Wooten a symptom

Friday’s release of the Alaska Legislative Committee’s report that concludes Gov. Sarah Palin abused her office to satisfy a family issue is incomplete.

What’s missing from this politically charged investigation is the role the Alaska Department of Public Safety and the Alaska Public Safety Employees Association plays in holding law enforcement officers to a higher standard of behavior in our communities.

National Football League Commissioner Roger Goodell has made waves in professional athletics, demanding players be held accountable for their behavior and actions. His crackdown on NFL players who violate this code has been swift and consistent, and those players who demonstrate an unwillingness or inability to conform don’t play.

It’s regrettable that troopers in Alaska, including Wooten, aren’t held to this standard. Legislative investigator Steven Branchflower asked many questions in compiling his report, but one question not covered in the report that we’ve heard repeatedly is why Wooten is still wearing a uniform.

Wooten admitted shooting a moose on his wife’s license (he didn’t have one himself) and to using a Taser on his 11-year-old stepson. Because there was no protocol against doing so at the time, he received a 10-day suspension as punishment.

If those sworn to serve and protect us need to have something like using a Taser on a child — even on the lowest possible setting — spelled out as unacceptable, then perhaps these men and women don’t possess the moral capacity to be officers. And while Wooten has become the poster boy for this in Alaska, he’s certainly not the only example for demanding DPS and the union representing troopers be held accountable for those they allow to be our community police and role models.

Palmer-based Trooper Eric Spitzer was accused in a 2002 trial of using excessive force in subduing a pair of suspects. Although a jury found Spitzer acted within legal bounds in that case, he voluntarily transferred to St. Mary’s in August 2002. About four months later, Spitzer was again singled out for using a Taser on a suspect to subdue him during a struggle to place the man in handcuffs. A civil jury in 2004 awarded the man, Kevin Patrick, $1.8 million for his pain and suffering.

Although Wooten “clearly deserved some punishment” for his actions, Alaska Public Safety Employees Association President John Cyr said it would be inappropriate to fire Wooten after he was already appropriately disciplined by the Department of Public Safety.

“Should [troopers] lose their ability to make a living? I don’t think so,” Cyr said, adding that “there are a lot of people who want to change the focus of this [Troopergate investigation] on Mike Wooten. … You can’t treat Mike Wooten differently just because he was married to the governor’s sister.”

We agree — to a point. Wooten is already a focus of this brouhaha. What’s concerning is that focus so far has been fuzzy relating to the broader issue of ensuring those who are trusted to enforce our laws meet the highest professional standards possible.

But to answer Cyr’s question, troopers who would use a Taser on a child, no matter what level the device is set at, absolutely should be removed from the force. Any parent using a device like a Taser or stun gun on a child invites investigation by local and state authorities. It sends a poor message if those same authorities sworn to uphold public safety commit similar offenses themselves without repercussion.

“That’s reasonable,” Cyr says. “The question is, what do you mean by a higher standard?”

Well, if you have to ask …