Video- John T. Williams shooting

[kylamonkey]

I think everyone should see the first few minutes of this video. Please be warned it can disturb some people, you might become angry at what happens. Sound is required- action happens offscreen, so the audio is the important part.

 

I follow a Seattle-based blog for much of my news (I follow certain US news topics carefully), and as such have an inordinate amount of knowledge of Seattle politics/city issues. I've been following this story for a while, because it is really bothering a lot of people in Seattle.

 

Simple background- this is from what I remember so it may be a little off, but it will provide you with what you need to know:

-Man is shot dead by police in Aug

-A day or so later, they say he was "menacing", had an open knife when he was shot and was known to the police. police report he was verbally warned before the shooting and did not respond.

-later, it turns out he was shot in the side/back. People start to question what actually happened

-friends of the man say he was deaf and a police warning would not have been heard. He was an Aboriginal man, and was known for his carving, which explains the knife. More public outcry.

-a report comes out saying the knife was a 3" blade, and was found in a CLOSED position, contradicting earlier testimony

-Last Friday, a video was released from the police car dash camera. It does not show the shooting (offscreen) but the audio is alarming

 

Here is the video. I will warn you again to not watch if you are easily upset.

 

http://slog.thestranger.com/slog/archives/2010/12/17/the-video-the-shooting-of-john-t-williams

 

There is no reason we cannot write to the Seattle police force, even if we are not Seattle residents.

 

The following is taken from the comments to the link I posted:

every person who feels Birk must be vigorously prosecuted should write a strongly worded letter, followed up with a phone call- it's possible public pressure would make it impossible to not file charges. Anyone who OKs Birk's behavior by inaction gets the government and the police force they deserve. Unfortunately, the rest of us have to put up with it too. So please, everybody take a few minutes and do your part...

 

Contact Mayor McGinn: http://www.seattle.gov/mayor/citizen_res…

 

Contact SPD OPA: https://www.seattle.gov/police/OPA/Compl…

 

Contact federal officials who review such incidents: Thomas Perez

Assistant Attorney General

United States Department of Justice Civil Rights Division,

Special Litigation Section

950 Pennsylvania Ave. NW, Washington, D.C. 20530

 

Honorable Jenny Durkan

United States Attorney

700 Stewart St.

Seattle, WA 98101

 

Inquest begins January 10, 9AM. King County Courthouse.

[)oooo>]

I'm sorry what exactly should we write about?

Condemning this police man for his actions when we don't even know what exactly went down?

 

having said that, if he was indeed deaf and never even heard the officer than this is a bit disturbing. The only way I could see how he got shot is if he lunged with the knife at the cop. I mean, from the first time he says "put the knife down" to the shots, it was like 5 seconds so he was either in danger or reeealy trigger happy

[jp.mylittlepwny]

You don't need the complete picture here to see that the cop overreacted.

 

The man was shot in the back, carrying an enclosed 3inch knife, and was not an immediate threat to anyone.

The cop should've more accurately assessed the situation before pulling the trigger.

[)oooo>]

You don't need the complete picture here to see that the cop overreacted.

 

The man was shot in the back, carrying an enclosed 3inch knife, and was not an immediate threat to anyone.

The cop should've more accurately assessed the situation before pulling the trigger.

 

O RLY? says who? the initial report said the guy was approaching the officer.

[jp.mylittlepwny]

So let's say he turned around to face the officer, with a sheathed knife. Justification to shoot?

The initial report also stated the knife was open.

 

Does it also require 5 shots to disable a man holding a small melee weapon that is standing several feet away?

[yamahac]

Yeah let's all write a letter telling the police they're very very bad even though none of us know what really happened.

[kylamonkey]

I'm not telling people to write, just giving contact info in case anyone is so moved to do so. I am also not condemning all police, nor would I ever do so.

 

No, we don't see what happened, but the audio from the female witness is very interesting: "He wasn't doing anything!"

[leviathan]

A couple pennies:

1. Police officers aren't superheroes or martyrs. They have wives, husbands, children and loved ones they want to see at the end of their shift. Thus immediate threats to their life are responded to without any hesitation and that response is deadly force. They are trained to shoot to kill and deliver as many rounds as necessary to do this.

 

2. We didn't see what happened but at the very least we know he was carrying a knife, and at the very least didn't respond to several demands to drop the knife. Whether it was open or not is irrelevant as it can become opened pretty quickly.

 

Everything else besides the above is speculation. Could he be negligent in this case? Maybe, but right now I give him the benefit of the doubt until I see more facts, a lot of which are needed before any conclusion can be made.

