Comments on: CRIME WATCH FOLLOWUP: Bail cut for man charged with stalking U.S. Rep. Pramila Jayapal

By: ?

Thu, 04 Aug 2022 23:29:15 +0000

In reply to DemandCurve. How are you so sure about that? Where did you get your information from?

By: Former WS resident

Former WS resident — Thu, 04 Aug 2022 14:35:38 +0000

Bail isn’t intended to be the punishment…bail is to give some level of confidence that this person will come to court. He hasn’t been found guilty yet (no matter how clear the evidence seems). The reasons someone might go with something shorter than the highest bail:1) Connection to the community.2) First offense of this nature.3) He had already been released (the prosecutor’s office decided they weren’t ready to indict him and needed to gather more evidence), and hadn’t gone anywhere nor had done anything dangerous in the meantime.4) He turned himself in when the new arrest warrant came out.All things considered, this person is likely to show for the trial. Keep in mind that the defense asked for bail to be $25,000, the prosecutors asked for $500,000. $150,000 is a pretty reasonable number. Judge Sutton isn’t out of line. Pretty balanced. For those who will watch the trial, getting ready to evaluate the judge for sentencing (if he’s found guilty), it looks like the sentencing guidelines will be 6m-12m. I’m not sure how this case compares to other Felony Stalking cases, for where it would appear on that scale. I’m also not sure how him having a gun at the time relates. Personally, I would definitely feel apprehensive about him having a gun in his possession at the time, but I’m not sure the law views this as an implicit threat. Since he never made an overt threat (that I’ve heard) and it never came out of his holster, it may not have a huge impact on the trial. That seems weird for those of us who don’t like guns, but I’m not sure there’s a way around that. If you don’t like how this case is being handled, talk to your legislator about changing State Law. The judge is just following it.

By: Samuella Samaniego

Samuella Samaniego — Wed, 03 Aug 2022 18:12:21 +0000

The threats he has made verbally, including showing up at Representative Jayapal’s home, are indefensible. Being stalked by someone or more than a few is its very own special kind of hell because there is no end to one’s worry and concern.

By: miws

miws — Wed, 03 Aug 2022 17:02:47 +0000

In reply to Seriously what. Seriously What, "Ill-performing official"? So, because you don't like Rep. Jayapal, (or, at least the way she performs her job), it's okay? I agree with Ron M.'s points, plus, you don't think this "cause(d) anguish" for Rep. Jayapal? How do you know that? You don't think a situation like this likely would cause her anguish? Especially after what she went through during the domestic terrorist attack on the U.S. Capitol on January 6, 2021? Did you not see video/photos of her and other electeds cowering down, putting on gas masks? I know that would make me extra concerned over someone driving past my home making deadly, racist threats. But, I reside on Earth One. I guess you reside on Earth Two... ---Mike

By: anonyme

anonyme — Wed, 03 Aug 2022 16:19:12 +0000

In reply to Leslie. The problem is that we seldom have a choice, given the fact that most judges run unopposed. If this guy is going to be out on the street again, I sure would like to know what he looks like.

By: momosmom

momosmom — Wed, 03 Aug 2022 14:03:32 +0000

In reply to Leslie. I wonder if "he" Brett Forsell realizes stalking and threatening US Rep Jayapal just before an election just put her in the win seat?...think Jackass who really won?!

By: Frustrated

Frustrated — Wed, 03 Aug 2022 13:41:22 +0000

In reply to Neighbor. Letting people who are a danger to the community out with low bail or no bail IS a threat... To all of us. People have died because of those decisions (literally).

By: momosmom

momosmom — Wed, 03 Aug 2022 13:35:37 +0000

In reply to Neighbor. No, no threat I read it as the truth and it sounds like your thinking is a part of the problem

By: Grammar Panda

Grammar Panda — Wed, 03 Aug 2022 10:23:31 +0000

In reply to Ron M. Right, so some mean words and being scary.

By: Rhonda

Rhonda — Wed, 03 Aug 2022 08:58:02 +0000

In reply to Neighbor. "Us-vs-you"? I included everyone in my comment. Anyone would be hard-pressed to find someone who isn't disgusted by judges who refuse to protect the public from dangerous criminals. This affects all Washingtonians.

By: Leslie

Leslie — Wed, 03 Aug 2022 07:20:24 +0000

After graduation law school the “Honorable” Aimee Sutton formerly worked for Society of Counsel Representing Accused Persons (SCRAP??). In 2011, she opened her own private practice specializing in criminal defense matters. I’m not criticizing her for representing criminals and “accused persons.” Of course, they have a right to an attorney. I’m just wondering about her possible bias in this case. I’ll try to remember not to vote for her in 2024.

By: DemandCurve

DemandCurve — Wed, 03 Aug 2022 07:00:57 +0000

Basically what I’m saying is he will be up for prosecution in a federal court for terrorist threats against a federal official and that’s a whole different world from Seattle street crime prosecutions, he’s going to pay so so dearly for this.

By: Chrissy D

Chrissy D — Wed, 03 Aug 2022 05:31:24 +0000

In reply to Ron M. Nice recap. Don’t think the judge got this information before the decision was made.

By: Chrissy D

Chrissy D — Wed, 03 Aug 2022 05:28:37 +0000

In reply to Melissa. Agreed, can the judge explain this reasoning considering the intent? Who cares that there's no previous criminal history, all it takes is one time, thus is a bs wild card move.

By: 1994

1994 — Wed, 03 Aug 2022 04:49:42 +0000

Can he vote while in jail? He can express his wishes by voting for another person or even writing his own name on the ballot as a write in candidate instead of voting for Pramila….but I see she is running above 80% on the returns so far. Yah!