October 27, 2011 in News, City

Thompson describes fatal confrontation

Tracking the trial

Follow the testimony and courtroom developments in real-time through live Twitter feeds.

Spokane police Officer Karl F. Thompson Jr. told jurors today that the death of Otto Zehm will be something he carries with him the rest of his life.

“It was a profound tragedy for his family, his friends, for me,” said Thompson, testifying in his own defense in Yakima where he’s on trial for using excessive force and lying to investigators in the fatal March 18, 2006, confrontation with Zehm. “It has extended throughout my department and the community.”

The comments mark the first time Thompson has publicly spoken about the fatal confrontation.

Under questioning from his defense attorney, Carl Oreskovich, Thompson described hearing the dispatch call about a man scaring some girls and possibly taking some of their money before fleeing. He said he spotted Zehm headed to the Zip Trip and told jurors that Zehm saw him pull up in his patrol car.

Thompson said it’s common for crime suspects to try and blend in, “They don’t all run.” He said his greatest concern was for the people in the store and whether Zehm was armed.

When he rounded the aisle that Zehm was in and began closing in on him, Thompson said time slowed down.

He said he was looking for compliance from Zehm. “I gave him commands. They were quick, but he gave me quick responses,” Thompson said. “It was ‘why’ and ‘no.’ ” Thompson said when he told Zehm to drop the pop bottle he was holding, Zehm asked him why and then refused.

Asked by Oreskovich why he was concerned about a plastic pop bottle, Thompson said: “That’s like holding a brick in your hand.”

Although security video shows no hesitation as he approaches Zehm in the store, Thompson said he recalls pausing briefly before engaging.

He said his intent was to detain Zehm but that Zehm continued to flail and struggle to get away. Zehm continued to move after being shocked with a Taser and Thompson said he worried that he was going to get to his feet, which would put him in a position to potentially harm him or others.

Thompson said it’s possible that he might have inadvertently hit Zehm in the head during the violent struggle but that he never targeted a potentially lethal area.

Cross examination is expected later this afternoon.

Watch for continuing online updates to this story and for complete coverage in Friday’s edition of The Spokesman-Review.

116 comments on this story so far. Add yours!

