Two days after an eye-opening event in my little corner of town, I read The Brainerd Dispatch account of things:
"Brainerd Police officers were dispatched to investigate a report of a despondent 32-year-old Brainerd man Tuesday.
About 6 p.m., officers first responded to a residence. The man was believed to be in the area of the 300 block of Fourth Avenue in Northeast Brainerd. Learning this was not an accurate location, officers determined the man was at a residence in the 700 block of 11th Avenue Northeast. Staff from the Crow Wing County Sheriff's Department and Baxter Police assisted Brainerd officers responding to the second location.
Brainerd Police Chief Corky McQuiston reported attempts were made to establish contact with the man resulting in a very limited response and interaction with him. As the situation developed, officers at the scene evaluated the circumstances and determined to withdraw from continued attempts to make contact with the man and officers cleared the area, McQuiston stated.
He said a subsequent follow-up investigation did not warrant additional law enforcement contact with the man at the time of this release."
ADVERTISEMENT
Sounds like a relatively happy ending, but it is remarkably incomplete at best. You see, several square blocks were surrounded for quite some time. Very well armed officers were walking through yards, advising folks to stay in their homes, even to go in their basements. An armored vehicle was parked a few feet from the door of the house on 11th Avenue, shining bright lights into the residence.
That's quite an unusual "attempt to make contact" with a man who "did not warrant additional law enforcement contact" a short while later.
But that isn't the strangest part of this rather revealing episode. Since no reporter is credited with the story, one can logically assume it is simply a printed press release from the police chief. If any follow up questions were asked of him, they aren't reported. The questions I have are: Were any questions asked? If none, why none? What answers were given?
My question for citizens is: How comfortable are you living in a town where three police entities, and your newspaper, simply conclude that the above explanation is all you need for an event like that?
If your answer is: "quite comfortable," would you mind informing the "community organizers," and our "media," of your contentment. They, along with an entire political party, seem to think cops are at war with us.
I've seen front-page news made of less significant police encounters by this newspaper. I've also seen no news accounts-nor any police action-in far more significant events. Do these folks have criteria for determining which is which? Whatever might those criteria be? Would they share them with "the public?"
In an age where police nationwide are under constant attack from revolutionary "community activists," and the president and Justice Department seem hell bent to convince folks how racist and evil cops are, you'd think the good folks who do police work would be looking to keep the citizens' natural trust in them.
Slipping an empty press release past an extremely gullible newspaper-with which they seem to have a comfortable working relationship-doesn't strike me as an all-American way to go about that.
ADVERTISEMENT
I hope Chief McQuiston feels at least some obligation to provide a bit more explanation to his flock when the guard dog shows that many teeth.
As for the newspaper, well.., hope doesn't enter into play there.
It's enough to make a citizen despondent. But I'm not sure it's wise to admit that in public right now.
Guy Green, Brainerd, is a former candidate for Brainerd mayor
