Seattle Police Release Dashcam Video Of Woodcarver's Shooting

[saxon]

So as a society we don't give LEO's the authority to stop people when they see fit.

according the the constitution and bill of right NO we dont give them or government that ability

 

[dmancornell]

Cops Kill Man, Raid Wrong House


yes even in the middle of the night submit or get killed

Or they raid the wrong house, the homeowner rightfully responds, and the state tries a second time to murder him using the "legal system":

Cory Maye - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

 

[BSG 75]

Heaven forbid the officer made the choice to go home at the end of his shift.

If "going home at the end of his shift" is an officer's top priority then he should find a different line of work, or else more citizens will be needlessly killed. Thank goodness firefighters don't put their personal safety above putting out fires and rescuing citizens in danger.

Lets flip the situation around, since this a poor partially deaf DRUNK non english speaking man IS SO INNOCENT. Lets say he was drunk on your porch with the knife and a piece of wood and you're walking up to your porch saw the knife and started issuing commands to drop the knife, leave and or get on the ground and he turned toward you with knife in hand WHAT WOULD YOU DO?

Not even a close analogy. Reasonable people see the difference between someone walking on a public street minding his own business and someone on your porch.

He was told a FEW times to drop the knife, he did not comply. Training kicks in, what is the officers learned response to a subject not willing to comply holding a knife? To hit the bad guy get off me button repeatedly.

It seems pretty simple COMPLY with the officers commands or reap the consequences.

How can you comply with a command that you don't hear? Failure to comply with an officer's command in and of itself is not a justification for an officer to use deadly force. If an officer commands you to produce proof of insurance at a traffic stop and you don't hear him, is it then reasonable for an officer to shoot you?

 

[BSG 75]

Someone wrote "Why did the officer not maintain a safe distance if he felt the man was a threat? And so on..." You dont win a fight backing up and I think training has been switched up a little and you go to the fight. Not sit back and wait for some idiot to start killing more people.

Win a fight? What fight? John T. Williams wasn't fighting anyone. Even the police have stated that Williams did not assault or even advance towards Birk.

Actually, this person who said he is a former Seattle Police officer said sit and wait for backup is exactly what Birk should have done.

The intersection of life came together this day, strangely enough at the intersection of Howell and Boren.

It's unfortunate that this incident occurred as it did. While the facts continue to emerge it's difficult to look beyond the following facts that we the public already know.
As a former officer for SPD and I quote:

RCW.9A.16.010, also known as the Revised Code of Washington, defines the legal definition of necessary force in these words:

No reasonably effective alternative to the use of force appeared to exist and the amount of force used was reasonable to effect the lawful purpose intended.

Each and every Washington state police candidate (recruit) entering the Washington State Criminal Justice Training Center, aka the police academy, learns and memorizes the definition of necessary during the criminal law aspect of their training. They're tested on it, and required to commit it to memory word for word. This law provides perhaps one of the strongest foundations of any officer's legal authority regarding the use of force.

As a former LE officer, one that served the citizens of the wonderful city of Seattle for many years, it pains me to say this but it should be fairly obvious to any reasonable person its painfully clear that, to quote the law, "alternatives appeared to exist" on this day at the intersection of Howell and Boren.

There are glaring elements that both any trained observer or an untrained observer should find in this incident which are very obvious.

The first of which is, Assistant Chief Metz during the news conference declared Officer Birk as a 2 year veteran officer with an excellent record. Clearly he and the department know that one can serve for several years on the department, yet they'll still lack the experience that a truly veteran officer would bring to the identical situation. It's common knowledge on any PD that it takes an average of 5 years of service in this vocation to begin to feel comfortable and experienced. I'd hardly classify a 2 year officer as a "veteran" for at what point is an officer not a "veteran?" If Ofc Birk would have 6 months of service would he have said he was a 6 month veteran of the department? Clearly, it appears that A. C. Metz chose those adjective to describe Ofc Birk with the intent to eliminate the perception that this incident occurred with one of SPD's inexperienced officers. I say that because clearly an assistant chief with 28 years of experience, that he so noted during the conference, knows that two years is not a vast amount of time to serve on the streets policing. Had the victim (I'll purposely call him that as opposed as suspect), encountered a more experienced officer at Howell and Boren on that day it is highly likely we'd not be mourning the loss of one of Seattle's homeless, and more than that, the needless loss of human life.