Squid on October 27 at 12:50 p.m.
Seems like it’s a profound tragedy for Otto, the SPD, and this entire city too. Hard to feel sorry for the SPD though.
The_Seer on October 27 at 12:53 p.m.
CO forgot to ask him why he used lethal force. He forgot to ask him why he was reaching for his baton while running into the Zip Trip. He forgot to ask him why, if he was really concerned for the people in the Zip Trip, why he didn’t just simply wait for Zehm to come outside.
Thompson is toast on re-direct. If the prosecutors don’t ask those questions they should be fired for dereliction of duty.
Coffee on October 27 at 1:07 p.m.
Hopefully Spokane police Officer Karl F. Thompson Jr. will be found guilty because it will put our local police on notice that misuse of the power we give them has consequences. Even if they give him a deferred sentence which believe would be appropriate, the lesson will not be lost on SPD.
ChefGus/ John Olsen on October 27 at 1:13 p.m.
I hope the Cross Examination is without any holds barred… and they get this guy to “react” on the witness stand… I still think there was some possible “rage” from body building drugs…. but no tests were or are ever done…… “afraid of a pop bottle” that is seen and recognized as a pop bottle…. We have armed men at house of charity every day…. and do not ever have to hardly ever use force to get them to “comply” with our requests…. MOAB “management of aggressive behaviour” as taught to all of us there by our Security Guy retired southern california policeman and security expert gives us all to tools to deal with seemingly armed persons without any need to raise a club.
How can anyone who is carrying a 40 Cal or more Automatic, and a Taser, and a non standard Baton be afraid of anyone…. give us a reality check here…. Officer T should have taken the 5th…. waiting for the Cross exam results on the evening news… John
jddavis on October 27 at 1:19 p.m.
Good questions Seer. Running through the event in my mind as told by Thompson, if I was really concerned with others in the store, I would have had my sidearm out of the holster ready to aim and fire.
I’m not trained in law enforcement, but know something about application of deadly force. No doubt if no one was in the field of fire, I would have had the drop on him. All this of course, if I believed he was involved in a robbery/attempted robbery. Either way, I wouldn’t bulldog my way up to someone I thought was dangerous and likely armed.
herewegoagain on October 27 at 1:20 p.m.
Don’t be the least bit surprised that this poor excuse for a human is going to walk when all is said and done.
They should all be charged with murder ( officers involved that evening) but it won’t happen. Once again the old boys club saves each other
trustbutverify on October 27 at 1:48 p.m.
Wow! I guess thought this paranoid specimen’s eye we all are carrying weapons around, we all just don’t know it! Imagine the gall of a person carrying around a pop bottle in a convenience store, how dare Otto do such a thing.
Everyone stop carrying these pop bottle “bricks” around and use Dixie cups instead as those aren’t considered weapons by SPD yet. I’m sure if Otto would have been able to get his beloved Snickers bar that Thompson would have claimed he was wielding a club! I hope the jurors can see through this bs.
Ron_the_Cop on October 27 at 1:51 p.m.
ChefGus,
I believe the fed young guns will definitely put Ofc. Thompson on the hot seat like no one in Spokane has been before. As I said in the other threads no one in Tucker’s bush league has held them to this level of scrutiny before.
Yes Ofc. Thompson is saying out the right things for officer safety but the video is what the video is. Hopefully the jury can see through the smoke that the defense is blowing and the lies given by the others in this search for the truth.
Bottom line in my opinion yes there were issues of officer safety but Ofc. Thompson acted like a cowboy that day and this situation went down hill quickly. I know it’s 20 20 but I wouldn’t have entered the store unless there was a direct/immediate threat and would have contacted Zehm outside.
If Ofc. Thompson was concerned about Zehm’s pop bottle I would have backed up and drawn my weapon and ordered him to keep his hands where I could see them until my assisting officers arrived. I would have not closed the distance to Zehm. If Zehm made a threatening move and brought out a weapon then I would have considered lethal force depending on what my background was. Yes there is an issue about hostage taking but as this went down I believe Ofc. Thompson’s action precipitated this event and the reaction from Zehm. It will be for the jury to decide if Ofc Thompson based on his knowledge of this event, education/training/experience acted within the course and scope of his employment and used reasonable force.
This is really a wrongful death case - negligent homicide/manslaughter under state law for positional asphyxia and the application of the mask. Of course we have the issue of the overt cover-up and the editing of the video tape that may or not come out in this trial. I don’t think the feds are done yet and there may be further indictments whether this jury convicts or not.
Also I’m still live blogging over at Rick Rydell KXLY facebook page.
terrymr on October 27 at 1:55 p.m.
I guess I’m still confused about why when going about your business you’re expected to mindlessly comply when somebody in uniform runs up behind you and starts screaming at you.
It may be in the cops head that this person could be a robber, but from the other side it makes no sense at all if you don’t know why they’re screaming at you.
trustbutverify on October 27 at 2:07 p.m.
If I was ordered to drop a pop bottle by a police officer very upset regardless if I had done anything wrong or not I would be afraid the pop bottle might hit the ground blast open, make a noise and cause the upset cop screaming at me to freak out and draw his gun and shoot me! Officer, at least let me set it on the ground please! Cops should be cool and level headed.
smittysturn on October 27 at 2:09 p.m.
These comments are hilarious. Never have so many, who know so little, shot their mouths off so much.
nslopeofw on October 27 at 2:16 p.m.
Mr. POPO, its sad to think you believe that you and your buddies are the only ones trained like this. The only ones who eval the situation upon entering any business. Who keep their backs to the wall at the restaurants. Who are trained in weapons and physical self defense as well as EMT skills.
trustbutverify on October 27 at 2:23 p.m.
There should be a reality TV show based about trying to stay alive in Spokane. Here’s the tagline:
Livin in “the Kan” and thinking about going to get a pop and a Snickers bar? Think again fool! Cause being innocent or guilty or a crime doesn’t matter here, it’s life or death baby!
The_Seer on October 27 at 2:28 p.m.
nslope: Exactly. My wife always wondered why I never sat with my back to the door in a restaurant.
SpokyDaBear on October 27 at 2:30 p.m.
Smittysturn is a cop-luber
BlondeSquawker on October 27 at 2:37 p.m.
