Spokane7
49°
June 7, 2010 in City
Appeal will delay Thompson trial at least two months
With a jury pool waiting in another room, a federal judge Monday postponed the criminal trial against Karl F. Thompson Jr. after prosecutors announced their intention to appeal his ruling that barred evidence showing Otto Zehm had not committed a crime before Thompson confronted him.
U.S. District Court Judge Fred Van Sickle ruled that attorneys for both sides could not introduce evidence about Zehm’s mental illness, or items found in Zehm’s pockets, or essentially anything that Thompson didn’t know before the confrontation on March 18, 2006.
“Evidence considering matters not known (by Thompson) may not be admitted in the government’s case in chief,” Van Sickle said.
But Victor Boutros, a Department of Justice trial attorney, objected and requested a short delay. The attorneys returned after lunch and Boutros announced that his superiors in Washington, D.C., approved a request to appeal Van Sickle’s ruling to the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals. That review will delay the Thompson trial for at least two months.
“The government believes this evidence is so significant … that it needs to seek review,” Boutros said.
Before the announcement, Van Sickle said he would allow other Spokane Police officers to testify about what they observed just after the initial confrontation between Zehm and Thompson, who hit Zehm with his police baton, shocked him with a Taser before other officers helped hogtie him.
Zehm, 36, stopped breathing after one of the officers placed a plastic mask on his face and he never regained consciousness. He died two days later.
“It seems to me … evidence presented by observers immediately after … would be relevant to corroborate the factual dispute involved,” Van Sickle said.
But Assistant U.S. Attorney Timothy Durkin in written arguments and Boutros in court testimony both argued that they should be allowed to counter those officers’ expected observations that Zehm was unresponsive to commands and continued to fight with evidence showing that Zehm was mentally delayed and had been erroneously accused of stealing money from a nearby cash machine.
“He has no reason to attack a police officer if he hadn’t committed a crime. We argue those (details) were relevant … for the purpose of challenging the credibility of the defendant’s claimed justification for his initial use of force,” Boutros said.
Attorneys could not say when appellate judges would take up the case. But Boutros suggested that Van Sickle set a new trial date in 60 days to expedite the review.
Van Sickle said he would issue an order soon setting the new date for the trial, in which Thompson faces the felony charges of using excessive force and lying to investigators.
Thompson’s attorney, Carl Oreskovich, said he was disappointed with the turn of events.
“We worked hard to get ready to go to trial,” Oreskovich said. “Anything that helps it get resolved sooner rather than later we are in favor of.”
Closing Geiger: Wise or worrisome? 
lewis8457 on June 07 at 11:53 a.m.
What the hell? How is that right. Prosecution cant show Otto was innocent. So the thought he was guilty could be in the mind of the jury? And some people think if you are a criminal you can be killed by the cops it saves money in court costs and such.
Not good not good at all.
Bob_Knows on June 07 at 12:23 p.m.
The courts are a joke. They make no pretense of justice.
misjustice on June 07 at 12:29 p.m.
The same thing happened to Shonto Pete, Lewis. The jury was NOT permitted to know that he’d been acquitted on the charge of stealing “Mr. I Have a Secret” Olsen’s truck. With holding that information from the jury meant that they did not have ALL of the facts regarding what happened that fateful night when Mr. Pete was shot (hunted actually, IMHO) by Olsen in the Peaceful Valley neighborhood. I believe that negatively impacted the decision rendered by the jury in the case; it allowed ‘reasonable doubt’ to be raised.
I support the efforts by Boutros, to question the exclusion of the evidence showing that Otto Zhem had NOT committed a crime; and was an innocent citizen wrongly accused of a crime. If the delay in the start of the trial for Thompson means that the government may have a chance to admit evidence of Otto’s innocence, then let’s wait. If the evidence is allowed to be presented to the jury, it will only strengthen the case AGAINST Thompson.
On the other hand, if the evidence of Otto’s innocence is not admitted/stipulated to - presented to the jury - then there is the strong possibility that ‘reasonable doubt’ could be formed in the minds of the members of the jury, and Thompson will walk; just like “Mr. I Have a Secret” Olsen walked….
Otto Zehm’s family and friends, and Otto himself, deserve to have the best case possible made before a jury of fellow citizens. And if that means waiting a little longer then so be it. Better to build the best case possible than to rush and risk losing the only chance left for some small measure of justice.
