Rushing to judge

| Thursday, Aug. 28, 2014, 8:55 p.m.

Can anyone tell me how you get “justice” in the Michael Brown shooting by rioting, looting, burning down local businesses (including the store the kid robbed earlier), and the dark threat of vigilantism among those who want the home address of the shooting officer? (As if they'd stop by to just chat awhile.)

We know the victim likely committed a strong-arm robbery minutes before he died; that the “witnesses” who described the shooting, one of whom was his friend in the robbery, lied (based on the autopsy findings); and that even Missouri's governor couldn't hold a healing assembly to discuss the issue without people shouting him down. This is “justice”? This is “honoring” the victim?

How about we “honor” the judicial system and wait for the facts, for both sides of the story, and (no doubt) for the white officer's conviction (to spare the suburb of Ferguson even more rioting after the verdict). That officer doubtless used excessive force, but until I walk a mile in his shoes and face the issue of drawing my gun, I won't condemn until the jury decides.

That, in my opinion, is “justice,” not pandering to agitators and letting them loot and riot because they're angry.

Mark Fassio

Pendleton, Ky.

The writer is a former Leechburg resident.

Subscribe today! Click here for our subscription offers.


Do you want to help us improve our commenting platform?
Click here to take this a survey.

Show commenting policy