[leviathan]

Does it also require 5 shots to disable a man holding a small melee weapon that is standing several feet away?

When an officer pulls out and discharged a firearm the intent is to kill, not disable.

[jp.mylittlepwny]

When an officer pulls out and discharged a firearm the intent is to kill, not disable.

 

Yes, thank you for stating my point explicitly.

The gun was discharged with an intent to kill.

 

Did the situation require him to shoot with the intent to kill? If so then we would assume that there was an immediate danger to the officer's life (or anyone else for that matter).

However, at 2:11 of the video you hear a woman's voice (witness) in the back ground saying "he didn't do anything" to which the officer responded

"mame, he had a knife and wouldn't put it down".

Not he came at me(or anyone else) with the knife, or I felt threatened, or was in an aggressive stance but just simply he had a knife and would not comply with my commands.

 

Yes, the request was made to put the down knife 3 times. All within a 5 second period followed by the shooting.

 

I would deem this premature.

 

Whether the knife was open or close position IS relevant. If it was open, ambiguity of the situation would be less. It's the difference between an immediate threat, and one that is not.

[jp.mylittlepwny]

I think it says something about the case, and the respective police department when they release a photo of the knife in the open position to the press when the knife was in a closed position at the scene.

 

http://www.komonews.com/news/local/111086414.html

 

Preliminary review found the shooting unjustified, which will be thoroughly investigated in January of next year.

[leviathan]

Did the situation require him to shoot with the intent to kill? If so then we would assume that there was an immediate danger to the officer's life (or anyone else for that matter).

Police officers never discharge their firearms unless their intent is to kill.

 

However, at 2:11 of the video you hear a woman's voice (witness) in the back ground saying "he didn't do anything" to which the officer responded

"mame, he had a knife and wouldn't put it down".

Bystanders and laypeople (case in point, you), do not understand the rules of engagement with law enforcement and are not in the position to decide when a person "didn't do anything". It would take a man plunging the knife repeatedly into an officer's chest before some people would consider him to be "doing anything". Even then there are some extremely thick individuals who would say the officer should have shot him in the hand or something equally ridiculous.

 

Not he came at me(or anyone else) with the knife, or I felt threatened, or was in an aggressive stance but just simply he had a knife and would not comply with my commands.

So because he didn't spend 5 minutes explaining to her his full reasoning, that means none of the above happened? Obviously he felt threatened or he would not have fired. Unless you are suggesting he just felt like murdering a person in public for fun? We do not know the rest of the circumstances since it was off-camera, but I'm assuming it was due to the aggressive stance of the patient. Further, if someone is holding a knife at you and refuses to put it down, that is aggressive in itself. It doesn't matter whether it's closed or open. It can become open in less time than it takes you to react to the situation. If you disagree I challenge you to find someone to stand a short distance from you with a closed knife and see how calm and collected you are when that person starts walking towards you and refuses to drop the knife.

 

 

Yes, the request was made to put the down knife 3 times. All within a 5 second period followed by the shooting.

 

I would deem this premature.

You absolutely have your own right to an opinion as to whether it was premature or not, but thankfully you are not a peace officer and not an expert who will be judging if it was or not from a legal perspective. Could this have been premature? Perhaps. Maybe he made a mistake. But neither of us were there to see what happened, neither of us are police officers to know what was going through his mindset at the time and how a police officer is supposed to react to that situation based on training and precedent. Quite frankly, although you are entitled to your opinion you should really try to give more benefit of the doubt to police officers. By and large they are all very good people who face nothing but undeserved criticism every day for every action they take, meanwhile putting their lives at risk every day for the very same people who criticize their every move (like you are doing).

[jp.mylittlepwny]

And here I thought the role of the police are to serve and protect, and to bring criminals to justice. Not to act as judge, jury, and executioner. How naive I am.

 

 

 

Bystanders and laypeople (case in point, you), do not understand the rules of engagement with law enforcement and are not in the position to decide when a person "didn't do anything".