Coffee on June 07 at 1:30 p.m.
misjustice I must be slipping over to the dark side, since I find myself agreeing with your posts more and more:) But I guess when your right your right. Well said.
ogdensk on June 07 at 1:50 p.m.
How wrong can it get? Since when is it against the law to tell a jury someone who was killed was innocent? Wrong wrong wrong! We should all be outraged.
ChefGus/ John Olsen on June 07 at 2:04 p.m.
Whether there was a crime or not… even if there was and he would have been found guilty…. the tapes and the lies fall on the side of conviction of this officer for the charges against him… no one deserves to be treated as if guilty before they are even arrested… and being treated as guilty does not mean you are subject to beating and suffocation…. john
garyc on June 07 at 2:31 p.m.
I think the judge is shooting for consistency.
The defense cannot show that Zehm was mentally ill or anything else in his past. So his medical records and a past confrontation with police are inadmissable. This pretty much torpedoes “excited delirium.”
The prosecution cannot show that Zehm had not committed any offense prior to the confrontation.
The point being: What was on Thompson’s mind at the time it happened. He didn’t know Zehm’s history or “condition.”. He didn’t know that there was no need to be called to the Zip Trip in the first place.
Be interesting to see what the appeal court says.
Patriot61 on June 07 at 3:19 p.m.
Thompson and his family deserve the absolute best defense possible. Thompson is the victim of a liberal media campaign who wants to try this in the press. It’s obvious that all you little cop hating cyber trolls have issues with authority figures. Believe it or not you can’t hug your way out of situations you twits. Take the tests, earn the uniform do the job then tell us all how it should be done. You won’t accept that challenge will you? You’d rather spew your hate and conspiracy theories smearing the career of a very good man. Why aren’t the people that were supposed to make sure Zehm was on his meds being sued? Why aren’t people like Zehm who can’t follow instructions by the police be more closely supervised? You all want to demonize officer Thompson who was doing his thankless job to the best of his ability with the information he had at the time. When an officer directs you to empty your hands and get down on the floor you should do so. If people aren’t expected to follow those and similar instructions how can they do their jobs? What are you going to do as a cop, debate every suspect til they comply or just walk away? Hmmm… must not have been the bad guy, cause he said he wasn’t. Officers give directions, if suspects don’t follow directions force is used to gain compliance. Comparison of other cases involving law enforcement to the current case as you all insist on is proof of your hate for the police. For once try not to swallow every drop the media feeds you and truly watch and listen objectively. You may be surprised what you see or hear that you didn’t before.
gslbball1 on June 07 at 3:23 p.m.
Let’s not forget that this federal Judge is as highly qualified and experienced as one will find in this country.
Doubtful the Appeals court is going to second guess the Judge–-he has a lot of discretion on evidentiary issues.
Ron_the_Cop on June 07 at 3:24 p.m.
For once Mr. Crooks, I can agree with your comment. The whole federal case is predicated on the state of mind of Ofc. Thompson at the time he confronted Zehm. This a federal criminal civil rights case involving whether Ofc. Thompson under the color of authority used excessive force for the circumstances he was presented with. What Ofc. Thompson did not know is not relevant and would only cloud the substance of this charge.
Msjustice as for the Shonto Pete case I think the deciding factor was that the prosecution didn’t recall the people from the house where Pete sought refuge to rebut the testimony of the SPD police dispatcher. The police dispatcher was called because the PD couldn’t produce the call/dispatch tape (A RED FLAG). The dispatcher was allowed to testify as to what he recalled (Think Zehm video tape). The people in the house had a different memory of what Pete said on the 911 call. This involved the alleged statement by Pete that he had stolen the truck (Olsen’s). This was a major error by the prosecution. The question remains was this by design of the prosecution to lose this case?
Bottom line is Co Prosecutor Tucker has to go not only for his handling of the Zehm case that the feds are now actively working but his office’s handling of the Pete case and others! More here on these point:
http://www.wikiupload.com/bKr8yilc
Det. Ron Wright (Retired)
Riverside PD, CA
Former two-term president of the Riverside Police Officers’ Association
CJ instructor in Forensics and CSI, Controversial Issues in Law Enforcement and Community Oriented Policing
spokanada on June 07 at 3:35 p.m.
