Some new information in the deadly White Center shooting, after the first court appearance of the 25-year-old West Seattle man arrested less than 10 hours after it happened. We’ve just published the update on partner site White Center Now.
He sounds like a great guy – the shooter that is (sarcasm!)…good riddance…strike 5 or six apparently.
So where are all the “White Center people bring crime to West Seattle” commenters now?
Always a good reason not to leap to assumptions about residence, among other things. I am working on a followup re: the High Point accidental shooting the other night, and the suspect’s address is listed as Tukwila. – TR
@A: exactly waht came to mind when I saw this article. I agree with no leaping to assumptions.
“has six felony convictions for robbery, burglary, and auto theft…” Talk about a revolving door! What happened to three strikes? Too much crime is repeat offenders. We had him, we let him out and now another young life is lost. What a tragedy.
Regarding the shooter: “His ‘last known addres’ is listed as the High Point neighborhood of West Seattle.”
I was on jury duty recently where the defendant was serving time in a mental facility for his repeat crimes (burglary, robbery, etc) and was requesting to be released — not sure why he was in a hospital vs prison. The defendant’s attorney didn’t like that I felt repeat offenders were unsalvagable and she released me from duty. This guy in the shooting is exactly what I was referring to.
Uncle Joe: Regarding your “three strikes” question, not all felonies are “strikes.” It’s not clear from the statement about this guy’s record how many of his priors are strikes. Robbery in the first or second degree is a strike, but the others on that list are not. So if he has one strike already on his record, he will not face a sentence of mandatory life without parole, but his may be facing a very long sentence. If, on the other hand, two of his priors are strikes, then he potentially will be facing a sentence of life without the possibility of parole. So three strikes is alive and well.
.
Bianca: I don’t know exactly what your experience was with the defense attorney who “didn’t like” your feelings about repeat offenders. It would be the defense attorney’s job to seek removal of any potential juror who espoused views that suggested he or she would prejudge the defendant as being guilty simply because he had prior convictions (as opposed to finding him either guilty or not guilty based on the evidence related to the specific crime charged). In the same vein, it would be a prosecutor’s duty to seek removal of a potential juror who espoused views that suggested he or she would prejudge any testimony from SPD officers as being untruthful based on news stories about department policies. The prosecutor would want someone who would evaluate each officer’s testimony individually to determine if he was telling the truth.
.
None of this reflects the lawyers’ views about juror’s concerns about community safety, I don’t think. The lawyers should be focused on whether a juror will give his or her client a fair shake.
Sorry, comment time is over.
| 8 COMMENTS