Seattle Crime Reports : Seattle Crime Blog : Seattle, Washington

• Print
• Comments
• Trackbacks

Received this charming message through the Seattle Crime Blog contact form last night:

You need to get your facts strait about the Randy Privrasky case. Update your website. The toxicology report came out and PROVED that he was sober during the incident. Before you make an assumption about what has happened know, your fucking facts. If you don't update or change your website's blog, I will find a way to find you and it will cost you. I'm not talking about money either. Go ahead and laugh at this message all you want. Be warned though. Change your fucking information or fucking pay. I will find you if you don't. When I do, I will NOT have second thoughts about anything I choose to do. Like your website says, "It's not always pretty." Change it. You will not be able to ever even type on the computer at the least when I get done with you if you don't change it. Get your shit together or pay.

The author, who called himself "Bill Langer" (and claimed his e-mail address to be sno67blurt@aol.com), was referring to this post written back in March by The Apprentice. In it, my co-blogger contemplated that perhaps Privrasky, not the 25-year veteran deputy chasing him, was responsible for the accident that took his life...and that people blaming the officer would be singing a different tune if this teen's failure to obey the law had killed an innocent bystander. The Apprentice and I both still stand by that claim.

The commenter does make one good point, though: we failed our readers by neglecting to follow up on this story to the extent that we should have. Toxicology reports did come back for Randy Privrasky in mid-May, and according to family members did confirm that he was NOT under the influence of drugs or alcohol at the time of the crash. From a brief in the Everett Herald:

A Marysville teenager who died after crashing his car during a police chase was not drinking the night of the accident, according to state lab results obtained by the boy's relatives. [...] Ron Privrasky, the boy's father, said he was given a copy of the Snohomish County medical examiner's autopsy report. Among those records were toxicology tests conducted by state experts that show the boy was not under the influence of drugs or alcohol when he died.

The problem is that The Apprentice never claimed that Privrasky was drunk (only said it was a possibility, which based on all available information was accurate at the time), nor was the alcohol factor the main thrust of his argument.

When it comes to sno67blurt@aol.com's complaints about "assumptions", he fails to see that the post in question was written before any toxicology reports, when there were still many questions surrounding the case. This site isn't an encyclopedia...it's a blog, where we provide our take on issues - the vast majority of them unresolved - that are currently making news.

This individual seems to think that because we had an opinion about an ongoing investigation that differs from his own, he can intimidate us into removing any record that such opinions ever existed. Well, his e-threats failed. SCB will not be take down anything we've published on the Privrasky incident so far (though we have updated the original post with a link to this one making note of the toxicology development).

The beauty of America is that everyone is entitled to their opinions, no matter how upsetting or outlandish they may be. We at Seattle Crime Blog have spent nearly a year calling local cases like we see 'em...and that's not going to change anytime soon.

• Print
• Comments (3)
• Trackbacks

At a post about the recent Critical Mass debacle at Big Blog, P.I. commenter J.P. Patches Pal succinctly sums up the two-wheeled terrorists:

Let's be honest. A lot of these riders are just passive-aggressive twits trying to make drivers mad. The riders I've talked to who believe in the concept of CM usually go along for one or two rides and then get so turned off by the idiots in the group they don't go out with these toads again.

One thing is certain: the next time these jokers go out on a ride, there will be probably be more cops in the crowd than actual bicyclists.

Couldn't have said it better myself. One can only hope that last Friday's stupidity marked the beginning of the end for this misguided group of local "activists."

• Print
• Comments
• Trackbacks

Starting Tuesday, an act most all of us have been guilty of became a crime in Washington State: in accordance with a law passed in early 2007, Washington drivers are now forbidden from using cell phones while driving.

Can't say I'm horribly against the law for any other reason than the principle of government intrusion on our lives, but the law itself is a total joke. Why? Because drivers can still talk on their phones while driving...they just can't be holding the phones at the same time.

Isn't the idea to eliminate distractions while driving?  Sure, that free hand may help with reaction times, but folks talking on the phone are going to be distracted whether or not they're holding a device up to their ear.  If I'm yelling at someone on my Bluetooth headset while driving in rush hour, am I really that much less distracted than if I had been talking directly into my cell phone?

On top of that, it's only a secondary offense, meaning you have to get pulled over for something else in order to get ticketed.  So as long as you still use your blinkers, you're good. From the P-I:

But 76-year-old Barry Jackson was disappointed to hear the new law allows headsets. He said the conversation is the distracting factor and allowing people to continue talking is more of the same.

"Why have the law, then?" Jackson said.

