Blogs
Jan 20, 2011 at 12:59 pm
Comments
Please wait...
Comments are closed.
Commenting on this item is available only to members of the site. You can sign in here or create an account here.
Editors' Picks
is a proud member of the
media network
media network
All contents © Index Newspapers LLC
800 Maynard Ave S, Suite 200, Seattle, WA 98134
800 Maynard Ave S, Suite 200, Seattle, WA 98134
YES: 1. NO: 4. UNKNOWN: 3.
this was a big one
Really, they all agree the knife was open in the beginning? I thought that wasn't a sure thing? Maybe I missed that.
I don't know how these things usually go - in this kind of case, does the prosecuter usually not file charges if there aren't more unanimous answers? Wouldn't the bit about not having enough time to put the knife down have a lot of weight?
Because of Birk's actions, each of us that live in the city is going to pay out of pocket on taxes for what he did if a civil settlement comes in.
There will be a civil case brought by the family that will be settled out of court for a high seven figure or low eight figure sum.
Maybe then they can pay the taxpayers back for everything mr. Williams sucked from us?
@ 12 - the criminal standard is proof beyond a reasonable doubt; the civil standard is preponderance, basically, that something is more likely than not. I'm not sure what the standard at this inquest was, but I'd guess it was preponderance or something in between preponderance (the lowest burden of proof) and proof beyond a reasonable doubt (the highest burden).
@ 14 - I think that's about right, although I think the settlement will probably be lower.
Did Officer Ian Birk have any reason to exit his car and confront John T Williams?
It looks like Birk only failed to convince half the jury of these facts. Four jury members have doubts or don't believe his testimony. The County would be crazy to go to trial with this.
Known drunk with violent criminal history walking down the street with a knife out?
And, was it reasonable, under the totality of the circumstances, for Off. Birk to fear for his life?
They reflect badly on all Seattle police. Ian Birk had no reason to exit his car in the first place- no law was being broken, the knife was a legal size, Mr. Williams was lawfully engaged in his profession of woodcarving. Citizens were passing by Mr. Williams without one bit of nervousness or fear. It was strangely, only Officer Birk who was fearful. He dealt with this fear by exiting his car and quickly narrowing the all important safe distance between himself and Mr. Williams, with his Glock already in hand.
He never identified himself as a police officer. Hey! Hey! Hey! Drop the knife! Drop the knife! Drop the knife! Four seconds til death, five shots, four of which all entered the right side of Mr. Williams' body.
There are video/audio recordings of this, as well as numerous witnesses who testified that Mr. Williams did NOT appear at all threatening to them. John T Williams had no time to respond before he was shot to death by Ian Birk.
There has been no information as to Ian Birk's possible PTSD, his possible use of steroids or his prior knowledge of and encounters with John T Williams. Let's be real here. Cops are human. Search this website & read the article about their newspaper "The Guardian". SPD needs a cleansing from top to bottom. It is unsafe for us all to let thugs with guns rule over us with impunity. I call on Mayor McGinn to step up, since it seems that Chief Diaz is unable/and or unwilling to do so, and reform the Seattle Police Department. As they are today- politicized and extremist- they present a clear and present danger to us all.
Birk needs to be charged. It is not acceptable to our society that "undesirables" can be murdered in cold blood on our streets.
I'm probably being optimistic though.
To convict Birk for murder or manslaughter, the prosecutor would have to prove that he acted with malice, which would be hard to do based on the facts as I've heard them (it's MUCH harder to convict a police officer for unjustified homicdes, see RCW 9A.16.040 http://apps.leg.wa.gov/rcw/default.aspx?…). It's too bad, but that's the state of the law.
@21, you're dead wrong. Police can contact a person for any reason (-- it's called a "social contact" --) but they can't order the person to stop without an individualized, articulable, reasonable suspicion that the person is involved in a crime. Reasonable suspicion is a very low standard; it doesn't take much to amount to suspicious behavior. But a person minding their own business while carrying a legal knife is no more suspicious than a kid with a baseball bat or a mechanic with a tire iron.
Good work Cienna.
The statement by Cienna which you quoted, and your reply to it, are an interesting illustration of where the burden of proof lies. Cienna wrote as though the burden of proof is upon Birk; your reply is a reminder that the real burden of proof is upon the prosecutor.
Like you, I'll be surprised if Satterberg runs with this one, given that he can't secure a murder conviction without being able to prove intent on Birk's part, and at least some members of this jury were willing to believe Birk as to his intentions. On the other hand, the jury's answer to 6b ("sufficient time to drop the knife") seems to suggest that Satterberg might have a provable case for manslaughter or some other lesser charge...
I think Cienna was trying to convey that, as a professional with a great deal of respect from the community, Birk still couldn't convince all eight jurors.
He didn't need to, but there is something telling in his inability. Can't fault her for playing to her crowd, either.
I predict (and this is just a prediction) the Williams family will move forward with a civil case. I doubt Satterberg will. If the Williams family convinces Ford to handle to case, I put even money on the city settling for low five figures.
I also expect the city to drag that family through the mud. We'll hear no end to rumor or innuendo about Williams past behavior. All this will have the end effect of further alienating the Native population in town. The civil trial will be a net loss for everyone involved.
douchenozzle ian birk sounds a little more appropriate.
i hope the memorial totem pole is erected in front of ian birk's house.
at the same time the SPD will continue to act and behave with their guild given impunity, and without any real oversight 'cause their "misdeeds" can be negated and paid for by the cities' insurance far into the future.
Bad judgement directly causing the death of a human being, that sounds more like second degree manslaughter.