I believe dropping a pop bottle is something we learn very young NOT to do. Who wants to open up a pop after it’s been dropped? It goes against all reason. Otto had every right to question the craziness of the demand.
BlondeSquawker on October 27 at 2:41 p.m.
I know one thing for sure. None of my kids are going as “Crazy Pop Bottle Man” for Halloween.
Lewis on October 27 at 2:44 p.m.
smitty look at the video now tell us all where the command to drop bottle was.
court documents show Thompson ordered Otto to stop resisting while still hitting Zehm with baton he never gave Otto a chance to stop resisting.
also in court docs Zehm was on his back trying to protect his face with the bottle, while Thompson continued to bash him with baton.
Thompson himself said “it’s possible that he might have inadvertently hit Zehm in the head” when bashing the hell out of someone it is easy to get off target, basically he was beating Otto down.
So Smitty, Ok to use lethal force because he was in roid rage and missed the mark, sounds like crazy person to me, not a member of the force that protects people more like a crazy maniac.
But we all know the members of SPD see nothing wrong so what is a disabled man compared to mighty officers dressed in black.
DEAD
misjustice on October 27 at 2:47 p.m.
smittysturn on October 27 at 2:09 p.m. These comments are hilarious. Never have so many, who know so little, shot their mouths off so much.
LOL…….I think I’m in love with smittysturn!! Way to go & I couldn’t have said it any better myself!!!!!!!!!!
BlondeSquawker on October 27 at 2:50 p.m.
Hey Spokane Police! Don’t shoot!
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DJjJ1C-7cmM
de3 on October 27 at 3:08 p.m.
Since schools now ban pocket knives, even pictures of pocket knives and pictures of guns, I presume they will have to ban soda cans, soda bottles, and heck, even textbooks. And cell phones - gosh, they are as big and as hard as the rock that Quentin Dodd held in his hand. P.E. is over with. Ever seen the damage that a baseball bat or tennis racket can inflict?
I understand an SPD officer made a video showing how a bottle of pop can be used to smash stuff. May be we should make a video showing how 100s of ordinary household weapons can smash stuff too!
Looks like all of us are now at risk of an SPD violent response because when you get down to it, holding a cellphone is the the same as holding a soda bottle, a rock or an assault weapon. All of which are lethal weapons in Spokane.
richie on October 27 at 3:35 p.m.
De3, you are exactly right. I saw the vid of Thompson’s cop buddy busting up boards and watermelons with a pop bottle. It came across as quite clumsy. It reminded me of people breaking boards and bricks with their fists, feet and skulls, which would be far more effective than using a pop bottle. So the cops can just assume everyone is “armed” (no pun intended) and have their way with them with their nightsticks, tazers and Glocks, as well as their equally equipped brethren. As far as Thompson saying that Otto saw him pull up, who cares? He had no reason to think that he was after him, as he did nothing wrong. Maybe this is the opening the prosecution needs to introduce the fact that Otto was innocent. I see the reasons why his innocence is not a factor, but I do not understand them. I cannot see why his innocence is not the number one important factor in this case.
lowtechmaster on October 27 at 3:37 p.m.
The Spokane Police Department members who have testified for the Defense (all of whom have contradicted themselves) have given the citizens of Spokane ample reasons to fear those who are paid to protect us. “Anything Goes” was a great song…but a very sad motto for a police department.
DickAdams on October 27 at 3:44 p.m.
I wonder who Thompson thinks he is kidding? It sure isn`t the citizens of Spokane from everything I read. More especially when the officials in city hall got caught covering up by the DOJ, in this sad, sad tragedy. Mayor Verner should be put on the witness stand. After all Verner is the top dog in the Lilac City. What a disgrace covering up this crime just criminals do by being liars.
Kivaari on October 27 at 3:48 p.m.
Had Thompson fessed up early on this would be over. Otto’s family would have cashed the check, Thompson would have received probation, and the sun would come up each morning.
It’s a shame that the department and Thompson let this drag on for such an agonizing period of time.
jddavis on October 27 at 4:27 p.m.
Smitty—your smug attitude will put you in a position of disadvantage…badge or no badge.
Ron_the_Cop on October 27 at 4:28 p.m.
Kivaari,
I agree this would have been over and done with if it was acknowledged this was a tragic incident and that mistakes were potentially made e.g., the positional asphyxia/mask. The incident itself pails in comparison to the cover-up. DO NOT VOTE FOR VERNER!
Sunshinegurl on October 27 at 4:29 p.m.
Durkin shows video clip. Thompson: “This is 1 of the reasons I didn’t want to watch the video before i made a stemtn. It’s confusing”
Thompson said he asked Walker if video showed #Zehm punching him. He said no. “And I said ‘Oh sh!t.’” That was night of incident
Durkin: So you DID review contents of video on scene that night. #zehm
misjustice on October 27 at 4:30 p.m.
Aww, ain’t that cute? JustGrammaAgain is in luv! At her age, one would think that she’d know better…wait till her hubby finds out!
Just to recap:
Plastic soda bottle = brick
Candy bar = club
Rock = knife
Holding any one of these items in Spokan’t when the fraidy catz Nancy boyz are around = dead
Any questions?
misjustice on October 27 at 4:36 p.m.
Funny clip, Blondie!
; )
Caution: if you are a cop do not click on the YouTube link, it will terrify you!
Sunshinegurl on October 27 at 4:40 p.m.
…we do not act rightly because we have virtue or excellence, but we rather have these because we have acted rightly…
detroitdude on October 27 at 4:50 p.m.
When several posters on here, who normally bicker about political BS and day in and out flame and bait one another on the political topic of the day, are, for the most part in unanimous agreement that something here stinks to high heaven (used loosely), it is noteworthy. Watch the video, “All I wanted was a Snickers”…this could have been anyone, not just Otto.
Kivaari said: “Had Thompson fessed up early on this would be over. Otto’s family would have cashed the check, Thompson would have received probation, and the sun would come up each morning.”
This is why I have no respect for numbskulls like you. Yeah, you know, when your kid gets murdered, a monetary judgement really replaces your child, right? I think anyone who has lost a family member and has won a civil suit would gladly trade their cash for their loved one back, it’s the only compensation that can really be offered after someone is dead.
Secondly, Thompson would have received probation?!? WTF…he should get a slap on the wrist for fessing up? No, and you know why? Because his actions led to the death of a man, for absolutely no reason at all. Nothing about Otto Zehm indicated that he was a danger to Thompson, patrons/employees of the Zip Trip, or anyone else. I just really don’t like that comment, not when anyone who commits a crime and is not in law enforcement, will never get the benefit of the doubt.
