I’m not thrilled with this outcome, but I expected it. I understand that police officers shouldn’t be prosecuted for merely making mistakes while on duty. And if a police officer feels his life or the lives of others are in danger, he should be able to respond appropriately. But there was nothing about this incident that made me think that Officer Birk acted with even the minimal level of restraint that we’d expect from a police officer. Dominic re-posted the dash-cam video of the incident (which doesn’t capture the shooting itself) and I have trouble imagining how Birk could have felt his – or anyone else’s – life was in immediate danger because Williams had a carving knife.
At the very least, Birk had better be fired today, yet I find it to be a shame that his firing would be the only semblance of justice that the Williams family sees from this.
UPDATE: As several commenters have pointed out, the Williams family can still bring civil lawsuits against SPD and they’d be more likely to prevail than in their efforts to have criminal charges filed.
UPDATE 2: Mayor McGinn’s statement here.
UPDATE 3: Officer Ian Birk resigns.
There will be a civil suit. Count on it.
This was to be expected, because the standard for charging law enforcement with a crime in this situation is absurdly high. Prosecutors would have had to prove that Birk did not actually feel threatened, but acted with personal malice toward Williams. Which is almost impossible to prove even if one believes it’s true (which I don’t).
I just hope nobody claims that this “exonerates” Birk. Because it doesn’t. At all.
More importantly, I hope it doesn’t give SPD the excuse not to engage in a serious self-examination of its training procedures and culture. While Birk made a tragic mistake, the way SPD instinctively tried to cover for him (e.g., first claiming Williams “lunged” at him) and insisted that Birk followed his training, along with all the other recent incidents, suggests a much more systemic problem.
Excellent post! I fully agree with you!
“I find it to be a shame that his firing would be the only semblance of justice that the Williams family sees from this.”
Aren’t you forgetting tort remedies? Nothing is stopping Birk’s family from suing Officer Birk and SPD for wrongful death. In a civil suit for damages, the burden of proof is much lower than required to get a criminal conviction. And the family doesn’t need money to pay lawyers; tort lawyers will work on a contingency basis.
These are the rights and remedies that Republicans want to take away from all of us. So-called “tort reform” isn’t reform at all, it’s a scheme to shield government officials, corporations, and others from responsibility when their actions damage property, inflict injury, or destroy innocent lives. And so-called (and mis-named) “tort reform” takes away more than just monetary compensation for intentional or negligent harm inflicted on innocent people. By immunizing perpetrators from liability for such actions, it encourages them to be careless or heedless of the safety and well-being of others, which puts all of us at risk.
“Tort reform” is indiscriminate. It harms everyone equally, including those who vote Republican. Why anyone would vote for people who espouse this pernicious doctrine is a mystery. The only explanation I can think of is stupidity.
@3
Aren’t you forgetting tort remedies?
Yes, and I’ve posted an update to the original post.
This happened right about the same time we installed the native woodcarving welcome figure in Tacoma. HERE IS MY CARTOON!
http://comics.feedtacoma.com/t.....d-seattle/
This decision is a travesty. I hope the Department of Justice reviews this matter to consider federal civil rights violations against Birk. Also, perhaps a recall drive against Satterburg would be advisable. The high hurdle for getting a conviction in this type of case does not mean no prosecution should occur. Sometimes doing the right thing requires taking on a high risk of failure.
even for a “F the police’ guy like me i feel criminal charges are tough to file here.
there are too many variables that only the officer can know….even the officer himself may not know what he saw or the danger he felt.
i compare it to the ‘reasonable’ people that think they see alien UFOs and other supernatural phenoms.
@6 Good point. I didn’t think of that right away and I should have. Prosecution under federal civil rights laws is possible here. And so is a Sec. 1983 civil suit in federal court.
The civil rights laws were passed to give the federal government tools to deal with local communities whose laws, elected officials, and police departments violate the rights guaranteed to all U.S. citizens in the Constitution. It is a proper exercise of federal responsibility to step in and enforce these rights where local cultures are racist and abusive.