Thanks go to Barry Jackson for pretty much summing up my argument. Ultimately, it appears that Washington's lawmakers have done it again: they've managed to pass a law that sounds tough but really accomplishes nothing. 

So remember, Washington drivers: feel free to pick up your iPhone and rehash last night's escapades to your best buddy...just make sure you have both hands on the wheel while doing so. Drive safe. 

• Print
• Comments
• Trackbacks

Check out these posters I've been finding taped all over around the city lately. Only in Seattle would fighting for the "underdog" be taken to such extremes:



I'm almost convinced that the people who espouse this nonsense are folks from outside the downtown core who never venture into the city itself...if they did and could bear witness to the impact homelessness has on all aspects of local urban living, they'd realize that painting Seattle's homeless population as an innocent bunch of helpless heroes being persecuted by the big, bad politicians at City Hall is little more than fantasy.

Then again, maybe that's why their message of making "practical and realistic help a reality" is regulated to lamp posts and street signs, sure to be washed away and forgotten about as soon as the next rain storm has passed.

• Print
• Comments (1)
• Trackbacks

Alright, look. We at Seattle Crime Blog know that over the past few weeks, our updates have been...sporadic, to say the least. (Luckily, we weren't the only local bloggers guilty of a slowdown).

But The Apprentice and I had a lot going on, none of which is worth explaining but all of which was extremely important and just cause for our failure as bloggers.  Worry not; beginning tomorrow, Seattle Crime Blog will be back in full-effect.

Until then, I'll leave you with this little treasure I found on a Capitol Hill sidewalk last night:

 

It reads:

Message to the person who left this pile of dog waste "unscooped" in front of my house: you are an inconsiderate slob! (The mailman agrees).

I'd imagine he would...though no word yet if that's because the unscooped pile of feces wound up on the bottom of his shoes. Criminal, indeed.

Oh, and before you leave: check out the P.I.'s new crime blog, Seattle 911. It's written in part by Casey McNerthney...he's a great guy, and it'll be interested to see where he takes it all. If nothing else, his new blog should give us more local crime news to rant about.

• Print
• Comments
• Trackbacks

In a move that surprised no one, Seattle Police officers just approved a resolution that will make them the highest paid police department in the state.

The measure got 90 percent approval from those returning votes and now just needs to be ratified by the City Council.

Some highlights of the new pay scale:

•  An 8 percent base increase for 2007, 4 percent in 2008 and 5.5 percent in 2009. Entry-level officers would get an immediate 8 percent pay raise on top of the overall pay raises. In 2010, the increase would be between 6 percent and 9 percent, depending on cost-of-living increases.
  
• Back pay of $6,807 for 2007.
  
• No changes in officers' health care. The city covers about 95 percent of the costs.
  
• A $5,000 hiring bonus, a $2,500 stipend for equipment and compensation for up to $14,000 in moving expenses for new recruits.
  
• A new 10-hour patrol shift for officers to help meet the new neighborhood policing plan, which would deploy more officers at different times of the day and in certain neighborhoods.

Sounds like a pretty nice time to become a cop. Besides, of course, all the whispers of corruption and lack of public trust.

• Print
• Comments (3)
• Trackbacks (1)

In their coverage of a vicious mugging at 17th & Harrison on Tuesday, local blog Capitol Hill Seattle reprinted the account of a community member who witnessed the incident firsthand. While the entire letter is worth reading for the vivid scenario it eloquently recreates (which explains the bottle of wine, pictured at right), that's not what this post is about.

Instead, take a look at the first paragraph:

I heard a commotion behind me at the west corner of NE 17th and Harrison right under the street light. A young couple walking to their car from On 15th Video, were being mugged by 5 teenage african american youths maybe 13 - 15 years old. There were 3 girls and 2 boys, most wearing hoodies, some in denim jackets, one girl with [CHS has snipped this part to remove personal description]

Something's nagging me about this. Why would you remove the "personal description" of somebody potentially linked to violent crime in the same neighborhood you strive to keep informed through your blog? By the way that sentence opens up ("one girl with...") it seems unlikely that this personal information would be anything as detailed as the girl's name or home address...which means there's no excuse for editing this section out.

I e-mailed the author of CHS asking why this information was removed, and he responded with the following:

because i could not personally verify the account and i felt the details were specific enough to identify somebody

if i had talked to police and received the description or even heard the description directly from the eyewitness, i would have printed it.

make sense?

I might be missing something here: but why would you not want to provide details that could allow police and neighbors to identify a suspected criminal? And why would such details be fair game if  they had come directly from an eyewitness, but not directly from a letter written by that eyewitness? This line of reasoning makes no sense.