detroitdude on October 27 at 5:01 p.m.
As has been said on here, I’d like to see the good cops rise up from this and confront this corruption….if the corruption runs so deep you are afraid to, then perhaps it is good the Feds are here.
valleyman on October 27 at 5:09 p.m.
@detroitdude: This is where you are so wrong and where I think, having watched the federal prosecutors, they are wrong as well. THE POLICE HAVE NO WAY OF KNOWING A PERSON’S GUILT OR INNOCENCE UPON FIRST CONTACT.
You and the other howlers on here can say what you want, but the fact remains, when you have limited information, and you have a situtation you believe can turn confrotnational, you take the actions necessary to ensure you come out of it ok. If Thompson hit Zehm in the head or neck, and he’s lying about it, then he deserves to go to prison. I’m not sure they’ve proved it, sadly.
Thompson didn’t knwo Zehm, didn’t know he was mentally handicapped, didn’t know he always did the same thing with regard to buying a pepsi and a snickers, and he sure didn’t know he was innocent.
Thomspon, if tellign the truth, had a man actively egressing from him, with an object in his hands that Thompson’s training told him could be used as a weapon, and Thompson supposedly ordered Zehm to stop and drop the soda, which he did not do.
What hasn’t been properly talked about by either side in this is just how disabled Zehm really was as far as his comprehension ability. Did he have the ability to, knowing he was innocent in his mind of comitting any crime, stopping and obeying a lawful order from an officer without acting in a manner that a police officer would consider resisting?
I really hate to even bring up this line of thought as I am still convinced Thompson used excessive force, but I’ve been thinking it for a while, and wonder if this whole thing could have been avoided if Thompson had receieved some training on dealing with mentally handicapped people and Zehm had listened to his command rather than trying to carry on with his normal activities.
Here’s to hoping for the right verdict, whatever that might be, even though I feel I know where this is headed. The prosecution is sucking at the moment…
valleyman on October 27 at 5:12 p.m.
Please forgive my spelling errors… Apparently my copy and paste with my edits didn’t take… :(
The_Seer on October 27 at 5:12 p.m.
Here are some beauties from the tweets provided by Cuniff today. They occur after the jury has been excused and the defense is whining about rebuttal witnesses.
Ahmed asks to bring up #Zehm’s innocence in rebuttal. “This nefarious mindset that they’re playing for the jury is complete fantasy.”
Oreskovich: We don’t know that he’s innocent. “We don’t know what occurred at the ATM.” Did #Zehm try to get cash and was unsuccessful?
It was Thompson’s job to determine the answers to what “we don’t know.” You don’t accomplish that by beating the person with your nightstick.
The Judge better allow Otto’s innocence into record. The defense has repeatedly referred to him as a robber, possible robber, et.al.
PlanB on October 27 at 5:16 p.m.
Sorry but during Thompson’s sad testimony (and by testimony I mean steaming pile of self contradicting lies), I kept thinking about how Jeff Foxworthy might address it:
If you are holding a pop bottle - you might be a dangerous criminal that requires deadly force.
If you are close to a pop bottle, or any item for that matter - you might be a dangerous criminal that requires deadly force.
If you are running - you might be a dangerous criminal that requires deadly force.
If you are NOT running - you might be a dangerous criminal that requires deadly force.
If you are wearing a jacket - you might be a dangerous criminal that requires deadly force.
If you’ve been beaten and tasered - you might be a dangerous criminal that requires deadly force (again).
Ed Byrnes on October 27 at 5:18 p.m.
Prosecutor Durkin did make Thompson appear to be a liar when going over the videotape in court, and overall I think the cross-examination was adequate from I could pick up on the tweets.
Hopefully the rebuttal witnesses will be strong, and Durkin will have a strong closing statement.
Nonetheless the verdict seems uncertain.
If Thompson walks citizens’ reactions are uncertain too.
Ed
Ron_the_Cop on October 27 at 5:20 p.m.
Valleyman,
I tend to agree with you re assessing the mental state of Zehm being able to comprehend Ofc. Thompson’s orders and need for further training.
HOWEVER from the video it appears that Ofc. Thompson went to his baton almost immediately without any benefit of commands. Testimony is that commands were heard only after Zehm was on his back.
Ofc. Thompson possible fault was he approached too quickly and perhaps precipitated the event without allowing anytime to assess Zehm’s responses. A few quick questions back and forth may have revealed that Zehm was mentally challenged. The question is whether Ofc. Thompson responded too quickly, precipitated the event, resulting in unnecessarily force being applied based on his level of education, training and experience. This is what the jury must decide.
The cover-up/obstruction of justice is another matter and I don’t think the feds are done. Former Chief Odenthal and Asst. City Atty Treppiedi should be very worried about the editing of the video tape with all views that was withheld from view.
Shadedmuse on October 27 at 5:27 p.m.
Chief Gus, i thought MOAB was Airforce talk Mother of all bombs. being a police chief you should no that.
brianrbreen on October 27 at 5:47 p.m.
What is really troubling for me, and it should be for any cop, cop hater, and all those in between, is the difference in the evidence and Officer Thompson’s statement to Ferguson which he apparently has now admitted on the stand is not depicted in the video.
“ he’s moving away from me, as I’m closing distance, he turns around and this would have been where he uh, was standing, started swinging at me. As I approached to get close enough again to try and push him or knock him down to the floor, he’s standing, standing there boxing with both fists, throwing punches.”
brianrbreen on October 27 at 5:56 p.m.
@Valleyman
I don’t think there has ever been a trial where the prosecution didn’t feel confident after their case in chief, and the defense was worried. Then the defense presents their case and they are confident, and the prosecution is worried. Prosecution presents rebuttal then they feel confident again and the defense is worried. The jury gets the case and both the prosecution and defense are worried.
I am prepared to bet you my check against yours that the note sent by the jury to the judge was whether or not Otto had committed a crime. You on?
valleyman on October 27 at 5:59 p.m.
