Argumentative Essay: Corporal Kincaid V. Campbell Montana

439 Words1 Page

Your honor. Brought before you today in the form of impeachment papers is nothing more than a last ditch effort to hold someone accountable for the petitioners misfortune.

On October 16th, Mr. Santos posted a complaint. He was upset that while “protesting” at the Department of Corrections, a violent criminal put a weapon in his face. These actions were tragic and should not have occurred. Mr. Santos claims that because the District Attorney did not press charges on Corporal Kincaid, that he is disregarding his duties as the District Attorney.

Mr. Santos claims that the SERT officer aided the violent attacker. Mr. Santos will try and say that the SERT officer “let it happen”

What Mr. Santos will leave out of his narrative is that Corporal Kincaid saved his life. The only …show more content…

Santos’ apparent attempt to get answers for his victimization. Looking at the case from an unbiased perspective, something the petitioner is unable to do, Campbell Montana knew that Corporal Kincaid’s actions were heroic. Where Mr. Santos sees a “criminal” the rest of the world should see a hero.

The petitioners claims are full of speculation, biased interpretations, and untruthful remarks.

Campbell Montana did not fail to file charges. He responded to a situation objectively and professionally. Corporal Zanciy Kincaid wasn’t aiding and abetting the attacker. He was remaining calm in the face of danger, and saved the life of the Petitioner. Campbell Montana choose not to file charges, because despite Mr. Santos’ claims of “apparent and unquestionable”, no crimes were committed removing the actions of the attacker.

No charges were filed as a result of this complaint. Not because of some ludicrous claim of dereliction of duty, but because the only criminal this day, was killed while Law Enforcement attempted to subdue

More about Argumentative Essay: Corporal Kincaid V. Campbell Montana

Open Document