Crime Watch court updates: Gatewood arson, Junction threat cases

| Crime | West Seattle fires | West Seattle news

Two updates for the court files (speaking of which, if you are following the Steve Bushaw murder trial, it’s in recess till Wednesday):

(June 28th photo courtesy Kathryn)
GATEWOOD ARSON: September 7th is now set as the trial date for 40-year-old John C. Siegel, arrested at the scene of the June 28th arson at a home he co-owned near Orchard Street Ravine and charged days later with setting it as an act of domestic violence, as well as with violating a court order. Court documents indicate that Siegel, who is a lawyer, is now representing himself in the case (though he has requested “standby backup counsel”). He’s due in court this Friday morning for a hearing to determine if everyone involved is indeed ready to go to trial. Siegel also has filed a handwritten motion seeking a separate jury proceeding on the “aggravating factor” that is alleged in the crime – that he committed it shortly after being released from jail (as reported here previously, he got out May 20th after a plea bargain on charges involving domestic violence and threatening a judge). Siegel contends that having the “rapid recidivism” aspect brought up in the main case would be prejudicial to that jury; prosecutors have responded that they believe the issue should be “reserved for the trial court” to decide. Siegel remains in jail, in lieu of $1 million bail.

Another case we’ve been following is now closed – plea made, time served:

(June 17th photo by Christopher Boffoli for WSB)
JUNCTION THREAT: 20-year-old Chriss Arce, arrested on June 17th for an incident that started in West Seattle Computers in The Junction and ended with him allegedly pulling a gun on the store’s owner, was sentenced last Friday, after a plea bargain in July. Arce was originally charged with assault; according to court records, he pleaded guilty July 20th to a reduced charge of harassment. The sentence ordered by Judge Patrick Oishi on Friday: 34 days in jail, which is equal to the time he served between his June arrest and being released on July 22nd.

K August 15, 2011 (2:13 pm)

It might be worth noting that Siegel’s licence to practice in the State of Washington is currently suspended. It won’t stop him from representing himself, but it does make you wonder…

Dave August 15, 2011 (2:30 pm)

Pull a gun on a store owner: Serve 34 days. Why the plea deal?

onceachef August 15, 2011 (3:40 pm)

34 days? I’m sure he learned his lesson, being so hard and all…what a joke!

msc August 15, 2011 (4:16 pm)

Remember Judge Patrick Oishi when election time comes. 34 days, I agree, it’s a joke. What’s to stop him from doing it again?

Wendell August 15, 2011 (5:17 pm)

34 Days. The law is an Arce.

Emmyjane August 15, 2011 (6:13 pm)

Wow, 34 days. Hey thanks judge for putting him back into the community!

waterworld August 16, 2011 (10:55 am)

It’s worth reading the officer’s affidavit before deciding that the outcome in this case is outrageous. The detective says that the store clerk (or owner, it’s not clear to me) reported that Arce was behaving suspiciously in the store. The clerk/owner asked Arce to leave, which Arce did. Then the clerk/owner followed Arce out of the store and down the street.
.
At some point, Arce saw that he was being followed and turned around and yelled at the clerk/owner to stop following him. According to the clerk/owner, Arce turned back towards him, yelling about being followed, brought his backpack in front of himself and reached inside and pulled a handgun out halfway. Arce was (profanely) demanding to know why the clerk/owner was following him. The clerk/owner denied he was following Arce. The encounter ended without further misbehavior.
.
Arce wssn’t charged with possession of an unregistered firearm or with carrying a firearm without a concealed weapons permit, so I presume there was no violation of that sort. The encounter between the clerk/owner, assuming this is the way it happened, doesn’t amount to an assault. It’s understandable that the clerk/owner felt threatened when Arce partially displayed the handgun, which is why the charge of harassment is appropriate.
.
This may not change anyone’s opinion about whether the sentence was correct; it was certainly within the standard range set by the legislature. My point is that the incident appears to have been somewhat different from what was first indicated to the public.

Sorry, comment time is over.