Liberty_Bell: Your statements are offensive, anti-Semitic, and without logic. If you look at the posts above, 90% of the people on here seem to think Zehm’s innocence as a matter of hindsight should be presented to the jury. You are right that police don’t get to make those calls in the field; you are wrong that it’s not the issue. I have a very firm grasp on my Constitution and my history. Don’t claim to have the upper hand in that regard thank you sir.
Additionally, I hope your anti-Jew comment gets you banned. Yours rants about the KKK and the like don’t belong on this thread. You’re acting like a total nut lacking any credibility.
valleyman on October 27 at 6:02 p.m.
@brian: I’d love to take you on, but unless as is fabled about those public employee retirement checks you rake in one hell of a lot as a retired detective, I’ll hang on to my guarantee…
So, NO DICE! :)
Jury note aside, the judge won’t be able to help them with that question, and I’ve seen no way the prosecution gets that information in at this point. Do you see it differently?
Without that information, I really sense this is going acquittal at worst and hung at best.
JayNW on October 27 at 6:06 p.m.
Actually Mr. Treppiedi is Greek. and yes, that is an anti semitic and should cause liberty bell to be banned. the first amendment does have some limitations.
brianrbreen on October 27 at 6:11 p.m.
@Valleyman
Hell I quit trying to call um years ago. They won’t get it in, he ‘s already ruled and he isn’t going to change. But CO did a good job of drawing the inference that Otto did a stick-up or something.
misjustice on October 27 at 6:14 p.m.
And I thought that any “inference” or mention of poor Otto’s guilt/innocence would “open the door”…?????
The_Seer on October 27 at 6:17 p.m.
Two cops are really going to bring up Otto’s mental health? Really?
Otto went to work at the same job every workday for how many years in a row? He was conducting a banking transaction using an ATM minutes before his encounter with Thompson? How is any of that an exhibition of abnormality?
He was calmly going about his usual business. He was engaged in behavior we all do almost every day of our lives. But now we want to bring up his mental illness? I can’t freaking believe the mindset of police these days. So according to Kivari, Ron, we are all potentially crazy. And according to Thompson and the training received by SPD members we are all “possible” felons with deadly weapons easily within reach in all environments.
What a joke.
brianrbreen on October 27 at 6:19 p.m.
@Valleyman
With respect to the note. When the jury sends a note to a judge a lot depends on what the exact question is and how the judge answered it. I don’t know exactly how the question was worded but the Judge apparently responded by saying he couldn’t answer the question because of a ruling he had made. So who knows how the jury might interpret that response, and they will interpret it even if they aren’t supposed to.
valleyman on October 27 at 6:21 p.m.
@Brian: Touche on the interpreting comment.
The_Seer on October 27 at 6:22 p.m.
As a Jew I’m not offended by Liberty’s comments only in that he lumped Rocco amongst us.
I mean really, Rocky Trepiddi a mensch? Not in a million years!
Oy Vey!
The_Seer on October 27 at 6:23 p.m.
Two retired cops acting as the 1st amendment police….
Does it get any better?
brianrbreen on October 27 at 6:33 p.m.
@Misjustice
They were careful not to open the door. In all the testimony regarding the possible scenarios they stayed away from directly suggesting Otto was responsible for anything.
brianrbreen on October 27 at 6:37 p.m.
@The_Seer
Not me, I never even read Liberty_Bell’S stuff. I could care less.
jddavis on October 27 at 6:37 p.m.
Valleyman: “You and the other howlers on here can say what you want, but the fact remains, when you have limited information, and you have a situtation you believe can turn confrotnational, you take the actions necessary to ensure you come out of it ok.”
I agree with you Valleyman! The problem is Thompson was responding to what he though was a robbery/attempted robbery. A reasonable person would think the suspect is dangerous, and likely possesses a weapon. Is my thinking wrong?
So if a reasonable thinking LEO is making first contact without cover, would you expect the officer to maintain control of the suspect all the while minimizing risk to him/herself? I certainly don’t believe an officer with such experience would rush a suspect with a baton when there is a great probability the suspect is armed, do you? would you?
The_Seer on October 27 at 6:43 p.m.
bran: I was referring to kivari and valleyman. And in regards to Otto’s mental health Ron and kivari.
brianrbreen on October 27 at 6:43 p.m.
@jddavis
I don’t know if I would have ever been considered a reasonable LEO but a robbery/ attempted robbery suspect. The pee shooter comes out, not the night stick.
Slightlyworried on October 27 at 6:44 p.m.
The fact that the jury sent out a note is a bit troubling because they, like all other juries, are instructed not to discuss the case until all the evidence is presented and closing arguments are heard. It appears they may have violated this instruction which means Thompson may have a great issue on appeal if he is convicted.
The_Seer on October 27 at 6:45 p.m.
jddavis: I know, huh? Thompson was so concerned about Otto being a threat to others he left the store before searching him for weapons. Is that standard protocol too?
Ron_the_Cop on October 27 at 6:45 p.m.
The_Seer,
OUCH. Hey I didn’t mean to imply that I approved at all of Ofc. Thompson’s tactics. I believe most cops I know would consider this p– poor. I’ve said before under existing state law there are potential crimes that may have occurred - negligent homicide/manslaughter for unsanctioned tactics that resulted in Zehm’s death. Of course in Tucker’s bush league that would never happen.
In the major leagues the feds jurisdiction is both civil/criminal civil rights violations. As for the criminal charge this requires specific intent. This is a big hurdle to get over re beyond a reasonable doubt when you have to view from the officer’s perspective. Still the video is what the video is.
Look I came from one of the meth capital of the US. Spokane does appear to be a little on edge - training ??? SPD to its credit has only lost one officer in recent memory. At RPD during my tenure we lost six directly to ambush and gun related incidents. And more from other causes. We just lost another to a gunshot.
brianrbreen on October 27 at 6:46 p.m.
@Slightlyworried
Happens all the time not a big deal.
Slightlyworried on October 27 at 6:51 p.m.
@BrianBreen:
Care to join me trick or treating at Spokane Police Department? I am going to wear a leather jacket, a blonde wig, and carry a 2 liter bottle of Diet Pepsi. If I’m approached by anyone in uniform I am going to tell them that all I want is a Snickers.
de3 on October 27 at 6:54 p.m.
Juries are permitted to ask their own questions about the case and do so by handing a note with the question to the judge. Or perhaps there was some other issue they wanted to raise not related to the court case. No big deal.
brianrbreen on October 27 at 7:03 p.m.
@Slightlyworried
I’ll pass thanks. I not in very good standing with some of the folks down there anymore. I’d get the candy with the razor blade in it.
