Regarding “Review: Cops’ deadly force justified.” (The Columbian, Aug. 17): No surprise. After all when did a police investigation of a homicide by police ever conclude anything much differently? They made their argument, as in The Columbian’s opinion Aug. 18, “In Our View: Ruling on Peterson shooting well-reasoned,” but there still are important questions to be answered that to my knowledge have not even been asked.
Why did a police department need to set up a crime in order to make an arrest? Why did they choose a relatively harmless prescription drug for a sting when often-fatal drugs are being sold almost daily? Why did they lower themselves to conspire with a confidential informant, aka a snitch who might be prioritizing his own interests (such as, possibly, the elimination of a competitor to his own drug dealings)? Lastly, who was responsible for moving this fantasy from the desk of Bad Ideas to the department of Planned Activities?
Until these unknowns are explained, it’s hard to accept that the Peterson case with its unforgiveable blunders is headed for a quiet burial under the file of “Justified.”
