Slog

News & Arts

Line Out

Music & the City
at Night

« Lunchtime Quickie: Risky Business U… | No Mas Animates MLB's Most Infamous… »

Friday, November 13, 2009

Crime Seattle Times Death Penalty Reader Poll

Posted by Dominic Holden on Fri, Nov 13, 2009 at 1:10 PM

The Seattle Times has posted a question on its Facebook account asking the judicious masses if Christopher Monfort, who police suspect murdered Officer Timothy Brenton, should face the death penalty:

Um, not to seem soft on crime, but the "suspect" hasn't even been to an arraignment hearing—let alone begun a trial or, you know, been convicted guilty—and the Seattle Times is running a poll on sentencing him to death? Jeez, you guys. Get a grip. Now, for the record, I've been rabid about this case from the beginning. Whoever killed officer Brenton and shot at officer Britt Sweeney is human scum who deserves to be punished severely. And I'm not a fan of the death penalty—it's expensive, it's state-sanctioned murder, there are mistakes—but it's the law on the books and maybe it's what will happen in this case. However, we have a practice in the United States where we find that someone is innocent until proven guilty—because witch hunts are considered gauche. And because sometimes people are found not-guilty (granted, this guy appears guilty based on what we've heard from the police). But we don't sentence them to death before the trial begins. And we most certainly don't let the court of public opinion—the juvenile, petty court of Facebook, no less—send someone to the gallows. Even King County Prosecutor Dan Satterberg, who called this crime "the worst of the worst," says there could be mitigating factors to consider before considering the death penalty.

UPDATE: The Seattle Times has removed the post from its Facebook page. I wonder why.

Comments (21) RSS

Oldest First Unregistered On Registered On Add a comment

While all that "innocent until proven guilty" stuff is correct, prosecutors have 30 days from filing charges (happened yesterday, I think) in which to declare whether they are asking for the death penalty or not.

Thus, while the suspect has not been found guilty, the question is timely. That said, timely does not mean facebook appropriate...

Posted by JLa on November 13, 2009 at 1:18 PM

Even if this guy isn't guilty of the murder of a police officer, he's most definitely guilty of attempted murder of police officers -- remember, he tried to shoot at the police when confronted outside his home.

Posted by joykiller on November 13, 2009 at 1:20 PM

i agree largely with the post and particularly JLa's comment, I'd just like to add the better question to ask is: whether or not the prosecutor should seek the death penalty? I'd still say not facebook appropriate, but is more accurate and definitely comes off as less bloodthirsty.

Posted by BES on November 13, 2009 at 1:21 PM

Where's the coverage of this?

http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/html/th…

Posted by Avtar on November 13, 2009 at 1:23 PM

Can I also propose the beating of facebook commenter 'K Paul Cook' with a steaming hot pointed stick for proposing that death would be preferable to a life in a wheelchair.

Posted by badbarky on November 13, 2009 at 1:29 PM

Need a new slog category: Two-block doughnut hole

Seriously, the only offense made by the Times here is trying to gin up traffic on their Facebook page. Not that Slog would know anything about that.

Posted by Punditwatch on November 13, 2009 at 1:35 PM

What's the big deal? Doesn't the Stranger post obnoxious and offensive polls?

Posted by BarfBarf on November 13, 2009 at 1:36 PM

I think the Times - just upstaged you guys - he should die naked and erect and orgasmic, then submit the tape to the HUMP contest.

Dom, really honey, moral compass now too ...

Posted by Ace, number One on November 13, 2009 at 1:37 PM

Who knew high school drop outs were legal experts? It's so funny every time Dominic puts on his "lawyer hat." Hey Dominic, did you go to law school with Orly Taitz? Stick to what you know: Smoking weed, embracing your own ignorance, and staying paranoid.

Posted by Keep the entertainment coming, Mr. Esquire on November 13, 2009 at 1:54 PM

So cute when stranger staff call others out on lax journalistic ethics.

Pot, meet kettle.

Posted by Rotten666 on November 13, 2009 at 1:54 PM

Fair trial, anyone? Prosecutor Satterberg and police investigators have hopeless tainted the jury pool here in Puget Sound country by releasing and discussing all the damning evidence they have accumulated.

However much evidence we have that he "dunnit", he's not going to plead guilty to a capital offense. There WILL be a trial, and at one time I thought that public officials like Satterberg and the SPD were interested in having fair trials for all, no matter how brutal the crime.

Guess I was wrong.

Posted by Citizen R on November 13, 2009 at 2:06 PM

What is the stranger's position on the death penalty? I appreciate that Dominic -and indeed anyone- is entitled to their own opinion and expressing it, and that that is a blog rather than the actual paper, but just wondering. Were there to be a referendum on the death penalty what would the stranger endorse?

Posted by Foonken on November 13, 2009 at 2:12 PM

You can only vote if you are a Fan of Seattle Times.

Hmm.

Posted by Will in Seattle

on November 13, 2009 at 2:19 PM

Is declaring people "human scum" helpful in some way? It does show that you are tough, though, right?

Posted by Quincy on November 13, 2009 at 2:25 PM

They just took it down.

Posted by Joe

on November 13, 2009 at 2:37 PM

What I find interesting is that the life of one male police officer is obviously considered to be worth so much more than the lives of 50 female prostitutes. I haven't heard one person bring that up. If we didn't kill the Green River Killer, why are we going to kill this guy?

Posted by MLP on November 13, 2009 at 2:47 PM

@16, isn't the reason the GRK didn't get the death penalty because he gave information regarding unsolved murders in return for the state taking execution off the table? The death penalty is used as a bargaining chip far more than it is used to actually kill convicted criminals. While I personally don't support the death penalty, I don't think it has anything to do with how "important" prostitutes vs. cops are.

Posted by lily on November 13, 2009 at 3:06 PM

@16 - what I find interesting is that we have a giant funeral and death penalty trial for one police officer while HUNDREDS of brave soldiers are being shot at or blown up and nobody cares.

Never mind the fact that up to half the people on death row have been released once they do DNA evidence.

Posted by Will in Seattle

on November 13, 2009 at 3:50 PM

@18 - amen.
@17 - you are right about the facts, wish I could agree with your conclusion.

Posted by MLP on November 13, 2009 at 4:14 PM

I just wish every murder case in WA had this relevance and coverage.

Posted by oh_man on November 13, 2009 at 5:44 PM

Word to @10.

You are entitled to a fair trial by a criminal court. You are not entitled to a fair trial in the press, or the court of public opinion.

Posted by David Wright on November 13, 2009 at 6:28 PM