Watch that rush to judgment, Chief

I've waited a few days before commenting on this story, in order to let things shake out. The more they do, however, the more I feel comfortable weighing in on the situation.

The background, for those that aren't from around here:

A man, Martin Treptow, is driving in Coon Rapids, Minnesota on Thursday with his wife and two young children. He gets into a "road rage" type altercation with a man driving another car. Treptow claims that the other motorist was driving very aggressively and unsafely, and he admits to honking and gesturing to him. What happens next is unclear, but Treptow and his family maintain that the other driver ended up pointing a Glock handgun at his car while the two vehicles were stopped at a traffic light. Treptow, a carry permit holder, drew his weapon and fired, hitting the man in the knees and arm. Treptow then drove a few blocks to a gas station, where he and his wife called 911 and waited for police to arrive.

Now, the wrinkle. It turns out that the injured motorist with the Glock is an undercover Robbinsdale, Minnesota police officer. Robbinsdale is about 10 miles away from Coon Rapids, and is in a different county. The Robbinsdale police department maintains that the officer was on duty at the time, and was not in his jurisdiction because he was doing work essential to his job. The Coon Rapids police do not have a record of the officer's operating in their jurisdiction, which is not required but is apparently usually done as a courtesy, as well as to ensure the officer's safety, as he is undercover and not readily identifiable as a cop to the other department's officers.

Treptow is taken into Coon Rapids Police custody on suspicion of aggravated assault, but is released Friday without charges being filed. The Coon Rapids Police is still investigating the case.

So, here's what we're faced with: We have two differing stories. Let's compare them:

1. We have an undercover cop, who hasn't to my knowledge admitted to any involvement at all on his part in the traffic argument, and operating outside of his jurisdiction, claim that he was shot by a motorist while he was sitting at a stoplight, with no apparent provocation on his part.

2. We have a private citizen, with no criminal record save moving violations, driving with his wife and two young children. He admits to arguing with another motorist, and claims that the motorist pointed a handgun at his wife at a stoplight, without ever identifying himself as a police officer. He states that he feared for his and his wife's safety, and neutralized the perceived threat. He then reported the incident at the first available opportunity, after removing his family from the immediate area of the threat.

Who do we believe?

This is a tough one, given the available facts (and they are still coming in), but depending upon whose story you believe, here's what I think should happen:

1. If the officer (who, being undercover, is by definition unable to be identified as a cop, so let's ignore that for a second) was truly an innocent victim, then Mr. Treptow should be charged with felony assault, not for shooting a cop, because Treptow had no way of knowing that, but for use of a deadly weapon to settle a traffic argument with anyone, regardless of who they are. That would be clear misuse of a firearm, and Treptow should be prosecuted fully.

2. If, however, Treptow's story is correct, and the cop pointed his handgun at the family without identifying himself, and Treptow fired in fear of death or great bodily harm, then Treptow's carry permit served just the purpose it was designed to do, which is to allow a person to protect themselves and their families from deadly threats. Cops can commit felonious assaults as well as citizens, even while on duty, and if this is the case here, the officer himself should be jailed and brought up on assault charges.

To their great credit, the Coon Rapids Police Department seems to be investigating the case well and without bias, as shown by the following quote from the article:

"'There's no indication that he's going to be charged or that he's not going to be charged,' Weber said of Treptow. Authorities haven't ruled out charges against the police officer, either."

Unfortunately, we can't say the same of Robbinsdale Police Chief Wayne Shellum, who is loudly trumpeting his officer's innocence, even while the investigation is still continuing:

"Without going into details, Shellum appeared to be standing by his guy Friday. "The focus is, this is a road-rage deal, and some guy with his wife and kids decides to end this thing by shooting somebody," he said.",

and,

"He's in good spirits, and he looked at me and said, 'Geez,' he says, 'I'm sorry, Chief.' And I went, 'Hey, it's not your fault, you're doing your job, you're doing what you're paid to do.' "

We'll see, Chief. I understand and appreciate you backing your officers, but your public comments come dangerously close to trying to affect popular opinion of an active investigation, in my mind. Maybe the officer really does have something to be sorry for.

All in all, a sticky situation all around, but let's see what the Coon Rapids Police come up with before assigning blame either way, shall we? I will say that it looks like the facts to date favor Mr. Treptow's version of events, although I will not defend him if the outcome is different from that perception.