Readers Write (Nov. 28): Jacob Wetterling case, shootings of police and by police

In August, 5-year-old Alayna Ertl was kidnapped in a small central Minnesota town, driven miles away and murdered. We heard about Alayna for a few days, then will hear of her again briefly when her murderer is convicted and sentenced. In 27 years, Alayna will unlikely be a household name but to her family and the residents of Watkins old enough to remember that horrible day.

In 1989, Jacob Wetterling vanished into the night near his St. Joseph home. For 27 years, his story was one of tragic legend. To be a Minnesotan is to know the Wetterling case.

It is interesting to consider how different so many lives would be if Jacob's abduction and murder had been solved in the days or even months after it occurred. His disappearance led to new laws and child-protection protocol. What would have become of the children saved by those changes? The mystery of his whereabouts also tore at the hearts of his family and friends every single day for much of their lives. How different would their lives be had they gotten closure in days rather than decades?

How different would any of our lives be had we not gotten to know the courageous, undaunted and truly inspirational Wetterling family?

The Nov. 21 front page included the following headlines:

1) "Doubt stalls refugee influx."

2) "A journey to adopt a neglected child."

Similarly, well-intended citizens should be equally concerned, and expect similar follow-up, if a police officer had been slain somewhere on Sunday. Unfortunately, a San Antonio cop actually was killed on Sunday — shot in the head twice while sitting in his squad car writing a traffic ticket to a motorist. The executioner was not involved in the traffic stop, but simply pulled up behind the squad car and executed the innocent and apparently unsuspecting officer.

Unbelievably, the Star Tribune reported the latter incident with a minute, three-inch article hidden on page six of Monday's issue. Once again, ad nausea, the media has demonstrated that it is more interested in selling news than in providing a public service. Perhaps the editors should re-evaluate the process used to determine which incidents are important enough to our society to warrant front-page coverage. And perhaps all members of our society should ask themselves why the execution of a police officer does not create the same level of interest and reaction as the killing of a black person by a cop.

• • •

Not one to stir the pot, I hesitate to bring up a tenet of American jurisprudence, but on second thought I'm thinking the pot does indeed need stirring, lest we return to pitchforks, lanterns and once-popular lynch mobs. Regarding the Philando Castile shooting, there is a maxim of English/American jurisprudence that may have been swept under the table: the tenet of being presumed innocent until proven otherwise. Can anyone, especially those in the Black Lives Matter camp, even mutter their adherence to this tenet with a straight face?

A Supreme Court case in 1894, Coffin vs. U.S., upheld the idea that defendants were presumed innocent until proven guilty. The doctrine of reasonable doubt plays a role in the presumption of innocence, since when this doubt exists a defendant should be excused.

Whatever happened next caused Yanez to fire seven rounds from his service pistol at Castile, causing Castile's death. While there were theoretically three witnesses — Castile's girlfriend, his daughter and Yanez's partner — no one other than Yanez can testify as to what he observed and how those observations affected his actions. The witnesses can only testify as to what they observed.

There was a dark time in our national history when citizens circumvented judge and jury, acted on incomplete information and, in lieu of trial, made decisions of guilt and carried out the death penalty. Much of the rhetoric we hear regarding the Castile case seems to lean this way rather than a willingness to learn all the facts of the case before passing judgment. Seems an almost anachronistic lesson in irony.

• • •

In his article "Castile tragedy offers an opportunity for healing," Donald Gault makes some great points, particularly in his call for a Philando Castile memorial site.

But I would build a monument instead.

They generally remind us of people who are missing, but they also can remind us of ideals — so they do not go missing.

While a monument to Mr. Castile is a fine idea, a structure or statue could be made much more powerful and meaningful if it were accompanied by a second monument — to a heroic police officer, shown helping a citizen.

Helping: That is the fundamental ideal a good officer of the law possesses. And so a monument to that would serve to re-educate all of us on the ideals of a good cop. And to the fact that the overwhelming majority of cops are good cops.

I know the power of the good cop. My father was an officer and detective for close to 20 years. That ideal — helping — was the cornerstone of my upbringing.

To remind not only citizens, but also police officers, of that ideal while juxtaposing with Mr. Castile's monument would be a powerful reminder of what we stand to lose when any of us, including our fine officers, loses sight of the ideal of helping.

Castile's monument will mean much more and be a more accurate portrayal of him once the case is closed. Time and its balancing effect will strengthen the future artists and their conceptions, and in turn our ideals.