A response to Soucheray’s question
In Joe Soucheray’s Jan. 27 column, he asks, “How would you have handled the Ricky Cobb stop, County Attorney Moriarty?”
In seeking answers to how the arrest could have been approached without murdering Ricky Cobb II, we can look to Minnesota Statute 629.33, which outlines when force may be used to make an arrest. Soucheray describes how “Cobb attempted to drive away, a trooper clinging to the car on both sides.” According to MN Statute 629.33 “if the defendant then flees or forcibly resists arrest, the officer may use all necessary and lawful means to make the arrest but may not use deadly force unless authorized to do so under section 609.066.”
Use of deadly force was not authorized under 609.066 clause (1) either, as the “threat” did not need to be “addressed through the use of deadly force without unreasonable delay.” The officers could have been protected from “death or great bodily harm” by letting go of the car. Therefore to answer Soucheray’s question, “are officers then obliged to let a suspect drive away, Ramsey County’s instructions be damned?” Yes. In fact the state law says so.
The Department of Justice report shows that law enforcement has violated the civil rights of non-white Minnesota residents for years and created closed-loop accountability processes where officers are allowed to investigate themselves and avoid accountability when they break the law. We need a democratically elected Civilian Police Accountability Commission to ensure they do their jobs properly and are beholden to the communities they are supposed to serve.
Elowyn Pfeiffer, St. Paul, and Jae Yates, Minneapolis
Divorced from reality?
I read with interest “Will AG take over trooper’s case?” This excellent and balanced Pioneer Press story addressed the possibility that Gov. Walz may remove the murder case against State Trooper Ryan Londregan from Hennepin County’s jurisdiction and give it to the state attorney general. This would be because of Walz’s concerns whether Hennepin County Attorney Mary Moriarty would approach the case in a fair manner.
Mary Moriarty is an zealot with unabashed anti-law enforcement bias. The fact that she is in a position of substantial public authority is profoundly alarming.
I am a life-long Democrat. The fact that we Democrats continue to elect divorced-from-reality ideologues like Moriarty will make us culpable if Donald Trump becomes our president in November.
Peter Langworthy, St. Paul
An experience they’ll never forget
How astounding! A politician making a positive impact. Vice President Kamala Harris made a pop-in appearance to the Jimmy Lee Recreation Center in St. Paul, where the St. Paul Central High School girls softball team was practicing and invited them for a visit to her residence in Washington, D.C. Here is a woman, a politician, who gets it. Teach by example. Positive role models help create positive change. This is an experience these young women will never forget. The kindness and generosity shown to them will be carried forward. Go, girls!
Ursula Krawczyk, St. Paul
One picture doesn’t show all
Recently, the Minnesota legislators took up a bill, Death with Dignity. After reading Pioneer Press opinions and letters to the editor, it gave me pause to reflect upon the role of suffering. There are a core of people who value suffering and believe when you suffer difficult circumstances and pain, it is valuable as it prepares you for life. Then there is Albert Camus who says there is no such thing as great suffering.
A number of years ago I worked in hospice and witnessed the suffering of the dying, family and friends. The grief, suffering and loss is intense and more so when a family member has a slow painful death. I worked in a special unit where we were challenged to get a person’s pain under control. Morphine sulfate is not always the panacea nor a solution to intractable pain. Unfortunately, there are a core of people who suffer no matter what pain medication you give them. We need to address the role of suffering (and it’s more than just pain) of the dying as well as their family and friends and welcome their concerns and the choices they wish to make during this journey;
Dying is about living, a time to reminisce about a relationship maintained. a life of kind, loving gestures, shared stories and a celebration of love and a life well lived. There will be a time, often long before we know, that the dying person believes or says, I am no longer living, I wish to suffer no more and it’s time for me to say goodbye. I believe we must give a person control over how they die. There’s never one picture fits all. Yet each of us should have the freedom to choose.
Geri Minton, Roseville
College loan forgiveness? Why?
I recently saw the president gave loan forgiveness to another 153,000 Americans. My question is why?
First and foremost, let’s make clear that loan forgiveness is not free and the cost is paid by the American taxpayer. Here are three questions I have about this topic as it pertains to me and my family.
One: As a blue collar factory worker for 38 years who never went to college, should I have to pay for someone else to go to college?
Two: Since my wife worked 60-hour work weeks at a printing press in the summer and held two jobs while going to college, does she deserve a monetary refund of some of the student loans she took and paid off?
Three: Our daughter is a sophomore at a state school which was chosen for fiscal responsibility. She works full time in the summer and 24 hours a week while taking a heavy course load at school. Surviving on her own, she has taken minimal student loans the last two years and is on pace to graduate with less than $25k in manageable student loan debt. My question is, why does she have to work so hard and take such great financial responsibility when the government is rewarding people who don’t?
Brian Aherns, River Falls
If we’re so worried about age …
Here’s a point to ponder: If such a large majority of 2024 voters are so concerned about the ages of the current president and his rival contender … both of whom were voted into office … then why aren’t we all concerned about the lack of an age cap for the Supreme Court justices … who are all appointed… for life!
Don’t you think that their advanced ages may have an influence on their due-process thinking and decisions, which we all have to live with, like it or not? It doesn’t make any sense to me.
Let’s hear it for an age term limits ruling for all SCOTUS members … and soon.
J. Lemke, Shoreview
Related Articles
Real World Economics: How Haiti now reflects age-old economic teachings
Skywatch: The wily rabbit of winter
Working Strategies: Nine career management steps for women
Joe Soucheray: Reckless car thieves, streetlamp wreckers … we’re tired of this
Dave Thune: We need to support our public-safety people every day
