Features
Feb 24, 2011 at 4:00 am
King County Prosecutor Dan Satterberg Should Not Have Let Killer Cop Ian Birk Off the Hook
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
More importantly, this article underplays the most important part about this whole debacle. The likelihood of conviction is almost more important than the actual law, and the inquest showed what is generally true in the King County area: juries here do not like to convict cops in shootings. They just don't do it.
So if the issues mostly surround the wording of the law and jurors vehemently siding with police, sounds like the problem is more on our end than the judicial agencies.
As revolutions roll through Muslim world, I as an American literally afraid of getting shot for no reason by our own "boys in blue", and that kind of fear is non existent in most of those "tyrannical" regimes which are being toppled at this very moment.
Yep, keep on being the land of the free and all.
Thanks for reading my post.
I am a practicing criminal defense attorney, former state prosecutor, and Seattle resident.
The SPD knew Mr. Williams and so did Birk. Birk picked the fight and then acted horribly. I'm shure he collected more than a few atta-boys from his fellow officers. Now he gets to collect retirement at public expense. And Mr. Williams paid the price.
Then Satterberg declares the inquest split jury is indicative of the case not being prosecutable. And Diaz delivers a public rebuke to Birk for not following training, after allowing his officers to testify to the opposite.
This is how they meant it to happen.
As someone asked above, HOW can WE change this law?
I seriously don't know how to make this law go away, an initiative? Calls to Olympia?
If anyone knows how to do this, please post it here.
I want to make it so if (more likely WHEN) this happens again, the police won't walk free.
Thank you
If the city were more respectful of authority (HA...the antithesis of Seattle...sayin')and ACTUALLY back up their policemen...then they would not feel so threatened.
Perhaps if this IDIOT had not exited his car with a KNIFE, he would still be alive...Darwinism in action my friends.
Of course there are rafts of people in Seattle just looking for a cause...the local cop suffices...how about what BHO has done to economy...hmmm, just can't get behind that one huh?
hipsters....
But there are also those that really do want to make a difference.
You've never met one, or have known one of these? If not, then I can see and empathize with your sentiments...but they do not apply to all cops.
If your community has the proper review board (made up of citizens), then the bad ones will surface and be eliminated.
The hatred you spout only infects and is a waste of energy.
Why not "confront" what the Neo-Chimp is doing to our nation...BHO is a slut.
"The grim but statistically inescapable fact is that the average American is much more likely to be killed by a cop than by a terrorist."
http://freedominourtime.blogspot.com/201…
So they get killed more often.
Lower crime, lower the killing.
For the prosecutor to say Birk intended no malice, thus he cannot prosecute, is to absolve the prosecutors office of any responsibility. Â A man was gunned down by a bad cop, and no one did anything wrong, no one is responsible. Â Decent people would be resigning.
At the very least the law should be changed so Satterberg’s private preference of interpretation of the law cannot be read to allow murder, if by cop.
The heart of the problem is the transformation in policing from constabulary to paramiltary force that took place over the last 50 years, starting in Los Angeles, and worked its way into Seattle. The law Satterberg cites is an example of the change. It took us 50 years to get to the place where a dead Indian on a Seattle sidewalk is no problem for a police officer, because paramilitary policing is the wrong policy and attracts the wrong people to law enforcement, and these things take time. But enough of us recall a constabulary police to where we could return to that better way in a mere months, with a few changes. McGlinn, Satterberg and Diaz must go.
For the prosecutor to say Birk intended no malice, thus he cannot prosecute, is to absolve the prosecutors office of any responsibility. Â A man was gunned down by a bad cop, and no one did anything wrong, no one is responsible. Â Decent people would be resigning.
At the very least the law should be changed so Satterberg’s private preference of interpretation of the law cannot be read to allow murder, if by cop.
The heart of the problem is the transformation in policing from constabulary to paramiltary force that took place over the last 50 years, starting in Los Angeles, and worked its way into Seattle. The law Satterberg cites is an example of the change. It took us 50 years to get to the place where a dead Indian on a Seattle sidewalk is no problem for a police officer, because paramilitary policing is the wrong policy and attracts the wrong people to law enforcement, and these things take time. But enough of us recall a constabulary police to where we could return to that better way in a mere months, with a few changes. McGlinn, Satterberg and Diaz must go.