 

I would say we are all lay people here when it comes to the rules of engagement and law enforcement. Yes, I do understand that the person who made that comment in the video was just a bystander who's assessment of the situation may not have been accurate, but the emphasis was on his response to justify the shooting

 

"Mame, he had a knife and did not put it down"

 

So because he didn't spend 5 minutes explaining to her his full reasoning, that means none of the above happened? Obviously he felt threatened or he would not have fired. Unless you are suggesting he just felt like murdering a person in public for fun? We do not know the rest of the circumstances since it was off-camera, but I'm assuming it was due to the aggressive stance of the patient. Further, if someone is holding a knife at you and refuses to put it down, that is aggressive in itself. It doesn't matter whether it's closed or open. It can become open in less time than it takes you to react to the situation. If you disagree I challenge you to find someone to stand a short distance from you with a closed knife and see how calm and collected you are when that person starts walking towards you and refuses to drop the knife.

I guess since we live in North America, everyone is assumed to speak fluent English? It's also pretty difficult to mistake the fact that the victim was a visible minority.

You assume he was in an aggressive stance, when fact: 4 bullets entered his side while standing 9-10 feet away from the officer. The victim was not walking towards him.

There's a difference between holding a knife at someone, and holding a knife. Recall the victim was minding his own business, when the police called for him to drop the weapon form behind.

It takes more time to open a sheathed knife, than to pull the trigger on your loaded, and pointed gun. And takes even more time while holding a block of wood in your hands.

I would be collected if I had a gun in my hand, pointed at a target with a sheathed melee weapon while they stood 9-10 feet away, and had years of training in the academy and 2 years of experience on the job.

 

You absolutely have your own right to an opinion as to whether it was premature or not, but thankfully you are not a peace officer and not an expert who will be judging if it was or not from a legal perspective. Could this have been premature? Perhaps. Maybe he made a mistake. But neither of us were there to see what happened, neither of us are police officers to know what was going through his mindset at the time and how a police officer is supposed to react to that situation based on training and precedent. Quite frankly, although you are entitled to your opinion you should really try to give more benefit of the doubt to police officers. By and large they are all very good people who face nothing but undeserved criticism every day for every action they take, meanwhile putting their lives at risk every day for the very same people who criticize their every move (like you are doing).

Yes I have a right to my opinion.

Yes all police officers have good intentions, have never discriminated, do not themselves act immorally just like all doctors in the world do it not for the money or prestige, but for the honest desire to help people.

 

You know what, I would give the police the benefit of the doubt however after seeing that video, and after an assessment of the facts and information available I cannot. They are people, and not infallible.

[Cop2Doc]

Yes, the request was made to put the down knife 3 times. All within a 5 second period followed by the shooting.

 

I would deem this premature.

 

I appreciate the fact that police officers should, and do, receive a reasonable level of scrutiny when lethal force is utilized. That being said, I find that retrospective analysis by lay people is extremely unreliable, biased, and often uninformed. This may have been an unjustified shooting, and I'm glad there will be a detailed investigation.

 

The Criminal Code and a Police Departments use of force police can be extremely complex. For example, I find very few people are aware that in Canada, there is a provision that allows use of force to prevent assault. I can think of a few moments in my career where I actually hit someone before they hit me. It's a difficult decision to make, and not one to be taken lightly.

 

The public sees me pull up out of nowhere, point a gun at someone, yell commands at them to lay face down on the wet pavement, then drag them towards me and aggressively handcuff them. It's fast and violent, but it's controlled. Yet many people would tell me that man "was just standing there" and I could have simply walked over and spoken with him.

 

Unfortunately, your perception is very different when your not aware of the context and circumstance. Some citizen reports that this suspect was seen with a gun, and I recognize this suspect as a gang associate known to carry firearms. This is crucial information your not aware of, and often never will be aware of. Yet you'll go home and tell your friends how heavy handed the cops were that night.

 

There are bad cops out there who make some terrible decisions. I just wish people would be aware that a situation can be more than what you see.

 

The comments made by jp.mylittlepwny are especially frustrating. To say you'd be "collected" pointing a gun at someone is a bold statement to make with no prior experience. You act as if his statement of "Mame, he had a knife and did not put it down" was the whole shooting summarized in a neat little sentence. What did you expect him to say? "Ma'am, he was displaying pre-assaultive cues and was x distance away from me so in accordance with my use of force police I ordered him....blahg blagh blagh"

[jp.mylittlepwny]

The comments made by jp.mylittlepwny are especially frustrating. To say you'd be "collected" pointing a gun at someone is a bold statement to make with no prior experience. You act as if his statement of "Mame, he had a knife and did not put it down" was the whole shooting summarized in a neat little sentence. What did you expect him to say? "Ma'am, he was displaying pre-assaultive cues and was x distance away from me so in accordance with my use of force police I ordered him....blahg blagh blagh"

I would hope to be collected enough to make a sound judgment call if I had gone through the academy, and had 2 years of experience on the job. Not if I was given a gun right now this instant.