Slightlyworried on October 27 at 7:03 p.m.
I have no doubt that juries can pass notes to the judge. And I know that juries often pass notes regarding the evidence presented after they begin deliberating. But this jury, like all others, were instructed not to discuss the evidence among themselves until the presentation of evidence was complete and closing arguments were done. The note appears to ask for more evidence regarding an issue they have discussed among themselves. I’m no legal expert, but this does at least appear to be a potential problem.
Slightlyworried on October 27 at 7:04 p.m.
@BrianBreen; Did I at least make you laugh at the suggestion?
brianrbreen on October 27 at 7:10 p.m.
@Slightlyworried
Usually it’s just one juror, or maybe a couple with the same question submitting it independently.
I think de3 might be referring to a grand jury where the jurors do ask questions of witnesses through the prosecutor.
brianrbreen on October 27 at 7:14 p.m.
@Slightlyworried
Yep, but I didn’t want to get into it to much out of fear that Liberty_Bell might come up with a cite that makes celebrating Halloween illegal, and spoil every kids fun.
another_perspective on October 27 at 7:15 p.m.
For two years or more, I have ignored valleyman, just from the fact that he refuses to live in the city of spokane and there fore does not have a representative voice, along with any logical thought.
Best to ignore that Troll
Squid on October 27 at 7:18 p.m.
With an Otto costume, wouldn’t you “blend in?”
“Thompson said it’s common for crime suspects to try and blend in”
hunternomore on October 27 at 8:05 p.m.
There you guys go again. Drawing incorrect conclusions based on one theory. It’s also possible that only one juror had a question, since they are not allowed to discuss the case, and needed clarification. Or maybe someone had to go to the bathroom. There could be more than one reason the note was passed. As for the nasty comment about people making comments who don’t know anything, it’s pretty apparent that there are no intelligent people in Spokane except cops, right? Really!
misjustice on October 27 at 8:10 p.m.
Brian answered: @Misjustice ~ that’s ME!
“They were careful not to open the door. In all the testimony regarding the possible scenarios they stayed away from directly suggesting Otto was responsible for anything.”
Yeah, inuendo and hints don’t count? And juries are completely objective? They will weigh that no DIRECT suggestions were made as to poor, poor Otton being a meth headed robber that scared two lil’ white gals?
; )
This goes to planting “reasonable” doubt; what ever the hell that means…wink, wink, wink…
Slightlyworried on October 27 at 8:39 p.m.
@hunternomore:
Court started this morning with the judge notifying both sides that he had received a note from the jury (not a “member of the jury”). I believe you will find that the note indicated that “members” of the jury (not a member) wanted to know if more evidence could be presented about Otto Zehm. This is not, as you theorized without any facts, someone wanting to go to the bathroom (which they could do in the jury room with or without the permission of the judge).
But I did enjoy the irony of your post.
hunternomore on October 27 at 8:49 p.m.
Actually i wasn’t going for “irony”, slightly. Just interjecting that there could be a lot of reasons why the “jury” sent a note. In addition, even single members of the jury are referred to as the jury. Just sayin. Frankly, based on how jurors are chosen and especially in WA, justice rarely is served.
Sunshinegurl on October 27 at 8:54 p.m.
” The problem is Thompson was responding to what he though was a robbery/attempted robbery. A reasonable person would think the suspect is dangerous, and likely possesses a weapon. Is my thinking wrong?”
Thompson was on a break at a police substation less than a mile away. The station was filled with other officers watching the NCAA tournament.
Thompson heard the “suspicious circumstance” on his handheld radio, and checked his patrol car’s computer for details. Realizing he was nearby, he responded alone because he didn’t care about the zags game.
Based on this information I would say any statement that Thompson went into this afraid that he was dealing with an armed/dangerous maniac is completely false.
Slightlyworried on October 27 at 9:11 p.m.
@hunternomore:
If you would have been watching the live feed or reading the tweets send by the media covering the trial, you would know that the judge made it clear that “the jury” wanted more evidence regarding Otto Zehm. His words left no impression that a rogue member had individually made the request. When I posted at 5:30 pm about this issue I made the horrible and idiotic assumption that others posting on this list were actually paying attention to what was actually going on in court.
So, I’ll say it again:
Since the jury has been instructed not to discuss the evidence until after completion of closing arguments, it appears troubling that it sent a note to the judge asking for more evidence.
I will not assume in the future that people posting on this blog have actually been following the proceedings. I’m aware now that people are confusing their assumptions with facts. My bad. I wish to apologize for discussing facts.
misjustice on October 27 at 9:17 p.m.
I wish that I could follow the actual court proceedings. I can only read the news reports…I am a cog in a corporate wheel which eats up most of my life…
*sigh*
And I hate to depend on “news” reports, I’d rather be in the court room hearing it all and watching body language and seeing for myself…
valleyman on October 27 at 9:41 p.m.
@another_perspective: I’m glad you have it all figured out. With people like you who know all and see all, it’s no wonder we had to move the trial of Thompson to Yakima to make sure if convicted he didn’t have SOLID grounds for an appeal based on jury bias.
I may not live in your fair city, but I work there, and that gives me plenty of right to weigh in whenever I’d like. The fact you feel threatened by that makes your fear of reading what I have to say and responding to any objective or subjective points I might make quite sad. Our American discourse depends on the ability of people to speak their mind and carry on a conversation civilly even when they disagree. Too many on here, now to include you, don’t get that.
If you don’t like what I have to say, refute me, or engage me. Stop trying to poison the well by saying I don’t deserve a voice because I don’t live in the city proper. That’s a poor way to win your argument, don’t you think?
valleyman on October 27 at 9:43 p.m.
@Liberty: Are you wholly incapable of staying on topic, or is it just an attraction to shiny objects that gets your distracted?
nslopeofw on October 27 at 9:47 p.m.
Valleyman-
I have no way of knowing whenever i enter a quick store if there is a robbery going on, or if anyone in the store is a criminal, or intending to harm me, yet i do not run in and beat the crap out of everyone and blame it on my training.