One condition you left out in your third paragraph is that Williams had a blood alcohol level of .18, which is more that twice the legal limit for driving. Why did you leave this out? This fact certainly had a consequence on the outcome of this sorry incident.
Of course you would run to the KKK and uneducated as your first card to throw...which is really your version of the RACE CARD.
If I didn't know you were koolaid drinkers...your responses give you away.
You got that right!
Well, they learn from the best.
NEO-CHIMP rails against the Cambridge police but says nothing about wussy black panthers carrying clubs to intimidate voters.
A lib can not help themselves...they is what they is.
You obviously have your heros (and you REALLY need evidence on the club carriers...are you dense...been watching the liberal media anytime in the last two years???)...but try to tell me who mine ought to be...and it isn't who you described.
You have a problem with the result of this? Talk to the inquest jurors, and every other juror on every cop-shooting case in the last 20 years in this county that found them all not-guilty (i.e. your friends). Talk to city council, county council and state legislators that make these laws, and get them changed.
All of you harping about the politicized nature of the county prosecutor, consider that CONVICTION is the outcome measurement, which is dependent on 1) the law, 2) existing evidence, 3) jurors, 4) competency of the legal professionals. The Prosecutor's office has control over 4) only, and you can be damn sure that if this came up under anyone other than Satterberg, they would have come to the same conclusion.
Blame the right people, here, folks.
"Basically, as the law is written, if you're an on-duty officer and the shooting's not intentional, and you're not reckless, then you're not guilty..."
"and the shooting's not intentional"?
That statement fatally contradicts the body copy and thesis of the article.
If Satterberg doesn't think the case should be charged, he's probably right.
Manslaughter would be fairly easy to convict Birk of. As to the state law he was citing that would in his view point give Carte Blanche to all officers, Satterberg ignored the "Good Faith" portion and focused only upon the "Malice" portion. "Good Faith" was shattered by the numerous breaches of protocols and simple common sense.
First, Birk did not call in that he was going to confront someone. Second, he had his gun out while getting out of his vehicle. Third, and most damning, he shot the man in the back. There was no way that Williams could have been threatening Birk or anyone else as Birk was the closest to him at well over 10 feet and Williams was not even facing him. "Good Faith" requires that was operating within proper procedures. Birk did not on multiple counts and should be charged with Manslaughter.
Well played, asshole.
Birk was an idiot. He made a mistake, and proved that he should not have been given a gun in the first place, but the moment this went beyond wanting to take Birk to trial, the protesters proved themselves to be as dumb as any of the stump-jumping right-wingers they get upset over.
The last time I saw Williams alive, he was pissing in the street in the middle of a Saturday afternoon on Broadway. None of you would have given him the change in your pocket, and I doubt many of you would have reacted better than Birk did if (you perceived that) he pulled a knife on you.
So why is the crowd calling for dead cops? Why are people breaking windows and harassing officers on the street? Why does The Stranger insist on feeding this frenzy with a rash of sensationalist articles and ZERO FUCKING INFORMATIVE CONTENT? All they have to do is print up a "Are you pissed at your local elected officials? Here's how to effect change" bit.
Will it happen? Probably not. It's much easier to be stupid and angry than it is to do anything useful or good.
Don't tote a badge and a gun if you cant handle the drunks with issues as well the rest of the morons who have been brain washed into believing that Obama will save them from the cruel cruel world?
anyone who knows anything about Birk and Williams knows why Birk pumped 4 fast ones into Williams and why he was wrong to do so but at the same time understands why people can do something wrong on a bad day.
The Williams crowd knows dam good and well that Williams drunk mouth was writing checks that his ass could not cash?
The Birk crowd knows dam good and well that the police had forgone the professional tactical concept of understanding real time situations for basic violence and brutality that makes a job faster and easy.
So you have it! a drunk who was spouting threats and viol garbage at heavily armed unprofessional stressed out government failures?
