story printed, we feel a sense that some justice has been served and that the public may know the truth surrounding the facts of our cousin’s death, and we commend you for your presentation and the research that went into writing such a thorough story.

Shera Pillsbury and Alexandria Smith
via e-mail

The truth has come out

Re: “Is This a Lethal Weapon?” by Stephen James (SN&R Cover, September 12):

I grew up with Steve Wallen. We were best friends since high school, and he was like a brother to me. I have just recently been married. Steve couldn’t go to an event on the biggest day of my life because a police officer in training didn’t do what he was supposed to do right. Five days before my wedding, I had to bury my best friend.

I am not against police officers. I have recently tried to get hired by a department and have gone through the police academy. Everything in the article I read that the two deputies did seemed totally wrong to me. I would like for someone to give Stephen James a pat on the back for me because the truth has come out.

Tony Donnelly
via e-mail

How lethal can handcuffs be?

Re “Is This a Lethal Weapon?” (SN&R Cover, September 12):

I must concede that the job of a policeman has to be one of the hardest professions to undertake. Making split-second decisions in the heat of the moment is never easy, especially when it may be a life-or-death situation. With that said, it seems to me that Rich Marshall and Matt Underhill mistook El Dorado County for Los Angeles.

This seems to be a case of a rookie cop with a hot head and a happy trigger finger. Although it seems [Steven] Wallen was no angel himself, it was not his violent actions that led to his death. We could blame the El Dorado Sheriff’s Department for improper training, but I am one to hold people accountable for their actions, and, in this case, both Marshall and Underhill are dead wrong (no pun intended).

With one hand cuffed, pepper spray in his eyes and on his face, and, from what reports say, bleeding, the officers try and convince us he was a threat? Are they taking us for complete idiots here? One man, battered and beaten, vs. two armed sheriff’s officers, and who was supposed to be outnumbered here?

Oh wait, I forgot, he was armed, with handcuffs. Did you ever think you would see the day where you would use those words, “armed with handcuffs,” in the same sentence?

Jeff Wright
Sacramento

Issue is power of coercion

Re “To Shoot and Protect” (SN&R Editor’s Note, September 12):

The article “Is This a Lethal Weapon?” was highly accurate, but your editorial column was slightly misleading and focused on an issue that is not the largest concern with regard to police power.

The statement that “a California law says that if an officer is afraid someone poses a threat to him or others, it’s OK to go ahead and pull the trigger” is vaguely accurate but highly misleading. In order for an officer to be authorized to use deadly force, he must perceive an imminent threat of death or serious bodily injury that could cause the death of the officer or another person. The key is that the threat be one of deadly force.

The officer’s ability to use deadly force is, for the most part, the same as that of the ordinary citizen (provided that citizen is in lawful possession of the gun or deadly instrument at the time it was used). Both the officer and the citizen have the ability to use deadly force only when their life or the life of another is in imminent danger. Although police are generally given more leeway when it comes to defending the life of another, both the police officer and the private citizen will be found to have committed “justifiable homicide” in situations where he can assert defense of self or defense of others.

The column does point out wherein the real problem lies. Society grants the officer license to carry a gun and orders that officer to enter into situations in which it is more likely that he will have to use it; therefore, situations concerning police lawfully using firearms are more prevalent than situations of citizens lawfully using firearms.

As a society, the true power that we grant the police is the power of coercion. We give police the power to detain and to use non-lethal force. These uses of non-lethal force can very easily create a situation whereby the officer can use deadly force—a situation that would not have come into existence but for the use of the non-lethal force. In the article on Wallen, there was a focus on the use of oleoresin capsicum spray by Officer Underhill. The article points out that this could have triggered the situation’s escalation into the use of deadly force.

The issues of police abuse of power should focus on the things that do not make the paper, such as the officer who uses verbal harshness, lies, and other forms of intimidation to do his job. Professional courtesy among all law enforcement agencies should also be questioned. That which you do not hear about is that which should concern you.

Travis Colby
via e-mail

Recession lessons

Re “Bubble Boys” (SN&R Editor’s Note, September 12):

Taxing capital gains from sales of assets such as stocks at a higher rate would have cut the size of the stock-market bubble. This policy could also have helped steer working Californians clear of excess market investments.

In this way, they would have lost less money and shifted more cash to insured bank deposits. This would have left many of those who are at debt’s door today in better shape to pay their bills. A lesson for the next recession?

Seth Sandronsky
Sacramento

Too broad a brush

Re “Muslims Tolerant, but Only of Monotheists” (SN&R Letters, September 12):

Muslims have always been painted with too broad and too accusatory a brush, by many people who have limited knowledge but infinite emotion about them.

It is not true that Muslim countries invariably persecute polytheistic religions. For example, Malaysia is a Muslim country, with large minorities of Christians, Hindus, Buddhists and those with aboriginal beliefs. Religious diversity is celebrated in Malaysia by all, in the form of festivals, open houses, religious activities and such. That has become a cultural cornerstone of the Malaysian identity, whether Muslim or otherwise. It is unfair to point fingers at incidents and generalize about a people because of that.

By the same token, I could point out the violent subjugation of Africans, Central Americans, and, to a smaller degree, Asians, by Christian missionaries throughout the history of international trade. Most recently, it was the ethnic cleansing of Albanians by virtue of their religion. And what about the Tel Aviv regime that is working to deny Muslim and Christian Palestinians the right even to own land in Israel? These actions do not represent a people, by any means.

This world is not a fair place, granted, but no one element should be singled out. Why point fingers, when [the letter-writer] himself states we should learn to live in peace with each other?

Izmir Salleh
via e-mail