Maybe I'm old-fashioned, and I have nothing against CHS or its authors. But if you have a blog that is meant to serve as an outlet for the community, it would make sense that you put all your efforts towards helping to remove criminals from that community. Deleting the personal description of a street thug, for whatever reason, goes completely against that logic.

• Print
• Comments (3)
• Trackbacks

The U.S. Border Patrol has been getting a bum rap from the media lately.

First, we heard about the sex-craved customs inspector who let drugs through at the Blaine crossing in exchange for sex acts from a Canadian prostitute.

Then, a group of uninformed Seattle University students embarrassed their entire campus earlier this month, when they protested the university's Career Day event. Their anger stemmed from the mere presence of Border Patrol agents - who, like most of the law enforcement groups represented, were there to recruit - at a Jesuit institution. From The Spectator, SU's student newspaper:

Protesters also encouraged passing students to sign a petition against recruiters at Seattle U.

“The Border Patrol should not be allowed to recruit on our campus because their tactics are responsible for thousands of deaths of migrant people trying to cross the border,” explained Lauren Ressler, freshman environmental studies major.

“The policies of the U.S. Border Patrol seem to contradict the policies of Seattle University; it’s shocking that they would be invited,” said Marianne Mork, sophomore humanities major.

You're right, Marianne. It's absolutely shocking that the university would give a legitimate government agency - an agency you and the rest of the idealistic social justice monkeys blame for doing their job effectively - the chance to give students jobs in a workforce where employment are getting harder and harder to find. It's not like the immigrants they work keep out of the country are illegal or anyth---oh wait. My bad.

Finally, in yesterday's Times, the Border Patrol is under fire yet again:

A couple of months ago, the U.S. Border Patrol began occasional "spot checks" of every vehicle and passenger arriving in Anacortes off state ferries, the lifeline between these islands and the mainland.

[...]

In the islands' coffee shops and the editorial pages of the local paper, then in a crowded, heated meeting last month, a number of people have complained that islanders are being unfairly treated and questioned, even though they haven't left the country and normally wouldn't be subject to such scrutiny.

Terms like "police state" are hurled around, as they say the searches are illegal, unconstitutional — and just a ruse to catch illegal immigrants and petty drug users.

A prime example of when rural folks with too much time on their hands let their conspiracy theories run wild. As the article points out, we're not talking Nazi Germany here; you don't have to answer any questions if you're on a domestic ferry, and Border Patrol agents have only arrested 43 people (38 of them Mexicans) in nearly two months of investigation.

While I would take issue with using the Border Patrol to make arrests for "petty drug use" - or anything that doesn't involve bringing people or products across the border illegally - the article makes no further mention of such activity other than in the sentence quoted above (unsubstantiated fear mongering, perhaps?).

The local stance on illegal immigration baffles me, when the answer to this fiery debate is simple: if you don't want to be hassled for being an illegal immigrant, then don't enter the United States illegally. And if you're an American who has problems with how we guard our borders, then do something constructive about it; immigration is an issue that has to be dealt with through an overhaul of our legal system (which is run by people we elect), not through appeals on emotional grounds. And blaming the Border Patrol is a ridiculously misguided approach to take.

• Print
• Comments (4)
• Trackbacks

*UPDATED WITH LINK TO FOLLOW-UP ON 7/31/08; SEE END OF POST*

On March 23, Randy Privrasky, an 18-year old Marysville-Pilchuck High School student was killed after his car careened into a ravine following a high-speed chase with a Snohomish County sheriff's deputy.

This Everett Herald story was first to suggest that the teen's car may have been vaulted into the ravine following a "PIT" maneuver executed by the deputy involved in the chase, making it the first death as a result of the PIT in Washington's history:

Privrasky apparently was speeding along Westwick Road near Snohomish when a deputy tried to pull him over, said Everett police Sgt. Robert Goetz. The teen did not stop.

Less than two miles and two minutes later, the deputy initiated a Pursuit Immobilization Technique, or PIT maneuver, Goetz said. That's where a police car pushes a fleeing vehicle in an attempt to get it to spin out and stall.

A PIT maneuver involves an officer nudging the back corner of a car at speeds between 25 and 45 mph, to make it spin out.  When it does, the car's engine usually dies because of the change in motion.

A sad story, no doubt...no one deserves to have their life cut short at 18. But my real reaction to this story came while listening to KIRO 710's Dori Monson Show earlier this week. 

Monson posed the question to listeners of who should bear the brunt of responsibility for this incident. The overwhelming response? That the officer should be held accountable for the death because of the age of the driver and, as one female caller put it, his overreaction to the "the stupidity of teenagers."

