West Seattle Crime Watch: More details on pellet-gun arrests

We’ve finally obtained the report on the drive-by pellet-gun-shooting arrests first reported here last week, when police arrested three 17-year-old boys after two people reported getting hit in Arbor Heights. Read on for the narrative, including one suspect allegedly admitting to police they had done this before:

This is a transcription of the police report, except for names and specific addresses; we are referring to the three suspects as Suspects 1, 2, and 3. (We usually do not identify any suspects who are not charged, and we will usually not identify suspects under 18 unless they are charged as adults.):

On August 18th at 2245 hours [the officer who wrote the report] responded to (11400 block of 37th SW) where (the victim) called in to report he had been shot in the chest by people in a vehicle. (He) told Dispatch it must have been a BB gun he was shot with and described the vehicle as a dark-colored 4-door, possibly a Nissan. (He) was unable to see inside the vehicle to see what the occupants looked like but could tell there were three people inside. At 2251 hours (another victim) called in to report he was walking at 35th/114th when he was shot at with a pellet or BB gun, again from people in a vehicle. (He) described the vehicle was a black Honda accord type vehicle that left NB on 35th SW. (He) also described two passengers as white males around 18-22 years old with short hair.

(An acting sergeant) saw a dark-colored vehicle driving northbound on 35th SW as he entered the vicinity of the call and also saw there were three occupants inside, all who matched the description of white males 18-22 with short hair. The vehicle was stopped at 10200 35th SW and (Suspects 1, 2, 3) were removed from the vehicle and an AR15 style airsoft rifle was removed as well. Suspect 1 was driving the vehicle with Suspect 2 in the passenger seat and Suspect 3 was in the back seat. The airsoft rifle was in the back seat with Suspect 3 and was covered up by a sweatshirt with the squirt gun filled with soda. All three were taken into custody at the scene. I asked Suspects 2 and 3 who was shooting the rifle and Suspect 2 said it wasn’t him. When I turned the question toward Suspect 3 he immediately stated he wanted a lawyer. I did not ask him any further questions pertaining to the investigation.

The report goes on to say the two victims were brought to the scene of the stop and identified the suspects and/or the vehicle. It continues:

(The three suspects) were all read their Miranda warning and transported to the Southwest Precinct from the scene. (An officer) impounded the vehicle at the scene.

Once at the SW Precinct (suspect 1) and (suspect 2) gave written statements. According to Suspect 1, this is not the first time they had driven around while Suspect 3 shoots at things from inside the vehicle with his airsoft rifle. Suspect 1 stated they had probably shot about 4-5 people that he knew about including the 2 people tonight. Tonight he was driving around with Suspect 2 and they picked up Suspect 3 from a house he was watching at around 9:10 pm. They went to McDonald’s, got food, then headed to the Arbor Heights area approximately an hour after he picked up Suspect 3. When they got in the area, Suspect 3 began shooting cars and when he would see a person he would ask if he should shoot them. Suspect 1 stated he didn’t answer and Suspect 3 would shoot at the people anyway. They drove around for an hour shooting cars, signs and people for an hour before being stopped by the police. Suspect 1 stated it was always Suspect 3 with the airsoft rifle and he was always the driver.

Suspect 2 said the same thing as Suspect 1 but could not remember any time frame. When they picked up Suspect 3, Suspect 2 knew he had the airsoft rifle and figured he had it so they could shoot at people. This was the second time Suspect 2 was with Suspect 1 and Suspect 3 while shooting at people. Suspect 2 was in the front passenger seat and did not know what Suspect 3 was shooting at but could hear the sounds of the gun firing. Suspect 2 stated he had a squirt gun full of soda he was squirting cars and signs. He stated he squirted soda at the pizza delivery boy … right before Suspect 3 shot him with the airsoft rifle. Suspect 2 could not remember much of the night, stating it was a blur.

(An officer) took a picture of the (pizza delivery person’s) injury. (An acting sergeant) submitted the photos, the airsoft rifle, two banana-style magazines, bb container, 1000 bb’s, and the squirt gun into evidence. Within the last few weeks there have been several calls about people being shot at from a bb gun and described the vehicle as a dark-colored 4-door.