I'm certain many officers would take aim at me for playing Monday morning quarterback in this situation, but all officers do this when any incident occurs. It happens at every precinct whenever there's a major incident. We're people first before we're officers. Personally, I prefer the truth coming out regardless of how the department feels it will reflect upon them.

It's my belief that on average an experienced officer encountering this situation would have observed the victim crossing the street carrying the same knife, called it in to radio requesting backup, watched the individual from a safe distance until his backup arrived before considering approaching him. And even if he/she chose to approach him before backup arrived you learn from experience to use your patrol vehicle as a barrier of protection. No 3 inch blade is going to harm you with a patrol vehicle between you and any suspect.

The following should be further noted. Young officers, and some veteran's too, when faced with stressful situations have a tendency to RUSH IN. Vocationally officers know it as: Rush in Roulette. Nothing good generally results when officers don't take better use of time. Time, if the situation allows for it, is always one of any officers greatest assets. Some situations do require immediate attention. This clearly was not one of those situations. And frankly AC Metz, and Chief Diaz both know that. Who doesn't recall 15 plus years ago the video footage of a sword carrying mental male walking through an area of Seattle center while countless officers followed in an attempted foot barrier establishing a perimeter between he and any other potential person for endless blocks? I didn't agree with that shoot either, but that's another story. This I cannot remain silent for. This did not, should not have happened.

SPD officers are trained both at the academy and on the streets dealing with mentally ill individuals, especially in the central district where a large majority of homeless people live. Additionally every officer working the street knows from training and experience that the self defense weapon of choice for those who live on the street is an edged weapon. One encounters edged weapons commonly, thus your radar is in tune to anticipate them. So it should have been no surprise to this officer when he viewed what appeared as a street person carrying a knife. His response to viewing that knife in plain view could not be construed as anything but the response rooted in a lack of experience. Clearly Ofc Birk had many options available to him. It's my sincere belief it was Ofc Birks lack of experience that contributed towards circumstances that quickly spun out of control in less than 60 seconds.

Every experienced driver knows the reputation intersections have for traffic accidents. When an accident occurs at an intersection an investigation determines who is the party at fault. Fault is determined by the standard could you have done anything differently to have avoided the accident? It will be interesting to observe how SPD handles what I observe as a clear cut case of a young officer who overreacted to a situation where no one was in danger, yet he rushed in and contributed to a situation that quickly escalated from a casual street crossing to taking that persons life. That's not to say a veteran officer couldn't have reacted the same way, but it's very likely he or she would have heard a voice in their head that allowed them to further examine their options, or in the very least to recall that academy training definition of necessary they were required to commit to memory...do options exist? Clearly, at this intersection on this day they did.

My heartfelt condolences to the victims family. And too to Ofc Birk, for he will have to carry the fateful events of this day with him for the rest of his life. They will haunt him. There's no escaping that.

I'm not so certain SPD is being as forthcoming about this case as they'd like the citizens of Seattle to believe. The department generally has a 'circle the wagons' response when one of their own does something questionable. You could easily see that in the defensive posture and body language of ***'t Chief Clark Kimmerer who didn't say a word, yet his body language speaks loudly. ***'t Chief Metz, as fine an officer as he is, too was clearly on the defense. It's too early to tell just yet. I trust the department will let the true facts reveal themselves and allow the citizens of this city truly see what type of police department they have. Seattle you've got outstanding officers on this department...a few bad apples too. It's no different than any large department across the country. Some officers would give there lives to protect a citizens life in a moments notice without so much as blinking an eye. I know that for a fact because I worked side by side with many of them. Please keep that in mind too whilst you continue to follow the investigation surrounding this incident.