I can't help but think that maybe the police officer used poor judgment in terms of where he executed the maneuver (eyewitness accounts say that had the officer waited a short distance, the road would have been level and the car would not have careened into the ravine).  And if the maneuver was attempted at any speed above 45 mph (which seems like it would be hard to prove at this point), the officer should be reprimanded for not following code. 

But to place the majority of the blame on the officer and not on the potentially drunk 18-year-old (toxicology reports are not back yet, but alcohol was found in near the car) who chose to flee from police at speeds over 80 mph is simply ridiculous.

The argument that the teen was "just being a teenager" and making poor decisions does not hold water with me. In this country, at 18 years old, you are seen as mature enough to be considered an "adult." That means you have been designated as someone responsible enough to make your own decisions. The teen involved chose to make a poor decision, and paid for it with his life. 

If the chase had continued and the Privrasky's actions had taken an innocent life, the reaction to this case would no doubt be different from the mood currently pervading his former high school:

In mourning, students hung posters around the school with Privrasky's smiling face and the letters "RIP." They left flowers and candles in the cafeteria and taped a sheet of paper over the computer monitor he usually used. The paper said, "Please don't sit here. In loving memory of Randy."

To honor their friend and help pay funeral costs, students plan to make T-shirts with Privrasky's artwork. He had a flair for writing friends' names in a style that resembled spray-painted graffiti.

I feel for the family of this young man, I truly do.  But our society has become one that, in the words of Harry S. Truman, "passes the buck." This young man chose to risk his life over what would have been a traffic stop and possibly a DUI charge. His story is a sad one, but so is the fact that nobody in this case wants to place responsibility on the real offender (who, whether we're willing to admit it or not, is ultimately Randy Privrasky, not the officer who took whatever means necessary to bring this teen's joyride to an end).

UPDATE: According to a toxicology report received by family members in mid-May, Randy Privrasky was NOT under the influence of drugs or alcohol at the time of his death. See our post, "Threatening email prompts follow-up on Marysville teen's death," 7/31/08

• Print
• Comments (6)
• Trackbacks

The issue of suicide has been popping up a lot lately, most recently with the city's plans to build a suicide barrier on the Aurora Bridge (detailed at SLOG on March 25). After paying attention to local news and getting a feel for the general attitude towards this taboo in our area, I've come to the realization that despite all it's libertarian leanings, Washington state has still got a ways to go before we're mature enough to deal with suicide-related matters appropriately.

The problem stems from the fact that we aren't looking at the issue from a reasonable perspective. A want to end ones life is two things:

1. A personal choice
2. A sign of weakness

Our culture fears suicide because we fear depression; and we fear depression because we think everyone should (and can) be happy. This couldn't be further from the truth. If society starts looking at depression and suicide as what they are - a weakness and the ultimate cop-out, respectively - we'll be much better suited to handle issues surrounding it when they inevitably arise in the future. If we start teaching kids that there's nothing glamorous about suicide and that it's a low-class way to go out, we'll be making a huge step in the right direction. After all, who wants to be remembered as a pussy and a chump?

The suicide barrier for the Aurora Bridge is a prime example of how stupidity can reign free when emotion (and the fallacy that "all human life is valuable and must be protected") gets a political foothold. So far, according to Jonah Spangenthal-Lee's report on SLOG, the Washington State Department of Transportation (WSDOT) has given $1.3 million to study a suicide barrier for the bridge, with another $6.2 million on the way. Though half of the funds will go towards a new lighting system on the bridge, the remaining money - approximately $3.75 million, by our count - will be exclusively for the barrier. That's $3.75 million we're putting towards saving the lives of those who don't want to be saved.

Sound like a foolish plan? That's because, like much of the nanny state decision-making that occurs in the Evergreen State, it is.

Of course, the hippies commenting on Jonah's piece seem to think otherwise. Commenter poppy says:

I'm pretty sure $3.1 million (not including the new lighting) for a barrier that would have saved about 40 lives the past ten years, including a 15 year old girl, isn't a waste of money.

Ah yes...invoking the suicide of a teenager to tug at the heartstrings and make your case even stronger. But look past the rhetoric, dear readers: even lowballing the cost as poppy has, $3.1 million to save 40 lives over 10 years is still a waste. These people do not want to live, and cannot cope with the stresses of everyday life that 6.6 billion of us face on a daily basis. Even spending $1 to save their lives seems like a waste.

There are some who share reasonable sentiments. Commenter Fierinferno offered a poignant response that captures my mood well:

If people want to die, let them. If suicide wasn't illegal then maybe they wouldn't be searching for a place that ensured their demise, rather than trying in the comfort of their own home where a chance of failure by discovery is so high.