Hey Patriot.
I don’t hate cops but I definatly don’t care for the ones that murder people.
In your eyes, if an unarmed man doesn’t follow instructions quick enough the police have the right to kill him? Let me know if I don’t understand your position correctly.
Nobody forced Thompson into taking this “thankless job”. And if he was such a good man why would he get a divorce to hide his assets? I guess his money and property is more important than the vows he made on his wedding day.
MrDavis on June 07 at 3:38 p.m.
A man points a pistol at a policeman who shoots and kills him. It turns out the man’s pistol was unloaded. Should the policeman be judged by the fact that he killed a man who couldn’t possibly harm him, or should the policeman be judged by what he reasobnably believed when he pulled the trigger?
spokanada on June 07 at 3:49 p.m.
Mr Davis,
Do you want my 5 year old to answer your question? I think there is a difference between a pop bottle and a unloaded gun.
lewis8457 on June 07 at 4:03 p.m.
patriot61 what planet are you on?
“When an officer directs you to empty your hands and get down on the floor you should do so”.
Thompson never made any such order, instead he entered the store with Otto’s back turned Thompson ran down the aisle with baton raised as Otto turned around Thompson bashed him on the head, Thompson ordered Otto to stop resisting arrest as he bashed Otto over and over not giving Otto time to stop resisting arrest.
Now I know the cops don’t lie but the video tells the truth.
Now that the citizens of Spokane know you cops think you can murder us I think resisting arrest is going to take on a whole new meaning.
“Take the tests, earn the uniform do the job then tell us all how it should be done”.
what tests? the driving while drunk test, the lying while keeping straight face test, the how many teen agers you can take down during a peaceful demonstration test, how fast you can drive in your personnel cars home test, how many consecutive turns you can make with out using your turn lights test, climb over a 4 foot fence while sporting a box of ding dongs test?.
How about the one test you guys should take the drug test you don’t take those do you?
“You won’t accept that challenge will you?”
Why don’t you take my challenge which is more realistic by making Spokane proud of you and stand with the people who pay your wage. The more you try to tell us how stupid we are while you deny what a video clearly shows just shows how much you really don’t care.
Lulubelle on June 07 at 4:03 p.m.
Patriot61 on June 07 at 3:19 p.m.
“Thompson and his family deserve the absolute best defense possible”
I suppose that would be his”ex”-wife that’s holed up in their in their lovely home in Idaho. Too bad everyone with an once of sense knows the divorce took place to protect his assets, including a nice retirement package from the city.
And now another delay paid for by the tax payers of Spokane,,,,,,, don’t you think people are going to start noticing?
And wouldn’t it be ironic if after all is said and done, the “misses” says, you know Karl, you are a big liar and mean brute……don’t think we’ll remarry…See ya!
GaryP on June 07 at 4:28 p.m.
I am not a cop and would never work for the government. Most of you people think you know about this case and you don’t. I don’t either. INNOCENT UNTIL PROVEN GUILTY. If he is found guily by 12 people that have heard all the evidence then so be it. I think the blogger who is obviously a cop had some valid points. It sure doesn’t look like Thompson gave any verbal commands though(could have and I was not there). If Thompson gave no verbals then he was over the top. He was obviously responding to a robbery or theft call which this pos paper always glosses over. Thompson will be found innocent partly because Durkin is not qualified and the Oroskovich is a stud. The city will pay out a chunk of change. Don’t want to see a 62 yr old vietnam vet go to prison. If he screwed up, it certainly wasnt intentional. It’s what he thought at that moment in time. Not all these idiotic monday morning quarterbacking
spokanada on June 07 at 4:31 p.m.
“Innocent until proven guilty” I am sure Otto would have appreciated the same!
GaryP on June 07 at 4:33 p.m.
The federal gov is evil. Thompson responded to the call of a crime and they want to try him on what he knows now?? The gov always wants to have it both ways. If Thompson didn’t know Zehm had a prior history then that can’t be used which is also reasonable. It’s what the officer new at the time. Now the trial is delayed for 2 more months because Durkin is a full blown retard. gov is bad and big gov is worse.
GaryP on June 07 at 4:36 p.m.