BTW, my profession is one of those that is far deadlier than the police. I am well trained, and deal with situations far more uncertain and deadly. If i’m not up to the task, then i shouldn’t do what i do. Same goes for the police.
misjustice on October 27 at 9:47 p.m.
“If you don’t like what I have to say, refute me, or engage me.”
Or, anotherperspective, just ignore the Sheriff, who hates to be called a cupcake btw but can lob names, like “howlers” and others at folks that post here…thin skinned and domineering; must be a requirement in the “valley”?
oink on October 27 at 9:52 p.m.
Can’t wait for Klubber Karl to start the appeal process I Hope et al has got it stashed …the feds are the feds don’t you know!
valleyman on October 27 at 9:57 p.m.
@Liberty: Again, you can’t stay on topic.
@nslopeofw: More dangerous than being hunted or assaulted by criminals? Your either in the military or think that accidents caused by human error are more dangerous than interacting with people who would you like you dead. Military, I tip my hat to you, otherwise, you don’t get to make that claim.
@Misjustice: And just because I grow really tired of your constant use of “my” assumed position as “Sheriff” to attempt to discredit anything I have to say without actually debating me on the merits - I’ll confirm what Brian & Ron have tried telling you for months. I AM NOT THE SHERIFF nor am I related to him in any way. It was fun letting you have mind game with yourself while it lasted…
brianrbreen on October 27 at 10:04 p.m.
@hunternomore
Here is my earlier post. I’ll bet my paycheck what the note asked, if you are interested. You can tell by the Judges open court statement to the lawyers as to his response to the note that it was in reference to what he had “excluded”. So it didn’t have anything to do with going to the bathroom. I will admit I have been wrong before but that was back in 1968.
brianrbreen on October 27 at 7:10 p.m.
@Slightlyworried
Usually it’s just one juror, or maybe a couple with the same question submitting it independently.
I think de3 might be referring to a grand jury where the jurors do ask questions of witnesses through the prosecutor.
@Slightlyworried
I don’t think it is a problem, notes from a juror happen all the time regarding the case, and it doesn’t mean they have been discussing the case. It’s no big deal.
brianrbreen on October 27 at 10:11 p.m.
@Misjustice
Honest, he is not Ozzie.
valleyman on October 27 at 10:33 p.m.
@Liberty: You are nothing but an anti-Semite and your posts are off topic and non-sequitor. Again, here’s to you being banned for being an absolute waste of space on this site.
misjustice on October 27 at 10:33 p.m.
I would never attempt to discredit the Sheriff. He doesn’t need my help!
misjustice on October 27 at 10:35 p.m.
Ozman, can’t run the Sheriff’s Department; but he thinks he can “run” the SR threads…mainly by name calling and bulllying other contributors.
valleyman on October 27 at 10:40 p.m.
Whatever misjustice. It’s clear only a few adults can have any meaningful conversation on here… And if you’re referring to my calling out of Liberty for his use of anti-Semitic slurs, if that makes me a name caller, I accept that. You should be ashamed for not equally condemning him.
jddavis on October 27 at 10:43 p.m.
Valleyman—I engaged you…no response. I don’t believe I was offensive or disrespectful; perhaps my question was too simple?
Where is Orange? Seems someone got there nose bent on my comment on yesterdays thread…my comment “got the gate.”
valleyman on October 27 at 10:51 p.m.
@jddavis: I’m sorry. You did ask a well-reasoned and rather simple question, and I was too busy dealing with the children to actually play with the adults… That was rude of me to wait this long to respond.
I’ve said from the beginning I think Thompson acted very poorly. If I were a member of law enforcement, I would get a visual of my suspect, call for backup, get containment, and only if the suspect moved to endanger someone or flee would I act alone, breaking my containment to engage. Thompson rushed in…
Isn’t there a song about “only fools rush in…?”
So, in that sense, Thompson acted very poorly, and if I was a LEO in his shoes I would not have done the same. I still don’t think a jury convicts him because he acted like an idiot with regard to tactics…
valleyman on October 27 at 10:53 p.m.
@Brian: You brought up a very interesting point earlier about gun vs. baton. I would have to agree with you there… Why challenge a “suspected armed robber” with a baton in hand, why not just draw down and start giving orders?
Unfortunately, I think Zehm’s response would have been the same given his mental capacity and his innocence. Very sad.
james_l on October 27 at 11:07 p.m.
@valleyman at 9:57 p.m.:
“@nslopeofw: More dangerous than being hunted or assaulted by criminals? Your either in the military or think that accidents caused by human error are more dangerous than interacting with people who would you like you dead. Military, I tip my hat to you, otherwise, you don’t get to make that claim.”
Police officer is just barely in the top 10 most dangerous occupations, placing 10th. I believe nslopeofw has indicated previously he is an oil worker, which would place him in a significantly more dangerous occupation than police officer.
The top 10 most dangerous occupations:
1. Fishing
2. Logging
3. Aircraft Pilots and Flight Engineers
4. Farmers and Ranchers
5. Mining Machine Operators
6. Roofers
7. Refuse Collectors
8. Drivers (salespeople and truck drivers)
9. Industrial Machinery Operators, Installers, and Maintainers
10. Police and Sheriff Patrol Officers
In 7 out of the 9 occupations more dangerous than police officer the salary is much lower than the cops.
The number one cause of death and injury for police officer is traffic accidents.
Source: Bureau of Labor Statistics: http://www.bls.gov/news.release/pdf/cfoi.pdf
jddavis on October 27 at 11:07 p.m.
Valleyman—I don’t think the jury will convict him for bad tactics either. I think they will see through the BS story of his and the other LEOs and their credability will be called into question…as it should be.
Although I’ve never heard the phrase “Never take a baton to a gun fight”, it goes without saying.
valleyman on October 27 at 11:12 p.m.
@james: Again remind me in which of those positions do people shoot at you? I think you’ll find that study refers to ACCIDENTS… This was pointed out by another poster or two earlier…
Oh, and by the way, where is the military on that list?
Sorry, not buying what you’re selling…
valleyman on October 27 at 11:13 p.m.
@jddavis: I wish I could have the same faith you do in the ability of the common man to see right from wrong and bs where bs exists in today’s screwed up world.
As for the second part, I think if the prosecutors were to focus on that key point, they might have a much better shot of convicting him…
valleyman on October 27 at 11:17 p.m.
@Liberty: Try spending less time misquoting Jefferson to make your twisted points and telling me to stop calling you what you clearly are, and just give it up… Your earlier posts about “Jewish lawyers” were removed… So I think my definition of anti-Semitic fits with the Spokesman editors… I hope you’ve enjoyed posting, because you clearly didn’t learn anything from earlier…