Are the costs of body disposal so high that we have to save the taxpayers money? This is a legitimate question, because it's the only motivating factor I understand here.

[...]

Before everyone with a nephew or a grandmother who's committed suicide starts going on a tirade, please know that I've also loved people who have committed suicide. I didn't like it, I mourned them pitifully, but I believe it was their right to make that choice.

Well put. Despite experiencing the suicide of a family member firsthand, Fierinferno is a rare breed: one who doesn't let petty human emotion cloud their sense of logic.

• Print
• Comments
• Trackbacks

For those who followed the blog during its early days, you know the Amanda Knox situation has been a popular subject for us.

Well, she's back in our lives.

Rudy Guede, the Ivory Coast immigrant who is one of three being held for Meredith Kercher's murder, has implicated Knox and her Italian ex-boyfriend Raffaele Sollecito as being present at the time of the murder.

Six months ago, this may have been a significant development. Now this just seems to be another ploy by the Italian police and court systems to hold Knox and her boyfriend behind bars.

I am one of the many who believes that Knox was involved in this in some way. But every day and every "convenient" development (Italy's Supreme Court was about to hold a hearing determining if there was enough evidence to keep Knox in custody) just makes this case lose any credibility.

I think it's fairly clear that neither Knox or her boyfriend are not breaking at this point. I think it's also pretty clear that Mr. Guede is guilty of something, judging by his fleeing to Germany after the murder and his willingness to change his story as often as he wants. Both of these facts point to us never really knowing what happened that night.

And now with Knox's parents becoming vocal, the mainstream media is only helping to dumb down this investigation. Do we really need to hear over and over that these parents don't believe their child is a sadistic, sex-crazed murderer. What parent would admit to that?

On top of that, why has no one ever talked about the poor girl who got killed? Know and her sleaze-looking boyfriend get all the press, when we really know very little about the victim.

This is going to continue for years. We'll most likely never be able to tell what happened that night, but there is one thing we can count on.

The "Amanda Knox" show is no where close to being cancelled.

• Print
• Comments (5)
• Trackbacks

More than six months and 100 blog posts ago, I wrote a lengthy rant complaining about the crime and homelessness plaguing Broadway on Capitol Hill. One of my key criticisms (which had also been pointed out by someone else in a letter to the editor published at SLOG) was of the self-cleaning public restroom, located just past Bonney Watson Funeral Home and Seattle Central Community College.

Now the issue is back in the spotlight, after Seattle Public Utilities announced yesterday its recommendation that the City Council approve removal of the five self-cleaning crappers scattered around the city. Yup...It took them four years, but city officials have finally realized what most of us who walk the streets have known from day one: self-cleaning toilets are a nice idea, but one that fails miserably upon execution.

You can't blame the city for trying new things, though...especially when their ideas have been proven to work elsewhere. From The Times:

Council President Richard Conlin said he voted to install the toilets after seeing their success in Europe, where "everybody uses them."

"They are a middle-class phenomenon," he said. "We thought we could impose that."

The problem is that in all its old world glory, Europe is far more disciplined, and in some ways more civilized, than the United States. Issues that have worked well for them (socialized healthcare, marijuana decriminalization, a fully-functional and near flawless railway system) are simply unwanted or ineffective - and sometimes both - in America.

Plus, homelessness isn't nearly as prevalent across the pond: according to the United Nations, the entire European Union has around 3 million homeless...compared to the United States, where government figures suggest as many as 3.5 million within our borders alone. While I value the city's willingness to experiment with new sanitation options, we cannot realistically expect that a system proven effective in a culture vastly different from our own would have the same positive outcomes across the board.

Of course, don't tell that to Tim Harris of Real Change, whose idealistic approach to homeless equality is a prime example of how dangerous human emotion can be when we allow it to trample over reason. Harris' argument? That not only do we need these five silver dens of debauchery...we need more public toilets. Quoted in The Times:

Removing toilets would force people to relieve themselves in streets and alleys, Harris said.

"If you don't provide alternatives and viable alternatives, then it's not fair to blame people for activities that they have little choice but to engage in," he said.

At his blog, Harris continues the verbal diarrhea:

I actually went into this whole conspiratorial rant about how they'll take the toilets away, and then when the whole downtown smells like a Belltown alley on a hot summer day and there's shit on every doorstep, we'll hear all about the filthy, disgusting, homeless people who are too lazy to even find their way to the bathroom.

But for some reason she didn't use that.

Maybe she didn't use it because it's total nonsense. Tim, I know you mean well, but you're approaching this from an angle that values the homeless perspective above all: above safety for the greater community, above fiscal responsibility and above respect for urban progress. That may be a feasible position for an individual such as yourself to hold...but it is a dangerous one for an entire community.