In the seconds before the death happened both were filled anger and hate and ignorance and in the seconds after the shooting they both knew what bad mistakes they both had made.
It cost one his life and it cost one his soul and well being.
in the aftermath the same hate and anger is Field into more hate and anger as its simply the Media maggots way of making Drama the American Way.
They obviously have a ton of public support, and the sooner we get together and take action the better. This tragedy has built a lot of momentum, let's make sure John's death was not in vain and see that the law is changed now!
Let's make sure John's death was not in vain.
Also I'd like to share something:
I worked at the building where John Williams lived. I remember him well, and as soon as I learned it was him who was shot by police I was suspicious. You see, John was barely ambulatory. When he came through the door people behind him would get angry because he took so long just to come inside. But I'd never seen him angry himself, never violent. He was a very damaged individual but his spirit was incredibly positive for all he'd been through.
I remember one time in particular when he was sitting in the lobby with his brothers, waiting on a friend to come downstairs. There was an awkward pause in their conversation, you know, the kind that just happens. John out of nowhere started laughing a bit, and then his brother did, then the other one. Pretty soon us behind the desk started laughing to and then the whole room was laughing, his friend came downstairs and had no idea, started cracking up to. Everybody cracking up and nobody had any idea why, it was awesome. That was John. He was a good man, barely hanging on but still full of life. That was the guy Ian Birk murdered.
@40: So apparently the right to keep and bear arms only applies as long as you're not talking shit. What a scholar we have here!
0/10 troll, would not feed again.
A cop tossing a family heirloom on the ground and watching it bounce down a sewer hole can really make people go crazy?
Even the video shows the knife is with a piece of wood and yet Birk has his gun at the ready as he "swaggers" like he is walking up to a fine piece of ass?
changing "a law" will not change a damed thing!
We have not heard the real reason why Birk shot Williams and we have not heard why Williams may have had any reason "If any" to provoke Birk.
But ah yea! Charley Chan know better than that?
Some big hush hush by SPD as they say they don't know anything? as in they know nothing? as in they don't have any records of anything about anything?
To the fact they contradict them selfs on SOP every dam incident that happens?
City hall only tries to cover its ass as SPD prances around with the "He looked at me angry so I shot him 4 times in rapid secession" story.
They offer some lame ass excuse how the people can win by changing some law that basically states Malice?
4 shots in 3 seconds is Malice to kill?
The excuse was he looked at me angry and did not drop a knife?
The totem poles have more brains and see more!
The Tea Party hasn't been known for good behavior, and the Black Panther "security patrol" said to have intimidated voters was stationed in an overwhelmingly black neighborhood that had consistently voted D. You mad.
And your trolling sucks. Before you pull off any quality trolling, pigs will fly, hell will freeze over, and Zelda will become a girl.
Why not take it line by line, and eviscerate it with simple logic?
Why do you take their convenient (for them) shorthand definition of "malice" when it's clearly defined already under RCW, and affects the entire balance of your dicussion of that subject? RCW clearly states malice can be inferred from an act.
Why do you not mention that since malice is only one of two tests required by the law, that proving either it OR bad faith is sufficient... instead you parrot Satterberg's office's "we would have to prove evil intent", with "no counterpoint", just as you accuse NWCN of doing.
Why do you not mention that the nonbinding inquest jury findings that Satterberg "relied" on were tainted by SPD testimony that was contradicted by the FRB, but only after it was all over?
If this is the strongest challenge to Satterberg that the press can (i.e., is willing) to muster, journalism is dead.
Further on some of my above points, if anyone is interested (dated 6 days before Cienna's article, FWIW):
http://community.seattletimes.nwsource.c…
Now it appears native Americans are being made into the Jews...
In fact, there have been four thirty year periods of war since 1455. The first was, peculiarly, entirely within England; it was called "The War of the Roses".
The second, almost certain caused by something learned in the first, was called THE Thirty Years War, to distinguish it from roses.
The third was when England divorced itself from the inevitable conflicts in North America between English, French and Spanish colonists. Cleverly, it guaranteed predominance to English speaking people by terribly opposing exactly English documents that included the Declaration of Independence and the Constitution.