Spokanda - I’m sure Otto would have appreciated that. I don’t think the call was handled correctly but that doesn’t mean you take shortcuts. This officer is a 62 yr old vietnam vet. Do you really think anyone would want this? This paper is a pos. Let’s wait for all the facts and accept the verdict
GaryP on June 07 at 4:47 p.m.
Patriot61- You are obviously in lawenforcement and I am not. I read your post and agree with most of what you said. Too many people are naive and “learn” everything from this pos paper. I think I understand that officers have to make split second decisions that people monday morning quarterback and it drives me nuts. However, in the video it appears(granted I wasn’t there)that no verbal commands were given to Zehm allowing him the opportunity to comply. If that’s the case, It seems going to baton strikes is over the top. It the officer did give commands and Zehm didn’t comply, I think the force is appropriate given that the officer was responding to a robbery call and that’s what he knew at the time. What say you?
Ron_the_Cop on June 07 at 5:28 p.m.
Gary P and Patriot,
I believe you have valid points. The results of the federal grand jury/FBI investigation need to be presented to the jury. The facts that are now coming out are what the federal jury must weigh when deciding whether Ofc. Thompson used excessive force. The video and the timing of verbal orders before the baton strikes began will be paramount. Tactically could this contact with Zehm been handled better - of course. I don’t think Ofc. Thompson set out to intentionally kill Zehm. Had Ofc. Thompson known Zehm from working this patrol beat with some regularity, this situation would have never occurred.
Initially I relied on Asst. Chief Nicks statement to the media regarding that Ofc. Thompson was responding to an attempted robbery call. Upon confronted by Ofc. Thompson Zehm took a combative position with the pop bottle (OK plastic was this a real threat?). Based on this I was willing to cut Ofc. Thompson some slack. However the federal investigation at least in the recent court motion states the facts differently. The feds have used the services of a grand jury to compel testimony under oath and police statements are now changing.
This call according to the federal investigation was put out as a suspicious person/circumstance call which would shed a different light on how Ofc. Thompson initially approached Zehm. The federal investigation alleges there was very little time if any between Ofc. Thompson confronting Zehm and the baton strikes began. As for the head strikes I think the prosecution is stretching. Yes, head strikes are prohibited but if the suspect is jumping around you can miss and strike a suspect’s head. I think the prosecution is also stretching with regard to this technical motion that has now delayed this trial again. This may have been a tactical move on their part to get more time to firm up charges they plan to file on additional officers. S-R sources have reported another officer received a target letter.
These are all issues for the jury to decide once it’s heard all the evidence and testimony. Initially I was inclined to believe the jury would hang or acquit on the primary charge but would convict on lying to investigators in a federal investigation (a federal mulligan that local/state criminal investigators don’t get). With the new information if true then I’m not so sure.
Bottom line is this was a wrongful death once Zehm was restrained, hogtied, positioned on his stomach, mask applied, and no one was paying attention to his vital signs. The City should have apologized and paid this claim quickly. Further police policy, procedure and training should have been reviewed/changed accordingly to prevent any further occurrences. Was there adequate staffing at the time? Was Ofc. Thompson forced into a situation of using force because of short staffing? What was Ofc. Thompson’s training regarding hogtying of suspects after a violent confrontation? These are all issues that should have been investigated by SPD’s IA Unit. Do we know this was done? SPD is not saying. Why?
[continued]
Ron_the_Cop on June 07 at 5:28 p.m.
[continued]
With Asst. Chief Nicks’ handling of the video in this case and his giving the detectives only one day off who allowed child porn evidence to be destroyed in the firehouse sex scandal, if I were Chief Kirkpatrick when I came to town I would have thanked him for his service and asked that he retire. In no way would I have given Chief Nicks my unequivocal support as my replacement if I got the Seattle gig.
People are focusing too closely on Ofc. Thompson and the Zehm case. The Zehm, Pete, and others are only symptomatic of much more deeply rooted issues in Spokane. Whether you believe Ofc. Thompson acted appropriate or not or whether he committed a criminal act remains to be seen. Ofc. Thompson in my mind is being made a scapegoat for the sins of much higher police and City officials.
There can be no meaningful change in Spokane PD until these other issues are addressed and resolved.
Det. Ron Wright (Retired)
GaryP on June 07 at 6:07 p.m.