Let the truth shine a light on this department today, now, and always, for the truth sets us all free.

Thank you Seattle.

Witness disputes police account of fatal shooting | Seattle Times Newspaper

 

[JRV]

If "going home at the end of his shift" is an officer's top priority then he should find a different line of work, or else more citizens will be needlessly killed. Thank goodness firefighters don't put their personal safety above putting out fires and rescuing citizens in danger.



Not even a close analogy. Reasonable people see the difference between someone walking on a public street minding his own business and someone on your porch.



How can you comply with a command that you don't hear? Failure to comply with an officer's command in and of itself is not a justification for an officer to use deadly force. If an officer commands you to produce proof of insurance at a traffic stop and you don't hear him, is it then reasonable for an officer to shoot you?

Someone walking down the street minding his business....LOL he was walking down the street with a open knife. Let me guess you are one of these OC advocates? So I guess if someone is just walking down the street carrying a gun its alright too?

As far as saying my analogy was way off. How about your car insurance analogy? Really? not hearing a officer ask for proof of insurance and turning towards a officer with a knife is way different.

As far as not worrying about going home at night. Yeah it should not be the only concern for an officer, but if it comes down to a guy using lethal force on a non complying person or not going home at night. The choice seems pretty easy.

 

[JRV]

according the the constitution and bill of right NO we dont give them or government that ability

So if we don't give them the authority to do the job they were hired for, next time you see a speeder pull them over....D.B.A.C

 

[dmancornell]

As far as not worrying about going home at night. Yeah it should not be the only concern for an officer, but if it comes down to a guy using lethal force on a non complying person or not going home at night. The choice seems pretty easy.

So essentially what you're saying is, the life of a civilian is worthless and he has no constitutional rights at all. :nuts:

 

[dmancornell]

So if we don't give them the authority to do the job they were hired for, next time you see a speeder pull them over....D.B.A.C

LOL "speeder", definition: a person who has the brains and courage to ignore a bureaucratic "speed limit" instituted by greedy bean-counters to steal money for government and continue employment for useless cops.

Usage: I speed, therefore I am.

 

[BSG 75]

Someone walking down the street minding his business....LOL he was walking down the street with a open knife.

Walking down the street in Seattle with a knife that has a blade that is less than 3.5" long is not against the law. Williams was a woodcarver, that's why he was carrying a knife, which was legal length.



So yes, he was walking down the street, not doing anything illegal, minding his own business when Officer Birk confronted and killed him.

As far as saying my analogy was way off. How about your car insurance analogy? Really? not hearing a officer ask for proof of insurance and turning towards a officer with a knife is way different.

My point, which it seems went over your head, was that failure to comply with an officer's command, especially if you didn't even hear it, does not automatically justify deadly force.

As far as not worrying about going home at night. Yeah it should not be the only concern for an officer, but if it comes down to a guy using lethal force on a non complying person or not going home at night. The choice seems pretty easy.

Again, non-compliance with any and all commands does not mean the officer has to kill the subject so the officer can "go home at night".

 

[MrNiceGuy]

but if it comes down to a guy using lethal force on a non complying person or not going home at night. The choice seems pretty easy.

And therein lies one of the many large flaws in your argument.

He was not faced with that decision.

It's about as valid as me saying he had the choice to order a large soda at wendy's or not go home that night.

He confronted a non violent law abiding person who did not threaten or pose a threat to him or anyone else in any way, got overzealous, and decided to fire without consideration for the circumstances or repercussions.

If this is an "easy choice" for you, than I hope you'll keep your interactions with the general public to a minimum...

Personally, I hope he'll spend a good amount of time in a 6'x9'.

 

[HahnsXD]

Someone walking down the street minding his business....LOL he was walking down the street with a open knife. Let me guess you are one of these OC advocates? So I guess if someone is just walking down the street carrying a gun its alright too?