Williams wouldn’t have been shot if he had been a Caucasian banker wearing a suit and tie, sitting on a park bench eating his lunch, and gesturing at the officer with a bread knife being used to cut his sandwich.
@7 I think what the officer saw, more than anything else, was a Native American dressed like a homeless street person.
You get stereotyped in our society based on what your skin color is and the clothing you wore.
A combination of dark skin and scruffy clothing makes your life not worth very much.
Rules of engagement for civilians
If approached by a Seattle cop, go prone on the ground immediately. Then inquire if the officer is Officer Birk. If he is, for your life, do not move or make any threatening motions until someone of higher authority shows up to take control of Officer Birk.
@10. He didn’t do the proper instant grovelling deference required by the cops if one is not white and affluent looking.
….Also what Ekim just said.
I reluctantly agree that criminal charges should not be filed in this case, simply on the grounds that it would be next to impossible to obtain a conviction.
We have to go to far into the officer’s mental state at the time to obtain a conviction. A god defense lawyer would have spent half a day of testimony going over each shooting or stabbing of a policeman over the past few years – not only here, but elswhere in the U.S., and asking the officer if he was aware of them, if he had heard them discussed by his supervisors or other policemen, and how many times a day he thought about them before, during, and after going on patrol. Only after that would he ask the officer to discuss how he felt threatened by the victim. Under those circumstances, at least three jurors is going to vote for acquital, regardless of the other testimoney.
Moreover, the grounds for the finding that the shooting was unjustified tended to focus on failure to follow proceedures, such as not identifying himself when he confronted the suspect, closing the gap between himself and the suspect, etc. A jury isn’t going to rely on those things in a murder prosecution, especially when a uniformed officer exits a patrol car – at that point identification seems to be the least of the problems.
Perhaps the problem is that we need some remedy which falls somewhere between a murder prosecution and a slap on the wrist from the review board.
Rules of engagement for civilian bystanders
Secretly video tape the proceedings so when Officer Birk shoots the non resisting bystander you can turn over copies of the tape to responsible parties and the victim’s family. Whatever you do, don’t trust the SPD with the tape. It may get misfiled somewhere…
The exemption for law enforcement officers using deadly force in RCW 9A.16.040(3) is ridiculously broad:
(3) A public officer or peace officer shall not be held criminally liable for using deadly force without malice and with a good faith belief that such act is justifiable pursuant to this section.
By contrast, it is much easier to prosecute a law enforcement officer for misuse of NON-DEADLY force, than it is to prosecute for the use of DEADLY force. In such a case, the prosecution merely needs to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that the NON-DEADLY force was not justifiable.
But if a law enforcement officer actually kills someone (or at least uses force that is capable of killing someone), the prosecution faces the additional burden of proving actual malice and bad faith beyond a reasonable doubt!
There will be a lawsuit. It will be settled before discovery gets entered into the record, like every other lawsuit against the SPD. The city will pay a little money for the truth to never come out. The city does not have control of the SPD; only the mafia known as the SPOG calls the shots. They can murder with impunity. Welcome to Iran.
Small comfort.
# 15: Sounds like the same problem with wrongful death lawsuits in general. The measure of damages for wronful death is considerably less than if the person were seriously injured, because “pain and suffering” are not part of the calculations.
Which leads to the old story about a driver running over a pedestrian, then backing back over him again to make sure he’s dead.
Maybe it’s not the first shot we should be looking at so closely. Perhaps it’s the second, third, or fourth shot.
Most of the time I appreciate the tough job the police have. We can’t see what is off camera but wonder what made the officer fire four times? There is no sound indicating efforts to revive the guy so he must of killed him outright rather than trying to wound him. Also if they guy was such a menace why not get some backup first-for his own safety? The previous instance in which excessive force was used resulting in severe brain damage was horrific.
Officer Ian Birk resigns over fatal woodcarver shooting
Tar and feathers comes to mind…
Wonder if he will run for public office as a Teahadist?
Have gun, will shoot.