Then again, Harris' vision of a putrid downtown core might have some unexpected benefits. If the people of Seattle were faced with unsanitary conditions at the hands of bums who treat the city as their personal playground, maybe we would all wake up to the fact that we can't allow this subculture of homelessness that we've tolerated thus far to continue prospering.

If Seattle really wants to grow into its own, Mayor Nickels should call up Rudy Giuliani and ask him what he did to get rid of the homeless during his time as New York City's mayor. I'm guessing it wasn't centered around the widespread installation of self-cleaning toilets.

• Print
• Comments
• Trackbacks

To all of you tech-savvy visitors who check Seattle Crime Blog through an RSS reader, we've got a new addition worth pointing out that is sure to heighten your daily crime news experience.

We've told you about our Twitter page in the past; now, you can subscribe to our "Crime News Links" feed as well, which will provide daily updates with links to stories - both from "traditional" news sources and other blogs - that we don't have time to write about but think are worth noting. Sort of the same as our Twitter page...but bypassing the use of Twitter entirely (though we'll still be updating that as well).

So how do you subscribe? Simple. Just copy the "Crime News Links" hyperlink above and paste it into your RSS reader. The links we've added so far today is just a glimpse of what's to come; expect daily updates on news from around the Puget Sound.

• Print
• Comments (1)
• Trackbacks

At the end of last month, we wrote about our need for writers here at Seattle Crime Blog. A handful of interested parties expressed contacted us. But only one survived the rigorous application process.

Now that his account has been created and he's ready to begin blogging, it seems fitting to provide an introduction to...The Apprentice.

As with the Seattle Crime Blogger, we won't reveal much personal information about your newest master of ceremonies (for the time being, anyway...if The Apprentice wants to pour out his life story when he starts writing, we're not going to stop him).

But here are the facts we're authorized to divulge:

• Like the Seattle Crime Blogger, The Apprentice has a background in journalism
  
• Unlike the Seattle Crime Blogger, he's a lifelong resident of Seattle (which should provide for some interesting commentary on local events that an outsider is unable to provide)
• He smokes cigarettes. A lot.

Keep your eyes peeled; his posts may start appearing as early as this evening.

And for the rest of you prospective crime bloggers who think you've got the writing chops to join our ever-growing cast, drop me an e-mail. We're still looking to diversify our author base.

• Print
• Comments (8)
• Trackbacks (1)

We can't claim to know much about Ivette Gonzalez Davila, the 22-year-old Fort Lewis soldier recently arrested on suspicion of homicide and kidnapping. But after reading the coverage of her supposed crime in the local dailies this morning, one thing is clear: this suspect has got it going on in the looks department.

Tasteless on our part? Probably. But we just can't help ourselves.

Look at the picture (right) and tell us she isn't just the cutest little suspected murderer you've ever seen. Though it's still early March, we at Seattle Crime Blog would even be so bold as to claim that Ms. Davila has already secured the crown in our unofficial, just-announced "Hottest Northwest murder suspect of the year" competition. I mean, come on...how often does such a bodacious babe grace our local crime headlines? Usually we just see sleazy looking dirtbags.

Sure, Davila is suspected of some heinous business: authorities say she killed a married couple - also soldiers at Fort Lewis - with a handgun, before dousing the bodies in acid (in an unsuccessful attempt to dispose of the evidence) and kidnapping their baby. The gravity of these crimes should not be understated, and it goes without saying that our hearts are with the victims and their families. If guilty, Davila certainly deserves to be punished appropriately.

Police think the motive may be tied to some sort of jealousy-induced rage. And yes, MySpace was involved. From the P.I.:

Davila had been corresponding with Randi and Timothy Miller [the couple she is suspected of murdering] through the personal networking Web site MySpace.com. In recent months, Davila had posted four short notes on the Millers' sites, most recently on Feb. 11, telling Timothy she would be coming over.

Lights & Sirens, the Tacoma News Tribune's crime blog, offers details from the victims' MySpace pages...but they don't provide links to either (apparently its authors haven't gotten hip to the purpose of blogs). We at SCB tried, unsuccessfully, to locate Davila's profile; after all, reading the P.I.'s coverage makes it hard to resist:

On her own site, Davila posted several racy photos -- including several of herself -- as well as two shots of semiautomatic handguns.

Hubba hubba. Like we always say, the only thing sexier than a scantily clad woman is a scantily clad woman who loves semiautomatic weapons.

Of course, some moralists, probably lacking the ability to detach themselves from emotionally-charged situations, feel a need to rain on the parade. At the P.I.'s Soundoff, commenter foulshot snaps us out of our daydream:

To the people who think this ugly female is hot, I feel sorry for you and suggest counseling. She's destroyed at least three lives.