Are you serious? Really? REALLY?!?!?!
Go read the constitution, you're a poor excuse for a gun owner.

I've been within close proximity of police officers a couple time in convenience stores while OCing and neither of them so much as said a word to me.


This guy was minding his own business, then this cop decides he's dangerous, so naturally the next thing he does is put himself within a dangerous distance of a guy with a (closed)knife, he gives a guy who can hardly hear him 7 seconds to comply then proceeds to shoot him in the right side as soon as he turns around. This was wrong from beginning to end.

 

[The B]

he's obviously a typically authoritarian, Constitution-hating bubblegum of a cop. don't waste your fingers on this cock holster.

 

[HahnsXD]

he's obviously a typically authoritarian, Constitution-hating bubblegum of a cop. don't waste your fingers on this cock holster.

Actually looking at his username again, I recognize him as the guy who basically runs the English Pit shooting range. I've "met" him before, not exactly a people person.
http://www.northwestfirearms.com/forum/outdoor-shooting-areas/25088-english-pit.html#post184770

 

[JRV]

Again, non-compliance with any and all commands does not mean the officer has to kill the subject so the officer can "go home at night".

No non compliance when you are holding a deadly weapon is just asking for a bad outcome.

 

[The B]

No non compliance when you are holding a deadly weapon is just asking for a bad outcome.

you're a complete idiot.

 

[JRV]

you're a complete idiot.

Yeah I'm the idiot, but you think the 7 seconds the guy had to comply wasnt long enough.

Or am I mistaken a knife can actually be used to kill someone....

 

[BSG 75]

Yeah I'm the idiot, but you think the 7 seconds the guy had to comply wasnt long enough.

Or am I mistaken a knife can actually be used to kill someone....

So can a baseball bat.

So imagine you were walking home from a softball game with your baseball bat, listening to an iPod (headphones attached to an AM/FM radio were found on Williams' body), and you are deaf in one ear. You are minding your own business and not breaking any laws or threatening anyone. Officer Birk comes up from behind you commanding you to drop the bat, but you don't hear him. You finally become aware that someone is yelling something from behind you, and as you turn to see who it is and what they are saying, you are shot several times until you are dead. No problem, because you didn't "comply"?

Even the Seattle PD doesn't agree with you. They found that the shooting was not justified and have collected Officer Birk's badge and gun. <broken link removed>

 

[The B]

Yeah I'm the idiot, but you think the 7 seconds the guy had to comply wasnt long enough.

Or am I mistaken a knife can actually be used to kill someone....

i can kill you just as easily with about half the things sitting in front of me on my desk, including this laptop.

i think it's about time you pop smoke. you're doing absolutely nothing but pissing everyone off, and quite deliberately. that's trolling.

 

[tac]

I guess that I'm listening to an echo, but I clearly hear FIVE shots fired. Not that it's anything but moot after the first four...

As for the guy being the RO at the English Pit Range, that's interesting. I recall going there a few years back when it was 'run' if that's the right word, by a guy who must have been kicked out of the Department of Correction Service for cruelty. I've never been yelled out so many times since I was a recruit.

I also recall the guy who took over [?] saying that he was going to put the past behind him and move into a more friendly and positive attitude to those visiting the range, and not treat everybody there as armed trespassers.

tac
Supporter of the Cape Meares Lighthouse Restoration Fund

 

[Trlsmn]

So as a society we don't give LEO's the authority to stop people when they see fit.

So next time you get pulled over if you don't think you did anything don't pull over, you don't have to submit

I think you are ignorant of the fact that police cannot pull over or stop people as they see fit, police must have a reason, look to your bill of rights. The United States is not a police state, the police are here to enforce laws, when no law is broken they have no right to stop anyone.

There is no law against having an open knife and whittling wood in Seattle so the cop was wrong.

United States Bill of Rights - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

You say a cop has a right to go home safe at the end of his shift? I say a whittler has a right to return home safe from whittling in public!