I think the upper brass seriously mishandled this. Just say what happened up front instead of guessing. Thompson didn’t kill Otto. It was being hogtied and lying on his stomach after exerting a lot of energy fighting. All officers and firefighters there should have been more alert to that once he was restrained and no longer a potential threat. I still say the city will pay big but I don’t see any intentional criminal act on the part of the responding officer. Dealing with a large man who is off his meds. Thompson doesn’t look big, has white hair, and is in his 60’s. Prison? Really?
GaryP on June 07 at 6:11 p.m.
Ron the Cop- think you’re onto something regarding city officials but disagree about Shonto Pete. Some looser stole someones truck and got shot at. If it was anyone other than an off duty cop(also had been drinking) it would have been a nothing. Don’t steal and then you don’t have to worry about being shot. He and his atty are both a pos.
misjustice on June 07 at 6:15 p.m.
Shonto Pete DID NOT STEAL Olsen’s truck; Pete was found NOT GUILTY by trial prior to the Olsen case coming to trial…GaryP, your misinformation on the Pete case is telling…
PlanB on June 07 at 6:33 p.m.
So if the appeal is denied, does the defense somehow get to imply that Otto did or was in the act of committing a crime?
I really find it hard to believe that the jury wouldn’t get to have all the information thompson had - thompson certainly did not observe any crime nor was he told that one had occurred.
GaryP on June 07 at 7:16 p.m.
Misjustice- Pete is a pos that stole the truck. Olsen and another female pursued his stolen truck with Pete driving. Olsen then overreacted and shot at him as he fled because he had been drinking and used poor judgement.
PlanB- “Thompson certainly did not observe any crime nor was he told that one occured” You are right!! I’m sure he normally sprints into a crowded Zip Trip with his baton out just for the hell of it. A Duhhhhhhhhhh-radio doesn’t dispatch cops to places for fun. Of course he was told a crime occured!!!!
Ron_the_Cop on June 07 at 7:20 p.m.
Gary P,
Regarding Shonto Pete I do have substantial issues whether it was criminal or not the jury rendered its verdict. I think the prosecution could have done a much better job as I said above. My question is did the prosecution allow jurors to sit that should have been rejected? Was the jury stacked because the prosecution didn’t want to win this case.
Was Olsen being held to the standard of a police officer or that of an ordinary citizen.? As for an officer he was drinking. What was his BA? Whether Shonto was attempting to steal his truck remains to be seen. In any event Shonto ran away and wasn’t presenting am immediate threat. Instead of just calling 911 and giving a description and direction of travel et al, Olsen chose to chase him done the hill into the dark. Olsen claims to see something flash in the dark and thought it was a weapon and fired at Pete. Olsen by his own actions precipitated this event. Bad practice as he had no clue what the background was and I believe rounds went into some nearby houses.
After the shooting Olsen did not call 911 and in fact ducked as a patrol sgt. drove by arriving at the scene. Olsen knew he was wrong and was avoiding contact with responding officers. He called the Guild’s attorney without calling 911. At the very least Olsen in CA would have been guilty of reckless discharge of a firearm.
GaryP on June 07 at 7:47 p.m.
Ron- I agree with pretty much everything you said, especially about the prosecution of Pete. They submarined to give the SR public enemy #1 at the time which was Olsen. Olsen mishandled everything but it is obvious to me Pete stole his truck. Remember, there was a vehicle chase(two cars including Olsen’s stolen truck in position #1) from Dempseys to where Pete fled on foot. Olsen then mishandled it from there. Like I said, I agree with your post but Pete stole his truck. It’s obvious
spokanada on June 07 at 8:19 p.m.
Gary,
In a previous post you said “innocent until proven guilty”. Shonto Pete was found not guilty so you are completely out of line when you say he was guilty. You are contradicting yourself.
Please explain.
PlanB on June 07 at 9:27 p.m.
I agree GaryP, certainly I wouldn’t think that a cop would sprint into a crowded ZipTrip with his baton out just for the hell of it. Oh, but duuuuhhh, that’s exactly what happened and thank goodness for the (multiple) videos otherwise this lying murderer would have gotten away with it and no one would ever have any clue as to what really happened.
But wait, I forgot that you don’t believe the video because the SR has it on their site. Must be a conspiracy and never really happened. Must be some super-secret information that is being withheld from the public. Gotta be related to the whole RPS fiasco somehow I’m sure.
