By J. Michael Jones
Law Enforcement Against Prohibition
TAOS— Could the collision of the two worlds of Elton John Richard II and Daniel Romero have been avoided, and with that avoidance the tragic death and pending imprisonment that resulted?
Of course; there are cusps on a reverse timeline where different decisions could have produced different results.
Richard could have shown remorse for killing a man for a property crime; that may have provided the judge with an opportunity for even greater lenience in sentencing.
Richard could have chosen not to shoot Romero.
Richard could have chosen to end his pursuit without confronting Romero. He could have chosen not to pursue over a failed attempt to steal his vehicle and damage to that vehicle.
Romero could have chosen another target or another way to pay his dealer. Romero could have chosen not to use cocaine to the point of abuse and becoming indebted to a criminal.
These are all decisions available to the primary participants in this tragedy but in each instance the decisions made took the pair further down the wrong road.
I do not condone the actions of either, but I have an appreciation either directly or indirectly for their individual circumstances. I am a Marine veteran with combat experience in Vietnam; I retired from law enforcement with experience as an undercover narcotics investigator and other assignments, including deputy chief of police in Gainesville, Fla.
I have been the victim of burglary and understand the anger, the rage that can ensue, emotions that perhaps course more strongly through a combat veteran. I have had multiple occasions when I could have justifiably taken the life of another and chose not to. I have never regretted the decision to allow another to live.
The law is clear about when the taking of life is justified and it does not include the simple taking or attempt to take property. The outcry to pardon or commute Richard's sentence has no legal basis of which I am aware. It is emotional not objective and would produce the type of result that laws are enacted to prevent. If it weren't for emotional decision-making this incident might never had happened, so enough of that.
If we look objectively at the supposed root cause of the incident we can see that another decision-making opportunity existed that might have prevented this incident. That decision is one for which we are all responsible, not just Richard and Romero.
It is said that the attempt to steal was to pay a drug dealer because Romero bought more cocaine than he could pay for. Had he never used, or overused, he would not have had problems with his dealer. If he had not had to go to a drug pusher to obtain a drug for recreational use this entire chain of events might never had occurred.
The right or wrong of recreational drug use is not my point, and I do not advocate such use. I do, however, recognize that such use is deeply ingrained in our society. Recreational drugs, including alcohol and nicotine, are widely used with an interesting distribution of harm. The two legal recreational drugs are known to cause various problems, even death from prolonged use or overdose. Often the most harm from use of illegal recreational drugs comes, not from the use, but from the prohibition of that use.
Had Romero been able to legally purchase standardized, controlled— and taxed— cocaine, the pusher would have been eliminated from the equation. Had we as a society acknowledged the reality of using recreational drugs and legalized— not decriminalized— them, controlled, produced, taxed and distributed them, there would have been no criminals selling them. The tax proceeds could have been used to establish educational prevention programs as well as treatment programs for those who are unable to use successfully.
Had we done those things then we, as a society, as a nation would not bear so large a share of the responsibility for the tragedy these two people have experienced.
It is not too late to prevent future tragedies.
opinion 
...go to bookmarks
E-mail Story
Print Friendly