Maybe so...but in this case, the saying "beauty is only skin deep" works to our advantage. Plus, as commenter Felon for Rossi noted in a post that P.I. moderators seem to have since deleted:

[S]he's 22, she's hot and this being Washington, 2 counts of 1st degree murder will get you less that 8. She'll be out before she is 30 and she's mine!!!

Felon for Rossi is probably not alone...we'd guess that, assuming Davila makes it out of jail before her good looks are gone, potential suitors will be lining up at the prison gates on the day of her release. Some people are into that whole "bad girl" thing.

But we at Seattle Crime Blog won't be among them. Oogling pictures of a suspected murderer over the Internet is one thing; lining up to take her hand and bring her home to meet the parents is a whole other story.

• Print
• Comments (1)
• Trackbacks

As devotee readers can attest, posting at SCB has been sporadic over the past couple of weeks.

This is due largely - if not entirely - to the fact that our author base is limited; up until this point, all the writing has been done exclusively by one author. And that author has a real job and other commitments that, at times, force him to put the blog on hold. Although your author has been using the third person and/or the plural "we" when referring to the blog lately, that has largely been a symbolic gesture; now, it's time to make the "we" a reality.

There is only one way to make sure more content is getting posted at Seattle Crime Blog: bringing on more writers. So, this an open call for anyone interested in writing on local crime at a blog that already has a fairly well-established readership.

We're looking for 2 or 3 new authors to come aboard and help document the local crime scene. Could one of those folks be you? It depends.

We want someone who:

• Lives in the city of Seattle
• Is willing to write 3-4 posts a week
• Has a moderate understanding of how to blog and what makes a good blog post
• Pays attention to details (both factual and grammatical)
  
• Is not expecting to get paid

If you think you've got what it takes, shoot us an e-mail or respond in the comments...the Seattle Crime Blogger will be in touch.

• Print
• Comments
• Trackbacks

It seems like in Seattle these days, community safety meetings come a dime a dozen.

First, there was the Capitol Hill Neighborhood Safety Forum, which we covered back in January. Then on Monday of this week, neighbors from the Central District got together to discuss violence around the intersection 23rd & Union. Finally, last night at the University of Washington, a similar gathering took place to discuss the supposed "crime wave" striking the U-District.

The 23rd & Union forum sounds like it was valuable to the community; Central District News (a blog that you should make a point of subscribing to) offered some great coverage and discussion among commenters. After all, 23rd & Union is an intersection plagued with violence, one that can only dealt with through meaningful community discussion. If CDN's coverage is any indicator, it sounds that discussion got started Monday night.

But the other two neighborhood meetings seemed largely unnecessary. We at SCB would wager to guess that the UW forum last night was much like the Capitol Hill one: a bunch of overly fearful citizens getting together to complain to police officers who are already working hard to maintain order.

Just look at some of the quotes from today's P.I. coverage on the UW event:

"When I'm walking home, I don't want to think that I might not make it to my test the next day because I got stabbed," UW sophomore P.J. Lafemina said. "Even in the middle of the day, the Ave is really sketchy."

There's no doubt that the Ave is sketchy...though we rarely venture to the U-District, we've seen first-hand the street rats who spend their days traversing the area. But that's a problem that plagues many neighborhoods of Seattle - downtown, the Central District, Broadway - and one that can only be stopped when neighbors and businesses put their collective foot down. Just look at how successful that approach was in shutting down the Chocolate City Club and cleaning up 21st & Madison.

But the comment about missing tests due to a stab wound? A good sound byte, but a highly unlikely scenario. Lafemina was likely referring to an incident last Saturday on University Way NE, when a scuffle between two men ended with one them being stabbed. No word on whether the victim was a student at the UW, but even if he was...one out of more than 40,000 students assaulted, and this UW sophomore is worried for his life? If it concerns you that much, dude, purchase a firearm; if you're unwilling to do that, maybe it's time to transfer to a more rural college. We hear University of Oregon is accepting applications through March 15...

• Print
• Comments (2)
• Trackbacks

Andrew Taylor at the Miller Park Neighborhood Association Blog announced it in a post this morning:

23rd & Union Neighborhood Safety Forum

Monday February 11, 2008

6:30PM – 8:00PM
@
The Lutheran Church of the Good Shepherd
2116 E Union St. Seattle WA 98122
(E. Union St. between 21st and 22nd Ave.)

Unfortunately we at SCB can't make it...but is there anybody planning to attend who would be willing to provide our readers with a report? We'll publish it here as a guest post, and will link to your own blog or website so others know who you are. If interested, shoot us an e-mail.

