Herbie Gomez I CAN’T for the life of me understand the mind of the citizen who equates crimes committed by hoodlums and perverts with crimes committed by police officers. The overzealous cheerleader cites a story about the case of a six-year old girl that was allegedly sexually abused by her own father and grandfather. “Where is the outrage?” he asks as he points to the two suspects who were arrested by the police. His point is that like the killing of 17-year old Kian de los Santos, the crime committed against the girl should also spark a similar public outrage. But why hasn’t it when like the de los Santos case, the other crime is also heinous? Both crimes are extremely wicked, the type that would make anyone sick and want to throw up. Such atrocities have no place in a civilized society. But there is a difference between the two crimes: the perpetrators. In the case of the girl, her alleged violators were his father and grandfather. That is sick and highly offensive from whatever angle you look at it. But in the case of de los Santos, he was kneeling with his face down on the ground when he was shot from behind by the police, men who were supposed to follow and enforce the law. That the perpetrators in the de los Santos case are men in uniform aggravates the already flagitious crime. Where was the public outrage? The police arrested the two men who allegedly raped the poor girl. That means that the police performed their law enforcement function, and caught and placed the suspects behind bars. The officers did their work properly, and here is one poor fish asking why people are not raising howls of protest. What does the dullard want? That people with placards, including human rights advocates, troop to the police station to protest the arrest of the alleged rapists or demand that they be executed without seeing the court? These are the differences between the de los Santos case and the other heinous crimes that some groups are attempting to interject in order to muddle the national discussion:
  • the other heinous crime was committed by sick citizens who have no conscience; the perpetrators in the de los Santos case were police officers (read: sick law enforcers with no conscience); and
  • the perpetrators in the other heinous crime have no protectors; the perpetrators in the de los Santos case have powerful protectors.
Again, here are the two “ingredients” that make the de los Santos case unique: 1) the perpetrators or who they are or what they represent, and 2) the protectors. If the stupe still doesn’t get it, then maybe it’s time that he slapped his own face. Pastilan.