Sarah may want him as her VP.
where was the williams family when the wood carver was wandering the streets drunk off his ass and homeless for months on end?
seems like they only care about him when dollar signs are at the end of the rainbow….
@10
and being white and wearing a police uniform will also get you stereotyped….
I’m a douche, that is all.
rhp6033 @ 18
I think that pain and suffering before the victim dies does go into the damages calculations. But it is a LOT less than how much the victim would have suffered if they had survived. That’s why the fellow killed by Everett PD was only worth $500,000, but the fellow brain slammed and vegetablized by King County Sheriff was worth $6 million or whatever they settled for.
# 24: I think you are correct. It’s the “ongoing pain and suffering” which turns into the big numbers (along with the ongoing 24-hour medical care for the rest of their lives), wheras in a wrongful death case the pain & suffering is of limited duration, and no long-term medical care is required.
If I remember correctly, the right of the family to bring a lawsuit for wrongful death was prohibed under common law, but granted only by statute and limited to it’s terms. Thus the primary measure of damages is the net economic loss caused to the family by the demise, less the cost of living which would be consumed by the deceased.
I suspect that the measure of damages for the wrongful death of an unemployed and transient woodcarver would be pretty low, except for the notariety of the case. Washington law prohibits the award of punitive damages, but that doesn’t prevent a jury from making a rather generous application of a the highest possible value for economic and intangible damages.
This could have a “chilling” effect on other officers. I’m not saying Birk was right or wrong in his actions towards Williams but he did the right thing by resigning. What do you think the Union negotiated for him? That would be interesting to know, wouldn’t it.
And Solomon brings up an interesting point. Where has Williams family been as he wandered around drunk with a carving knife.
How many lawyers have contacted Williams family promising them millions of taxpayer money?
To address the crap spewed in 26 and 21. It really isn’t an interesting point on the whereabouts of family. It has no bearing whatsoever on whether Ian Birk had malice, or not in his decision to shoot a person 4 times. This sort of reasoning, if you must call it that, implies that Williams is at fault for being drunk. If anything, his physical state made the use of deadly force even more absurd and the ability of Birk to claim “fear” quite unbelievable.
As for Birk’s intentions, I think it is the case that his lawyers would have had to say “just claim you were in fear for your life.” Any worthy lawyer would have done so since that is the only measure that would protect him from prosecution. It is clear from Birk’s posture when leaving his vehicle, that he was cock sure, literally. He’s thrusting his hips out, hunched, hand on his penile substitute (gun) And less than 10 seconds later, Williams is dead.
The only way that Birk would have been threatened is if Williams was getting ready to throw the knife in some sort of Rambo move at the cop. Shuffling across the street, failing to look up because some dick is yelling at you and not identifying himself as a cop was probably nothing new to Williams. Half deaf, inebriated, some asshole is yelling, might not be at him, and it probably would have taken longer than he had left to live to figure that out.
Williams was shot in his side. He wasn’t facing Birk. He may not have even seen Birk.
The other question is why Birk from his car would have thought it’s time to stop and confront this guy (but not REALLY confront him, because he was never closer than 9 feet). What was it about a man shuffling through a cross walk, with a piece of wood and a small knife that Birk would have to know is entirely legal? The only thing left is the fact that he was obviously homeless, obviously drunk and obviously brown.
What isn’t always a part of these stories is that the Williams family carved together in Steinbreuck Park. John T wasn’t homeless, he lived in housing for chronic inebriates. So within the resources available, Williams was getting the most service he ever would.
Reportedly, after the shooting, the SPD “officers” would stand menacingly across the street from that park and occasionally harass supporters who would come there to be with the other Williams family. The people who run the Chief Seattle Club have attested to this. And the Chief Seattle Club is where John T. got meals and support.
I wonder how many people with mentally ill family members can control the movements of their family members? And what their reaction would be if some asshole PIG shot them dead?
@27: Anything that may have been even a slighty worthy of reading in your rant, is negated by your last sentence…hippie trash.
@28
she’s probably the type that would spit on soldiers returning from the middle east…