JavaScript is disabled
Our website requires JavaScript to function properly. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser settings before proceeding.
This from the story:

KOMO News reported that while hiking, the young couple stated they heard growling, so they fired a gun toward the noise. The pair found Christensen and his dog dead, but continued on their hike and left the next day.

WTF?!
Fired toward a "noise" then found the guy and his dog dead and just kept hiking? I seldom believe much of what I read in the "news" these days over stuff just like this. I have to hope this is NOT quite how this all went down. If it really is? Again WTF? Are they trying to tell me if this same couple heard a noise in there yard and fired through a door at home and killed someone on the other side the law would just shrug and let them walk? I have to hope to hell there is a lot more we are not being told here.
 
Rest assured though if you shoot someone beating your baby with a club, you will be charged with murder, possession of a weapon of mass destruction (revolver), etc.

Meanwhile these two kids shot, irresponsibly at that, a man and his dog, and claim they shot at a growling noise. The evidence that supposedly doesn't exists clearly shows their story is bs.
 
Kids have political connections? Members of a privileged class?

They admitted being present. They admitted they had a gun and admitted firing (in fact, firing highly accurate "sound shots"; they would certainly be a welcome addition in any deer camp :rolleyes:). They admitted they found the bodies but did not report this to anyone.

Surely the authorities took their gun for ballistic processing?

How could there not be enough evidence to prosecute for at least negligent homicide? I wonder how soon the wrongful death lawsuit will be heard in court.
 
Kids have political connections? Members of a privileged class?

They admitted being present. They admitted they had a gun and admitted firing (in fact, firing highly accurate "sound shots"; they would certainly be a welcome addition in any deer camp :rolleyes:). They admitted they found the bodies but did not report this to anyone.

Surely the authorities took their gun for ballistic processing?

How could there not be enough evidence to prosecute for at least negligent homicide? I wonder how soon the wrongful death lawsuit will be heard in court.
I wonder if the victim's family has a member in it that will dish out Justice James Reece style, regardless of what the cops, courts, or the system says…
 
That short KATU article doesn't cover the whole story. According to the county prosecuter, charges weren't brought mainly due to the incompetence of the Lewis County Sheriff's dept. Also the forensic pathologist who first claimed a heart attack. The Centralia Chronicle has been doing in depth reporting on this as per this report.....

 
That short KATU article doesn't cover the whole story. According to the county prosecuter, charges weren't brought mainly due to the incompetence of the Lewis County Sheriff's dept. Also the forensic pathologist who first claimed a heart attack. The Centralia Chronicle has been doing in depth reporting on this as per this report.....

Sure sounds like a monumental amount of incompetence all around. :(
 
That short KATU article doesn't cover the whole story. According to the county prosecuter, charges weren't brought mainly due to the incompetence of the Lewis County Sheriff's dept. Also the forensic pathologist who first claimed a heart attack. The Centralia Chronicle has been doing in depth reporting on this as per this report.....

Holy hell. Looks like fabrication to me. A tree branch punctures the dog and the man? Give me a break.

Kid says he shot at the dark at growling animal and then found a dead man there. Oh yea kid must have had nothing to do with it (sarcasm). He tells the sheriff this then sheriff finds he must have been punctured by a tree branch. Ridiculous. So the bullet that was in him was from some past shooting or something? The medical examiner could not tel the difference between a gunshot wound and a tree puncture? Then they say it was a heart attack that killed him. Those guys should all be in jail for this coverup.

That sheriff and the whole group, especially the pathologist and medical examiner should be investigated. This is ridiculous. So because of who his father is the kid gets off Scott free. That's just wrong.

1FE9611E-CE36-4E8F-AE6A-9FD983D4A9AA.jpeg
 
Yeah, first poked with a tree branch. Then maybe laced marijuana. Then heart attack. Finally the bullet hole. After the kid fessed up and bullet forensics confirmed him as the shooter, some Sherlock Holmes in the Sheriff's Dept finally put two and two together. Between the incompetent Sheriff and initial pathologist, the evidence on this was so botched the County DA didn't have enough to bring charges. No day in court for the victim and his family.
 
Yeah, first poked with a tree branch. Then maybe laced marijuana. Then heart attack. Finally the bullet hole. After the kid fessed up and bullet forensics confirmed him as the shooter, some Sherlock Holmes in the Sheriff's Dept finally put two and two together. Between the incompetent Sheriff and initial pathologist, the evidence on this was so botched the County DA didn't have enough to bring charges. No day in court for the victim and his family.
Personally I think this is not incompetence. I think it's small town politics. Here's what I mean, some kid comes to you and says "I heard growling on the trail and fired a shot into the dark. Then I went to investigate and found a dead man and dog where i shot". Of course the first thing you, or any reasonable person much less someone in law enforcement, would think of is I wonder if he shot the guy.

Then sheriff goes out finds the shot man and dog and concludes he somehow got poked by a tree? Was there a bloody branch sticking out of his chest or other evidence of such a wild claim, no. Was he riding a horse or fell off a cliff so as to be impaled by the non existent tree branch? no. And the branch happened to go through his dog and him both? That defies all credibility. How could he think the gunshot and the man in the area of the shot weren't related? Then the changing stories as people do when they are caught in a lie.

I think sheriff and others intentionally botched it so evidence would be tainted enough to not convince the favored family son. But enough evidence for petty crimes. Or if it wasn't intentionally botched it was a cover story that fell through, then changed to another one, which fell though. The end result is the same either way: not enough acceptable evidence to convict.

I know how small town politics work. That sheriff may owe his job to the kids dad, related via marriage, friends with, related, etc. Its how many small towns work unfortunately. And it's totally wrong. Sheriff could have been thinking he didn't want to ruin the favored family kid's life over this, when it was a stranger that died by "accident". This whole thing just reeks of protecting that kid and a series of BS stories to do it. I hope the truth comes out. Perhaps though a civil case against the kid and sheriff and whoever else was in on the cover up, who knows.
 
Last Edited:
Seems pretty amazing that deputy Andrew Scrivner could come upon a dead guy and dead dog both with holes in them in close proximity to each other out in the woods and come to the conclusion that "nothing suspicious here".

If it's not a cover up what else could it possibly be?
 
coming from a small town and having more than my share of run-ins with the local yocals, I can guarantee you that privilege is playing a part in this. been there, done that, have the T-shirt.
 

Upcoming Events

Oregon Arms Collectors April 2024 Gun Show
Portland, OR
Centralia Gun Show
Centralia, WA
Albany Gun Show
Albany, OR
Falcon Gun Show - Classic Gun & Knife Show
Stanwood, WA
Wes Knodel Gun & Knife Show - Albany
Albany, OR

New Resource Reviews

New Classified Ads

Back Top