CRIME WATCH FOLLOWUP: Delridge murder sentencing

Two weeks after a jury found 44-year-old Jaycee C. Thompson guilty in a one-hour crime rampage that included a North Delridge murder and South Delridge shooting, he’s been sentenced. King County Superior Court Judge Mark Larrañaga ordered Thompson on Thursday to spend just under 60 years im prison; 18 of those years are mandatory “enhancements” for using a gun in every crime for which he was convicted. In June 2022, he shot and killed 56-year-old Anthony “Gonzo” Gonzalez, described as a “friend,” at a Delridge encampment, shortly after shooting and wounding a 35-year-old man – also someone he knew – two miles away in South Delridge. Thompson, a convicted felon, had been released from jail one week before the shootings, over prosecutors’ objections, as explained in our original story on his arrest. His sentence – 718 months in prison – matched what the King County Prosecuting Attorney’s Office recommended.

12 Replies to "CRIME WATCH FOLLOWUP: Delridge murder sentencing"

  • TMT October 27, 2023 (11:23 pm)

    Thank you Judge! Well done…. 

  • 1994 October 27, 2023 (11:25 pm)

    That sounds like a consequence that will keep everyone safe from Mr Thompson. Crime may pay in the short term but crime catches up to the offender and then it really may pay.

  • Rhonda October 27, 2023 (11:55 pm)

    Whoever released him from jail should serve 60 years, too.

    • Richard October 28, 2023 (6:48 am)

      did you even read the original reason why he was being held? it was for car theft and failing to appear to court. things that people do that don’t necessitate eventual murder. do you want the state to be able to have people held indefinitely if they think you’ll do something even worst after doing a property crime? give it a break! the bias framing being done by WSB here with saying “he was released under objection of the prosecutors” as if that objection was in any way possibly related to this murderer happening is so egregious. he was dodging court appearances, so of course they would object to his release, but avoiding a court appearance isn’t a guaranteed precursor to murder…

      • Matt October 28, 2023 (11:08 pm)

        Bias framing? It was a simple statement of fact. He was released twice (once on bail, which did not go up after his second arrest) and each time continued to dodge court appearances. And before the third release, “he still had a warrant active in a Pierce County DUI case.” Your own bias framing here ignores some pretty serious facts to drive a pretty strange agenda. No, people shouldn’t be held indefinitely, that’s why he was released the first time. He was given two chances at personal recognizance and refused to face justice both times, so no, he should not have been released a third time.

    • Big Bird October 28, 2023 (7:08 am)

      I agree that whoever released him should do time, Maybe 3-5 years (mandatory time behind bars) and lose their ability to work as a Judge. I also think that rule should apply to all Judges who release violent offenders who get out and reoffend ending in the death of another.

    • K October 28, 2023 (7:17 am)

      Jails have a finite number of beds.  Someone has to leave to make room for all of the RV campers and encampment residents you want to lock up for breaking nuisance laws.

    • flimflam October 28, 2023 (8:03 am)

      Yes, that judge has a death on their hands.

    • Yes & amen October 28, 2023 (8:18 am)

      100% agree!

  • Greg October 28, 2023 (6:53 am)

    The name of the Judge who released him originally should be published in every story about the defendant. These judges are elected officials who should be held accountable. They do come up for election.

    • Westyone October 29, 2023 (10:04 am)

      I agree with you completely that the judges names should always be publicly listed.  But guess what?  If you looked at the voting brochure you will notice that not one judge had anyone running against them and apparently that’s usually the case.  so our hands are tied as the public to get them off the bench. Perhaps they should have their own ‘day in court ‘where they are held legally responsible and accountable for poor decision-making.  Or maybe ‘three strikes ‘for judges? if they have three times that someone committed a serious crime after they let them loose on the public that they are removed from the bench….. ha ha …. no matter how great it would be to have them accountable. I don’t think any of these ideas will happen.. maybe we could get the laws changed in some manner to remove judges that keep unleashing crime onto the public through their ridiculous decisions.

  • BAnderson October 30, 2023 (1:24 pm)

    I was on the jury for this trial. This was a brutal and cold blooded murder, attempted murder, kidnapping and attempted robbery. The defendant had a kill list of his friends and even his brother. His friend knew about this list prior to any of this happening.  He didn’t just snap this was calculated and premeditated. If police had enough resources they could have interviewed people.  We heard from homeless people whose job was to go steal everyday to buy drugs. These people weren’t proud of what they were doing, they wanted help. We listened to police talk about not having enough staff for murder investigations and how they were working multiple murders at the same time, and having to pause a murder investigation to start another one. This was caused by the City Council, just like the hands off approach to homelessness in the city. If we keep electing people to city council that will not stand up for police and our community, none of this will get better. If your preferred candidate thinks defund the police or housing first is good you should choose someone else. I’ve seen the pictures of what happens and it is awful. 

Sorry, comment time is over.