POLICE MUST EXPLAIN

John Rasanen was neither armed nor committing a crime when he was
killed by police in Aquebogue ["Shooting Justified, State Police
Say," News, May 19].

He had no history of violence when police say he lunged at them,
"making contact" with Daniel Brown, the officer who shot him in the
chest at close range.

Police never claimed Rasanen reached for Brown's gun or any other
weapon, and Brown was not injured. It is plausible, by this account,
that Rasanen merely grazed Brown and was subsequently killed in his
bed.

Police are legally required to act reasonably in their use of deadly
force. But isn't it reasonable to suppose that Rasanen acted
reflexively and instinctively, perhaps to show his hands, at the
instant when he was startled awake in his dark bedroom by unknown
figures who pointed guns at him?

I seriously wonder if Brown would have reacted differently in that
situation. Before we rush to justify Brown's actions, police should
answer why two highly trained officers, with the element of surprise,
could not subdue an unarmed man whom they had just awakened by their
entry.

Vera Rupolo

Patchogue