But if it was you who got chased down, beaten, and murdered by an out of control cop I would still be here ranting about bad cops (never the many good ones who have a difficult job and do it well) and having your civil rights violated even though you don’t deserve them based on your total lack of belief in basic human rights and liberties.
lewis8457 on June 07 at 9:59 p.m.
garyP do you know what you are talking about? Shonto Pete never stole the truck he was found innocent in a court of law for that supposed crime. There was no DNA of his found in the truck anywhere. You don’t know what you are talking about, yes prison firing squad sounds more like it. I don’t care who you are you cant beat a unharmed man a down with out trying to talk to him first. For your info it isn’t SR’s tape it belongs to Zip Trip.
You’re just like a cop if you aren’t one. You don’t believe VIDEO, the SPD doesn’t believe video either in fact they are so full of them selves they have been ignoring this incident for years.
Olsen had a weapon on him when he left his house where he started drinking then he drove to the bar where he drank until intoxicated. Federal law says a police officer can carry his weapon any where but can not carry it while intoxicated or on drugs. Now are you trying to convince yourself it is OK to wrongly accuse a man of thief chase him down the street shoot him in the head and leave him for dead?
if you do i feel sorry for you.
GaryP on June 07 at 10:22 p.m.
Plan B-your own beloved paper says thompson responded on a report of stealing from an atm. Last I checked, stealing is a crime. It’s what he knew at the time, not what all you csi experts claim to know. Mistakes were made from the top down but not amounting to sending him to prison.
Lewis- a cop of 18 yrs all of a sudden, after thousands of violent confrontations associated with his job, decides to randomly shoot at someone just for the hell of it. Petes fingerprints were on his window. The material inside most vehicles doesn’t hold prints to be lifted. I forgot though that you are an expert because everything you know, you got from reading this paper. Get some life experience and a second opinion…
spokanada on June 07 at 10:32 p.m.
Gary P,
You have no idea what you are talking about. You claim that Thompson is innocent until proven guilty yet on the other hand you claim that Pete is guilty even though he was proven innocent.
Your opinion is worthless until you correct one of your previous statements.
hammer1969 on June 07 at 11:05 p.m.
Any trail attorney with basic knowledge knows that hindsight is not allowed, therefore the fact that Zehm was guilty or innocent is irrelevent. The testimony can only rely upon what was known at the time of the event. If that was the basis of Durkins case and he needs two more months to try and gather another argument he’s wasting everyone’s time and money. As has been stated before, this will be a quick acquittal. Should Zehm have died, of course not. But it had nothing to do with Karl Thompson’s inital repsonse to the situation, it had to do with how Zehm was medically treated and his obvious physical and mental deficiencies.
Shonto Pete was found innocent by jury but that does not mean he didn’t steal Jay Olson’s truck (think OJ Simpson). There were three witnesses that said he was in the truck (including his own admission) and his fingerprints were found on the truck. FYI for those crackerjack box lawyers that believe this paper: There is no crime for carrying a gun and being intoxicated if you can legally carry a gun. And there is no crime for being intoxicated and defending yourself with a gun. Of course the prosecutor didn’t want a conviction for Shonto Pete. That would have torpedoed his (same prosecutor) later trial against the victim….Jay Olson.
Ron_the_Cop on June 08 at 6:49 a.m.
There now is a newer thread for this article:
http://www.spokesman.com/stories/2010/jun/08/appeal-delays-officers-trial/
lewis8457 on June 08 at 7:33 a.m.
Hammer you don’t know what you are talking about either it is against law for a cop to carry a gun into a bar while getting or is intoxicated. I will find the URL and post it for you although even if it comes off a federal site I doubt if you believe that either.
Olsen never chased Pete in his girlfriend’s car because the girlfriend was a guy. And Pete was found innocent of that crime. But you and garyP want us to believe Pete was guilty and Olsen is innocent?
If you don’t believe anything SR writes then what the hell are you doing on their site, shouldn’t you be reading true crime or something like that? Get a life.
I don’t care of he is General Patton no one can kill and man before his day in court. I Know plenty of Vietnam veterans as far as I know none of them have killed a man in a mini mart. Just because a person is veteran does not mean he can murder at will.