The fourth ostensibly started with the assassination of Duke Ferdinand of Austria and his wife in Sarajevo in 1914... and quickly erupted into the period of war mentioned above.
These three wars each spanned three decades, the orbital period of Saturn, anciently used by Romans to finesse dimwitted barbarian hordes.
They occurred at intervals of just about 165 years apart, the orbital period of Neptune which had been surmised by Galileo.
That does not make it certain the next 30 year period of grief will not happen sooner if it is convenient to entities that instigate war abroad, just as long as it does not happen to them.
Anyway, here's the timetable:
The War of the Roses in England between the Houses of Lancaster and York (1455-1485) (Neptune crosses GC 1489)
163 years
The Thirty Years War, vague religious wars, throughout Europe (1618-1648) (Neptune crosses GC 1654)
158 years
American War of Independence from Great Britain (1776-1812) (Neptune crosses GC 1819)
137 years
The First and Second World Wars, viewed as one (1913-1945) (Neptune crosses GC 1984)
http://www.birkaction.com/satterberg.htm…
Dude. You are banned from the internet now.
I mean, that's only one of the oldest trolls in the book.
You hurt my feeling.
Too bad the truth hurt so some ignorants. Did you happen to catch the dead guy had previously threatened to KILL POLICE...and had over 30 arrests.
Still want to defend your HERO?
I am a first nation and there are indians that need help...this guy had a death wish...and now he has morons defending his pathetic life.
Soldier of Misfortune...get a cause, get out of Seattle, get lost...asshole.
hoka hey my ass, all people involved in this case are grade A cowards from that CUNT birk to the pussy Indians. disgusting. I'm sick of it all. not one fucking true leader amongst them all just fear sucking cowards. blah.
What a waste of a good Cote de Provence.
I believe that Mr. Birk, without this law, would be charged with and convicted of manslaughter, or reckless homicide. That, however, is what the state law is designed to prevent.
No. In fact, in the Everett (Meade) case in 2009, a range of charges including both manslaughter and murder were explicitly made available to the jury.
Malice does NOT have to be proven to get around the justifiable homicide law -- how do you read that into it? Malice OR a lack of good faith -- either one.
Even Satterberg himself acknowledged this in his written statement, though admittedly, he hid it away. Maybe he hoped nobody would see it.
The state law is not "designed to prevent" a manslaughter conviction - that's utter nonsense.
You could really benefit by carefully reading the following, and the supporting documents:
http://www.birkaction.com/satterberg.htm…
Police know this: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9igSoJHEd…
And fear this: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FL1zX-SrB…
John was known for having his carving knife. He was not known for having a gun. If anything, that video on Channel 13 showed what assholes the cops were by harassing him at every opportunity. Keep in mind it's the same station that SAT on the Shandy Cobane video when he kicked the Mexican guy's head! THEY compiled the video to try to paint John in as bad of light as possible. All they showed was cops harassing a sometimes homeless drunk.
I say this as a staff member of Chief Seattle Club- someone who knew the victim, the late John T. Williams. I want to make a clarification, you mention that "Perhaps if this IDIOT had not exited his car with a KNIFE, he would still be alive...Darwinism in action my friends."
He did not exit a vehicle, he was walking across the street in a cross walk, carving. Which is a legal activity. He made no attempt to lunge at the officer, he was not acting in a suspicious or violent way. Your comments show that survival of the fittest does not in fact, play a part in our sociaty today...Since you are obviously an idiot yourself.
I say this as a staff member of Chief Seattle Club- someone who knew the victim, the late John T. Williams. I want to make a clarification, you mention that "Perhaps if this IDIOT had not exited his car with a KNIFE, he would still be alive...Darwinism in action my friends."
He did not exit a vehicle, he was walking across the street in a cross walk, carving. Which is a legal activity. He made no attempt to lunge at the officer, he was not acting in a suspicious or violent way. Your comments show that survival of the fittest does not in fact, play a part in our sociaty today...Since you are obviously an idiot yourself.