SHONTO PETE AND POLICE COMMISSION

 

 Shonto Pete has now been rebuffed in his attempt to hold the city of Spokane legally responsible for the fact he was shot by Jay Olsen.  A federal judge did the rebuffing.  It seems like an open and shut case.  If a city-employed plumber helped me with some water line work during his time off and I suffered damage because of his incompetence, I can not believe I would think of suing the city.  Hold it a minute.  I might allow the thought to cross my mind only because the city has much more money.  And this seems to have been the ultimate rationale behind Pete's case against the city.  As to Pete's pressing legal and medical bills: If I had the money I would pay them myself in the interest of justice.   Perhaps there are like minded individuals in Spokane who do have the wealth and the desire to at least partially right a wrong.  Note though that there are hundreds of cases each year where judgments are made in civil actions but the aggrieved party never collects.  I've had it happen to me.

This whole incident opens the door to a consideration of a wider issue:  the setting of policy for the Spokane Police Department.  For starters, let's keep one foot in the ore body and look at off-duty drinking of alcohol and taking of drugs, including prescription pain killers.  Just what the policy should be, other than not what is now, I am not sure.  But I do not believe the mayor or chief should set the policy by themselves.   An independent board of citizens, properly selected, should act as a primary advisor.  This would not be a "sounding board" group or an "oversight" committee.  It would be, to start with,  similar to what Eugene, Oregon has.  And I would hope it would evolve into something at least as strong as  the Park Board.