Lewis on October 27 at 11:34 p.m.
valleyman you stated thompson did not have training for disabled people but he did he said that on the stand today he had training he just didn’t realize Otto was disabled,
also you said thompson did not know Otto had not stolen money but he did it was reported on krem news he got a dispatch before he entered the store saying the girls had called back to say Otto had not taken any of their money.
Valleyman is full of mis-information typical cop blowing smoke out his rear end.
valleyman on October 27 at 11:35 p.m.
@Liberty: You can use a quote however you’d like, but when it’s misapplied to make your point, you’ve used it incorrectly. The bastardization of Jefferson’s quote is a misquote. Sorry if that education nuance is hard for you to grasp. I’m done chasing my tail in circle with you for the evening.
I hope to see you perma-banned tomorrow morning.
richie on October 27 at 11:35 p.m.
I wonder if “going to Ziptrip” and “checking out a strange car on your property in the middle of the night” break the top 100 non accidental death activities list?
richie on October 27 at 11:38 p.m.
I also wonder if dead people care if they were killed accidentally or on purpose, or if one way or the other makes their job less dangerous? Hmmm……
Lewis on October 27 at 11:42 p.m.
another_perspective Kivaari doesn’t live in Spokane either.
Slightlyworried on October 27 at 11:43 p.m.
@valleyman:
The statistics cited are for “fatalities” at work. And in fact, police work is relatively safe. I don’t believe anyone is saying that police work isn’t stressful or even somewhat dangerous, but statistics show that it is not as dangerous as police make it out to be.
I have a relative in a job that loses one person out of every 250 people every year. If that rate applied to Spokane County law enforcement (e.g. SPD, SCSO, Jail, Marshals, DEA, etc.), we would lose 3 law enforcement officers a year, every year. And we don’t. In fact, I can’t remember the last time we lost a police officer in the line of work.
But setting all that aside, we have some undisputed facts about Thompson. He never came to complete stop in front of Otto as he claimed. From the time Otto started to turn his head toward Thompson to the time the first baton strike struck Otto’s body was 2.2 seconds. Otto never lunged at Thomspon or assumed a boxing stance. When Otto emerges from behind the shelving, he’s on his back holding the 2 liter bottle against his forehead attempting to protect his head from further baton strikes. Thompson exposes the most vunerable portion of his body for 16 seconds to Otto as he repeatedly struck him with his baton. In cross examination today Thompson had to repeatedly admit that the tape did not support his version of events.
And all Otto wanted was a Snickers.
greenlibertarian on October 28 at 4:17 a.m.
Wow.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Zzq5X-p2C0Y
Ron_the_Cop on October 28 at 5:09 a.m.
New thread
http://www.spokesman.com/stories/2011/oct/28/thompson-describes-zehm-confrontation/
brianrbreen on October 28 at 7:29 a.m.
@Valleyman
With respect to your comment about how Otto would react at the point of a weapon. It might be interesting for you to read the filings regarding his mental capacity. I’m not sure what you mean “Zehm’s response would have been the same” as far as I can see his only response was the same anyone would have, to try and protect themselves.
Lewis on October 28 at 9:25 a.m.
Valleyman i made a few points about some of your mis information will you respond or you just want to throw your hate at liberty.
You said you would gladly debate the issue well where are you?
the post i refer to i left on oct 27, 11;34pm
Lewis on October 28 at 9:29 a.m.
brain i knew Otto well, he was not taking his meds meaning he was trying to hide not fight.
anybody with a brain bigger then valleyman could see from 2blocks away Otto was disabled.
valleyman on October 28 at 1:24 p.m.
@Whocares: There’s really nothing to comment on since you have all the answers and just want to say I spread misinformation.
The_Seer on October 28 at 2:02 p.m.
If what Thompson knew at the time of entering the Zip Trip is the only relevant predictor of his behavior, why doesn’t that extend also to Otto. He knew he had done nothing wrong and I believe most of us would have reacted exactly as he did. We have heard from several former cops they would have handled the case differently. That, to me, is the jist of the case. Otto acted pedictably, Thomspon acted unpredictably.
Lewis on October 28 at 2:35 p.m.
valleyman too chicken to debate since you put down misinformation?
valleyman on October 28 at 4:25 p.m.
What is it you’d like me to debate?
1) I said I thought it was a pity Thompson hadn’t been trained to deal with the mentally ill. He testified he had been trained to do this. Where’s my lie? I think he clearly slept through the training and didn’t get “trained” at all. Do you disagree? Where’s my lie?
2) I said Thompson had stated he did not know that no money had been stolen. Despite the information presented in court, Thompson testified he was unaware of the information contained in the CAD report. I was repeating Thompson’s testimony. Again, where’s my lie???
There… are you happy I’ve responded to your accusations?
misjustice on October 28 at 4:42 p.m.
*****also you said thompson did not know Otto had not stolen money but he did.,…………… it was reported on krem news he got a dispatch before he entered the store saying the girls had called back to say Otto had not taken any of their money.****
I don’t believe that. If that’s true, then show where you got your information. Besides…..we all know what you read & hear in the news is the Gods Honest Truth!
valleyman on October 28 at 4:58 p.m.
It’s called the testimony he gave in court… Read the articles and you can see it’s what he testified to. Sorry that doesn’t make you happy or fit with your version of the events…
misjustice on October 28 at 6:05 p.m.
@slightlyworried: Are you a recent transplant to Spokane?
Spokane Police Detective Brian Orchard was shot and killed on July 20th 1983 while conducting an undercover stakeout of two thieves wanted for the theft of a valuable gun collection. The suspects had attempted to ransom the collection for $20,000.
brianrbreen on October 28 at 6:26 p.m.
@JustMeAgain
It might help some of the points, you and others are trying to make.
1. How did he walk up to the car?
2. Where was his weapon?
3. Where was the location of the meet?
4. What were the back-up officers armed with?
5. What plan was made to stop the vehicle from escaping?
6. How many people were in the suspect vehicle?
7. How many shots were fired and by who?
8. How long did it take to identify Lonnie Link as the shooter?
9. Was it a drug deal or a guns deal?
10. How far away from where the shooting took place was Lonnie Link arrested and how long after the shooting, was he arrested?
Just kinda interested if you have any idea.