From today's Olympian editorial:

A Thurston County shooting review board consisting of law enforcement officers found no fault with Nelson’s decision to use deadly force against Moniz. Nelson fired three gunshots into Moniz as the suspect sat behind the wheel of his vehicle with four blown-out tires on a dirt road near Steamboat Island following a high-speed chase. Also inside the vehicle were Moniz’s 17-year-old fiancee and their nine-month-old son.

The board concurred with Nelson’s claim that Moniz, who was unarmed, was using his vehicle as a weapon, which justified Nelson’s split-second decision to fire at Moniz.

Colleagues of Nelson from the law enforcement community have ruled in his favor, and the Thurston County Prosecutor’s Office has chosen not to file charges.

That said, it’s still appropriate for a jury of Nelson’s peers outside of law enforcement to review the evidence.

An inquest by Warnock would remove any shadow of doubt over whether or not justice has been served.

As I've written on another blog, The Olympian is quick to judge the performance of others in their work and this is a perfect example.  Read carefully and know that between the lines the editor is saying "I have a problem with police investigating the actions of a police officer".

I'll be the first to say that police officers are human, thus can be wrong or biased on any issue.  My question is, who is better equipped to make a decision on a law enforcement issue than a law enforcement officer? 

I'm not sure that, in the heat of battle, feeling threatened by a man driving a 2,000 pound weapon, that I would not have taken the same action and I'm not even a gun owner.  But I digress from the real issue of this blog.

The Olympian uses its readership as a tool to take its opinion to the public and yet tries to quell others from doing the same.  "Don't do as I do, do as I say", is how the old saying goes.

The Olympian fails to tell you that a seperate police juristiction is investigating the matter.  That would be too complete and not give you the idea of the possibility of impropriety on the part of someone.  By The Olympian's standards, the investigating unit and the Country Prosecutors are not good enough to make this decision, we must turn it over to the hands of a jury of citizens - as soon the newspaper educates the public on the rights and wrongs of the issue.  Now THERE is a jury of peers!

This editorial should make for good comment fodder from both sides, as did the story about the incident and the subsequent story about the Prosecutor's decision.  I say "case closed". 

We can spend tax dollars galore trying to make something out of nothing or be willing to admit that if the driver of the car would have pulled over, as directed by law, he would be alive today, although likely incarcerated, serving the time he was trying to avoid, instead of serving an eternity for endangering another human.