Thompson has 18 years in and still has years to live how much does Otto have NONE!
misjustice on June 08 at 7:56 a.m.
GaryP, your curlers are in too tight, obviously…go back to your True Romance stories; since you don’t place ANY value in the SR, not sure why you read it. Are you Olsen’s girlfriend?
brianrbreen on June 08 at 8:43 a.m.
GaryP
“Plan B-your own beloved paper says thompson responded on a report of stealing from an atm. Last I checked, stealing is a crime. It’s what he knew at the time, not what all you csi experts claim to know. Mistakes were made from the top down but not amounting to sending him to prison.
Lewis- a cop of 18 yrs all of a sudden, after thousands of violent confrontations associated with his job, decides to randomly shoot at someone just for the hell of it. Petes fingerprints were on his window. The material inside most vehicles doesn’t hold prints to be lifted. I forgot though that you are an expert because everything you know, you got from reading this paper. Get some life experience and a second opinion…”
Wow!
Do you honestly believe that your continued diatribe reflects well on your department?
eagleproducer on June 08 at 3:55 p.m.
patriot61: Cops are not authority figures. They are not in charge of people, they are here to serve and protect. If you are a cop and think of yourself as an “authority figure” you need to quit working as a cop and find a job where you are an authority figure. Might I recommend baby sitting? I think people don’t like cops because of cops like you, not because they have problems with “authority figures.” Cops are not heroes unless they engage in heroic activity, a quality sadly lacking in the members of the SPD. It is not heroic to shoot someone in that back after they shot at your police dog. It is not heroic to shoot an adolescent while he is lying face down on the sidewalk. It is not heroic to shoot a person in the back of the head while they are fleeing from you because you are worried they’ll boot you from the closet you’ve inhabited your entire adult life. It is not heroic to spend most of your working hours hassling the poor, destitute and homeless. If you were heroes you’d pick on entities worthy of your available force, but you don’t. Are you getting my gist?
This issue is a matter of mens rea and will be decided in Thompson’s favor. That does not, however, relieve him of culpability for his actions regardless of what he knew or didn’t about a purported crime. The police are not judges and juries and are not supposed to mete out justice with violent, deadly strikes with an “ironwood” baton. They are to apprehend suspects with the least amount of force possible. Hitting a person repeatedly in the head with a baton is the use of deadly force and that fact is agreed upon by all parties. I have been trained in the use of and application of deadly force and what Otto had been purported doing would never meet the criteria for the use of deadly force even if he had raised the two liter bottle in a threatening mannter.
brianth on June 09 at 6:30 a.m.
If the prosecutions actions are intended to make a stronger case against Thompson, then yes please have the Judges ruling appealed, we have waited 4 yrs to get to this point. I want to address the one subject that keeps being debated over and over and that is Mr. Thompsons handling of the call. First I want to say I respect the men and women in blue. The job they do is dangerous and does rely on their ability to use split second judgements on how they handle most situations. That said, I still find it hard to see how split second judgement was mandated in this situation. Thompson knew where Mr. Zehm was, he was in the Zip Trip he saw him go in there thats how he knew he was there. Well at this point it seemed now that Mr. Thompson had two choices, 1. go in like he did and already assume that Mr. Zehm is guilty and confront Otto on his own, without back-up, or two wait for back-up as he already had Otto spotted, and wait for other units to show up and assist. Well lets see, not being in Law enforcement myself, but I do have Law enforcement training and knowledge from my younger days. We were instructed that if you come upon a suspect and if you are a lone officer, and you feel that the suspect you are observing maybe a threat, you wait for back-up! Well obviously not being able to determine what was going thru Mr. Thompsons mind at the time of this incident, it is clear to see by Mr. Thompsons immediate actions that some preceived belief in guilt towards the suspect was apparent .Hey you don’t just rush up on some one from behind with club ready to go if you don’t believe of preceived guilt and a threat maybe present. So please, to you Law enforcement people out there, is this wrong? Wouldn’t the smart thing for Thompson to have done was to wait for back-up and try to observe the situation before making the intial contact?
brianth on June 09 at 7:33 a.m.
One last thing for GaryP, Please oh please assure me you are not a police officer in the city of Spokane! With your obvious non understanding of anything It would really be sad if a person like you had a GUN AND BADGE on the streets of Spokane.