The same goes for a physician. If you had gone through residency, and have worked for 2 years, you had better know what you're doing as lives depend on it.

I would expect him to have a better reason for using lethal force as in, he was about to attack you/me.

 

Just because we were not there, or because we are not experts in that area does not mean we cannot discuss it here.

If anything, I'm here to learn from the opinion of others and to increase my own awareness and perspective on situations.

[Cop2Doc]

I agree there's no harm in discussing it. Passing judgement and stating that the officer is negligent is something different.

 

It's just a little jarring when I see comments like this:

 

"Does it also require 5 shots to disable a man holding a small melee weapon that is standing several feet away?"

 

I understand it's a comment made in good faith. But the tone of it is judgmental and implies fault. Not to mention the the issues you raise are not issues at all.

 

"Does it also require 5 shots"

 

How many times you shoot someone would vary considerably. I suspect that sometimes, you may just have to shoot someone that many times.

 

"to disable a man"

 

As mentioned previously, a firearm is discharged for one purpose, and one purpose only: lethal force.

 

"holding a small melee weapon"

 

The goal is to avoid a fair fight. You want to scrap with me, I pepper spray you and pull out a baton. You want to stab me, I pull out a gun. You have a knife, out comes the gun. I'm sure the nurses, docs, medics, and firefighters on this board can attest to the damage a melee weapon can do.

 

"that is standing several feet away"

 

Ever try shooting a handgun? It's damn hard to hit something only a few feet away when your stressed.

 

Discuss. Sure. Pass judgement. Fair enough, but I'll have something to say if your basing your theory on anecdote and conjecture.

[)oooo>]

I'm finding a very peculiar and sinister pattern among these police shootings. They seem to be targeting individuals with rich criminal pasts or troubled backgrounds that are just about to change their lives for the better...

no lie...

"Native carver shot by officer was turning his life around, brother says"

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/national/british-columbia/native-carver-shot-by-officer-was-turning-his-life-around-brother-says/article1844083/

[jp.mylittlepwny]

Avoid a fair fight. It takes more than 1 person to fight. From the information available, it doesn't appear the victim knew he was in a fight to begin with.

 

It was stated in one of the articles that the victim was standing 9-10 feet away. I have no doubt that it is very hard to fire a gun accurately especially if you're untrained, that's where time spent in the academy comes in.

Without a question a melee weapon can inflict a lot of damage, but was there intent to use that knife as a weapon? We know the reason he was carrying a knife to begin with was because he is a wood carver. We'll have a more definitive/legitimate picture when the investigation gets under way, but from the preliminary report it's unlikely.

 

My theory is based on the information that is available to the public.

[apache]

This honestly looks like second degree murder, the man was walking like a cripple and had a block of wood... he obviously had no ill intent towards anyone. Plus, with the 4 second interlude between the cop telling him to put the 2 inch knife down and the speed we had seen him walking at before there's no way i believe the man could have been a legitimate enough threat (if he was a threat at all) to justify using lethal force... this looks like nothing but cold blooded murder.

[leviathan]

And here I thought the role of the police are to serve and protect, and to bring criminals to justice. Not to act as judge, jury, and executioner. How naive I am.

Strawman argument. This has nothing to do with the role of police. This has to do with an officer who determined there was a threat to his life and he acted upon that threat.

 

 

"Mame, he had a knife and did not put it down"

As I've already said, and the officer in here has said, did you expect the police officer to give this individual a 5 minute explanation for what he did? He has more pressing matters to attend to, such as the individual who he just shot.

 

You assume he was in an aggressive stance, when fact: 4 bullets entered his side while standing 9-10 feet away from the officer. The victim was not walking towards him.

There's a difference between holding a knife at someone, and holding a knife. Recall the victim was minding his own business, when the police called for him to drop the weapon form behind.

Where is the evidence for ANY of this?

 

It takes more time to open a sheathed knife, than to pull the trigger on your loaded, and pointed gun. And takes even more time while holding a block of wood in your hands.

I would be collected if I had a gun in my hand, pointed at a target with a sheathed melee weapon while they stood 9-10 feet away, and had years of training in the academy and 2 years of experience on the job.

I'm glad you know how you would feel in a job you don't have with training you don't have. It's not an every day occurrence for an officer to draw his weapon and fire it.

 

 

You know what, I would give the police the benefit of the doubt however after seeing that video, and after an assessment of the facts and information available I cannot. They are people, and not infallible.