All three were released to parents or guardians at the Southwest Precinct.

The report notes that police request charges of assault be filed against the three suspects. As of yesterday, the case had not yet been referred to the King County Prosecuting Attorney’s Office; we are checking again today and will continue to check.

23 Replies to "West Seattle Crime Watch: More details on pellet-gun arrests"

  • msc August 23, 2011 (4:38 pm)

    I think it was ridicules the punks were released to their parents! They were shooting a gun with intent to shoot people!

  • marty August 23, 2011 (5:01 pm)

    Dumb! Good thing they were stopped before someone lost an eye.

  • Wendell August 23, 2011 (5:23 pm)

    I like that each suspect has their IQ after their names. I wonder if the parents were the original suppliers of the Airsoft rifle.

  • B August 23, 2011 (5:37 pm)

    Winners!

  • shed22 August 23, 2011 (5:50 pm)

    All victims should file a lawsuit. Do not let this end with the County.

  • Ivote August 23, 2011 (6:11 pm)

    So the kids admit to what amounts to a wave of drive by shootings with a compressed gas projectile weapon in .177 cal, and they’re sent home to the parents?

    RCW 9.41.230 lists compressed air weapons in the same class as firearms and deadly missile weapons.
    The boys violated RCW 9.41.230 and should get an added 9A.36 RCW 2nd degree assault.
    Definition of terms under RCW 9.41.010 lists a drive by as a “serious offense” “felony”.

    I’m not a lawyer but someone who is please hammer these punks and their way too lenient or lazy parents.

    Also i firmly believe that “i want a lawyer” is paramount to “i am aware of my wrongful conduct and am afraid of whats to come”

  • Scandinavian August 23, 2011 (6:15 pm)

    In North Dakota these punks would be picking rocks out of the north 40 for twenty years. With a double-barrel BB gun pointed at them from my air-conditioned John Deere. LOL at these filthy punks….

  • Kate K August 23, 2011 (6:23 pm)

    What is wrong with these people that they think shooting people is ‘fun?’ That is severely messed up.

  • AHNeighbor August 23, 2011 (6:35 pm)

    You have got to be kidding that they released these criminals to their incompetent parents. This crime will be just one of many in their careers.

  • skyblue August 23, 2011 (7:27 pm)

    WSB – Did you ask the police why they were only released to their parents and not taken to jail? I know they are kids, but it seems like an odd ending for such a severe crime. Very frustrating as some of my neighbors were victims of these kids.

    • WSB August 23, 2011 (7:35 pm)

      Procuring the report involved working through a channel that didn’t involve any way of getting that comment, but it’s part of a followup inquiry I’ll be asking. I have to say it’s not unusual, though. As you might remember from a previous WSBeat, sometimes the Youth Services Center declines to take someone – the criteria include whether the suspect has a record, among other things – haven’t found any of that in this case yet, though again, these are juveniles, so records access is not as easy as with adults – TR

  • Coolie August 23, 2011 (7:58 pm)

    I’m curious, it’s dark, car drives by, and a guy feels that he’s been hit by something, painful. Maybe he briefly catches a glimpse of a dark silhouette of what looks like a gun. If the person had a carry permit and had a gun on him, in the heat of the moment thought he was being shot for real, would he be justified if he had pulled out his (real) gun and returned fire?

    Not interested in heading down the rabbit hole of a big pro-gun/anti-gun debate, just curious how the law would see that situation.

  • Cascadianone August 23, 2011 (8:51 pm)

    Coolie, it’s the “reasonable person” question:

    Would another person put in that situation reasonably feel their life/health was being seriously and immediately threatened?

