I want to clarify some information in my article about the arson at Guns and Goodies that may have caused some confusion. I was informed by the sheriff that Mr. Wong had been arrested and released on his own recognizance. That is a fact. That is not a statement about his conviction. Contritely, it would have been more accurate for me to write that Mr. Peterson “played a role in the release of Mr. Wong." By not opposing the "release” rather than the wording I used. Mr. McClure was also released on his own recognizance from Musselshell County. This is also a fact and can be found in county records, as well as media reports.
Mr. Peterson has written the lengthy article above to clarify that the release of Mr. Wong is justified and that the McClure case was publicly discredited. While Mr. Peterson is in no way culpable for the action of others, he had the opportunity to prevent both releases. Why did he not prevent these releases? To declare that either of these two men is non-violent seems at odds with their actions. The law appears to give the apprehended the benefit in these cases. It’s as though the victims are not given any consideration.
An attorney paid by the county has the potential to do great things. He has a powerful and influential place in our local elected government. I would like to think that the protection of victims and the community would be the most crucial goal of our county attorney.
Lura Pitman
Roundup
Reader Comments(0)