All you have is a video which tells us nothing. Where are these other facts? Who are they coming from? Are you using the opinion of an untrained bystander as your evidence?

[jp.mylittlepwny]

Dig a little deeper, even just scratch the surface by doing a google search under john t williams, and under latest news.

Many articles have posted up the circumstances, evidence, and facts related to the case. e.g The Seattle times have posted this article "Woodcarver's shooting by SPD officer ruled not justified in preliminary finding" at

 

http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/html/localnews/2013160320_shooting15m.html

I'm not pulling facts out of my ass here.

 

Many of your responses have been responded to, so I will not go over it again.

 

Strawman argument? nay

Sarcasm.

[jp.mylittlepwny]

Here, I'll save you some time.

This section is copy and pasted.

 

 

"Birk shot Williams after he stopped his patrol car at a red light and saw Williams carrying a piece of wood and a small knife that turned out to be used for carving.

 

Williams, who was a member of Nuu-Chah-Nulth First Nations in British Columbia, did not respond to three commands to drop the knife, according to police officials and an audio recording retrieved from Birk's patrol car. The department originally said Williams advanced on Birk but later retreated on that statement.

 

According to two people familiar with the shooting, who asked not to be identified, there was a time span of less than 15 seconds between the time Birk issued his commands and when he fired his gun. Seattle police have previously said that Birk fired four rounds from a distance of nine to 10 feet.

 

Williams was struck by four bullets on the right side of his body, indicating he was not facing the officer at the time the shots were fired, the attorney representing the Williams family has said.

 

The attorney, Tim Ford, questioned whether the officer needed to shoot if Williams wasn't directly facing him. "... Where is the threat?" he said last week.

 

Williams collapsed on the sidewalk along Howell Street, where he was pronounced dead.

 

The autopsy report also noted that a pair of headphones attached to an AM-FM radio were found with Williams' body, Ford said last week. The report didn't specify where the headphones were retrieved, Ford said.

 

Williams' family has said he probably didn't hear the officer command him to drop the knife because he was deaf in one ear and wearing headphones."

[bpp]

obviously we have to wait until the investigation is complete and the officer tells his side of the story. however, the more you learn about the story, the worse it looks for the officer. you can see from the video he was walking across the street carrying the knife and looking at something in his hand, so his back was facing the officer(could have turned around and lunged towards him but autopsy seems to indicate otherwise). you can also tell from the video he never identified himself as a police officer, so if Williams was facing away and heard, the natural response would be to turn around and see who is yelling. I have probably already made enough conjectures, but all I am trying to say is that from the evidence released it doesn't look good for the officer.

[jp.mylittlepwny]

whats the relevance of this? We charging him for racially motivated first degree murder now?

The police put out a statement that Williams advanced on Birk' date=' which was retracted. The police also put out a photo of a knife in the open position, which later a photo was uncovered from the crime scene of a knife in the closed position.

Police putting out one statement, later having it retracted due to 'new' evidence.

Hmmm... Doesn't take a genius to see something is fishy going on here.

also indicating that he wasn't just walking away... again we don't know what the hell he was doing.

We know he wasn't advancing towards the officer, with a closed knifed.

Attorney doing his job... and?

what's your point here.

This i think will be the crux of the case, whether or not Williams posed enough of a threat to the officer to warrant discharging his fiream.

My opinion, no need to flame.

here we go, another excuse. Hes a deaf man listening to the radio so he couldn't hear the cop

Truth is we don't know what happened so just calm the heck down. Investigation is underway and will hopefully reach a just conclusion.

lol, a disability as an excuse for not understanding the officer within 5 seconds lead to him being fatally shot.

That's like telling a quadriplegic to put his hands up where the officer can see them.

 

We know what happened. A man was fatally shot by police. Do we know the full circumstances behind the shooting? No, but we do know a lot, and enough for me to draw me own conclusion based on what is currently known. I can do this because my opinion has NO IMPACT on the investigation. As an observer, a student, a thinker I can use the relevant information presented for a situation and draw my own conclusion. I don't need a newspaper or an official investigation to what the conclusion is for every situation without having trying to arrive at one myself.

It's like being presented with a problem and information, and not trying to work it out on your own and wait for someone to tell you what the answer it. Yes you may not be presented with all the information, but in life you will never have a complete picture. I'm sure this is true with medicine.

If new evidence is presented later on, I may change my position. If the ruling was that the shooting was justified, and no new evidence or information was presented, I'll reflect and ask myself why that may be.