    I would argue that if you saw a dark car rolling past, window down, the barrel of some weapon pointed at you- that would be the PERFECT opportunity to open fire… But after you’ve been stung by some little BBs and survived with very minor injuries and they are driving off? Much harder to justify. You don’t pull your gun when somebody bumps you with a cart full of groceries at the supermarket either, but a heavy cart could also cause injuries, right? Just not life-threatening or serious bodily harm. But now imagine if some large crazy person knocked you down with the same grocery cart and then heaved it up over his head to smash it down on your skull??? Draw and fire! Everything is situational- you have the *justify* your conduct in the aftermath. Remember, lawfully shooting somebody with a gun requires that you first admit to (attempting) murder and then explain why doing so was reasonable under the law.
    ((( http://apps.leg.wa.gov/rcw/default.aspx?cite=9A.16.050 )))

  • Mander August 23, 2011 (10:47 pm)

    I hope someone nails them to the wall.

  • Nick August 24, 2011 (2:29 am)

    I will be getting in contact with the precinct and I want to testify against them. I have no doubt they are the same ones who hit me last week.

  • CandrewB August 24, 2011 (7:58 am)

    Nick, sue the parents. It will be more painful for them than court supervision.

  • Dirk August 24, 2011 (10:33 am)

    Disclaimer: I am NOT condoning the actions of these suspects, they should be charged with assault and battery.

    However, there is a lot of confusion surrounding the terms thrown around in the style of gun and ammo used.

    There is a huge difference between airsoft and airguns. Air guns are legitimate weapons used for hunting that fire metal projectiles (pellets or BBs). Airguns are used for hunting, target practice etc. and are classified as weapons. Any reference to a pellet or bb gun is generally thought to refer to an airgun. Air guns are either .177 or .22 caliber and can fire at 1000+ fps.

    Airsoft guns on the other hand are technically toys. Airsoft guns always come with a bright orange barrel tip to mark them as such. These guns fire plastic BBs and have a maximum velocity of 450 fps on the highest end models (~$400-$500). My friends and I used to shoot each other with the cheap version ($50-$100). Yeah, they hurt a bit, and if you were shot point blank in the eye, with your eye open, it would cause some serious damage. Our gun battles were probably not the wisest activity, but it was a far cry from some of the stupider activities undertaken by my peers at the time.

    The police report indicates that the weapon was in fact an airsoft gun (assuming the officer who wrote the report knows the difference). So it’s unlikely anyone’s life was in danger any more than if these kids were chucking small rocks at people.

    So they should be charged with assault and battery (the same charge as throwing and striking someone with a rock). They were not committing assault with a deadly weapon, as airsoft guns are not compressed air weapons (key word being weapon), like an airgun would be.

    ps. is it possible to insert linebreaks? br tags and returns don’t work.

  • Cclarue August 24, 2011 (2:40 pm)

    They should have gone straight to juvi!!!!

  • Ex-Westwood Resident August 24, 2011 (3:53 pm)

    Oh give the kids a break!!!!
    They were bored and just looking for something to do.
    {bonk}
    Excuse me I just went in to the dream world of the Dr. Spock guide of raising children.
    These “kids” (and their parents) need to spend time in the lock-up.
    This is the “revolving door” of juvenile crime (yes they committed a crime) that just reinforces the “see I can get away with it” mentality that is so persuasive in the community today and is perpetrated by the Judges and Prosecutors in Seattle and King County.

  • getalife August 24, 2011 (5:48 pm)

    This is definitely cause for punishment I agree 100%. Did any of you do any thing wrong when you were teenagers I can pretty much guarantee that you all did. Let me ask you this was it all your parents fault because they didn’t teach you right from wrong? So as an adult if you do wrong is that to go on your parents as well? None of you people know what goes on in peoples daily lives.

  • CandrewB August 24, 2011 (7:20 pm)

    Getalife, I did all manor of idiotic things to myself when I was a teenager, and into my twenties. But one thing that never crossed my/our (collective) mind was to assault random strangers for giggles.

  • Jill Loblaw August 24, 2011 (7:48 pm)

    Amen! I agree with getalife.

  • Jim P August 25, 2011 (2:16 pm)

    Amazingly stupid but yet one was bright enough to clam up and demand a lawyer.

    Hope the parents enjoy the civil suits. Be interesting to see what sort of priors these fun-loving “children” have racked up.

Sorry, comment time is over.