• Print
• Comments (1)
• Trackbacks

As violent crime continues in the Central District, the Seattle Times this morning wrote on an interesting new method of stopping criminal activity around 23rd & Union: giving the Seattle Police Department a micro-office near the intersection to take care of business while keeping an eye on the community.

It would be a place where Seattle police officers assigned to the Central Area could write reports, use restrooms and take breaks instead of trekking back to the East Precinct on Capitol Hill. [...] The building's owner may be willing to provide the space rent free for the next six to nine months, though the department will have to cover utilities, Greeley said. The department just needs to sign a lease, but must wait for the owner to return from vacation, he said.

Finally! People thinking with their brains instead of their hearts. This sounds like a good solution to us at SCB, and a long-overdue one at that. While folks in the rest of the city seems to be targeting police officers for their supposedly over-aggressive tactics, we're now witnessing the complete opposite in the Central District. A strange turn of events, especially because many of the criticisms against police officers reported in alternative weeklies like The Stranger report on unfair treatment of African Americans (who at this point still make up a good portion of the C.D., and who we'd suspect are largely instrumental in bringing this new "cop stop" to fruition).

But the media's cynicism appears to be absent around 23rd & Union, a community fed up with criminality who are doing all they can to encourage a greater police presence. The end result will benefit all parties: the Central District will likely see 23rd & Union return to a pleasant intersection, the criminals who threaten our community will be apprehended or drop under the radar to keep a low profile, and the SPD will develop closer ties with individuals and businesses in the community. A win/win/win situation.

The question now is: where will this push the drug dealers, loiterers and thugs? As we noted on Wednesday, these people only congregate at 23rd & Union because after the Chocolate City Club's closure they were no longer welcome traversing their old haunts near 21st & Madison. Our suspicion is that this activity will not go away...instead, as gentrification continues, it will move further and further into the C.D. and the South End. The "cop stop" is a temporary solution, and a great one at that. But it would be naive to expect that it will end violent crime completely.

• Print
• Comments
• Trackbacks

(As an aside, some non-crime  news. - Ed.)

It took us a while to fully understand its purpose, but we've finally got Seattle Crime Blog set up on Twitter.

For those outside of the technological loop, Twitter is a "micro-blogging" service that allows users to post brief (140 characters or less) messages about what's going on their lives or on their blogs.

Right now we're mainly using it to highlight the most recent posts in Seattle Crime Blog, but next time we find ourselves surrounded with too much crime and not enough time, we're going to begin using it to provide quick links to outside sources. If important news breaks and we don't have time to blog it, expect at the very least a "tweet" on the matter.

Readers and local bloggers alike: are you on Twitter? If so, make sure to start following us (our user name is Seattle Crime) to stay up to date on the latest local crime news.

• Print
• Comments (2)
• Trackbacks

I don't know how someone can continually write a semiweekly column about nothing and still retain a position at one of the Northwest's most respected newspapers. But The Seattle Times' Nicole Brodeur has managed to do just that.

In terms of crime news, Seattle should be celebrating: statistical data recently came out showing that our city was experiencing its lowest crime rates since the late 1960s. But instead, Brodeur's column yesterday - despite saying very little - somehow manages to rain on the parade.

As seems to be an ongoing trend with this author, her latest piece once again appeals to our most superficial emotions without letting reason get a word in edgewise. To Brodeur, it seems that because of a few recent high-profile crimes (crimes that have been elevated to media-sensation status, due in no small part to the same publication for which she writes), all the good news is meaningless:

The numbers would feel like welcome sun, if the year hadn't started with blood on the sidewalks, if holiday hugs hadn't given way to a sudden interest in self-defense classes.

But death pays little attention to the calendars of men. Of course the year is going to start with "blood on the sidewalks" - that has has been the case every year before this one and will continue to be the case every year in the future. In the Northwest's most populous city, we should expect this more than anyone in the region.

As city dwellers, we've always got to keep our guard up. Thinking that we have some sort of right to traverse the city with a care-free mentality and without a constant awareness of our surroundings is extremely naive. If you want a life where your personal safety is all but guaranteed, barricade yourself inside a cabin in the woods. But if you're living in the city, you are expected to develop street smarts (those habits we get into that serve as our natural defenses in the urban jungle). It is the beauty of the social contract: in exchange for a constant state of cautious awareness on our part, urban dwellers get to reap the benefits a city has to offer.

But some people can't seem to look past the bad. Why? Seattlest jumped into the debate yesterday, and commenter James provided an eloquent answer that sums it up best:

[T]he safer things get, the more people freak out about edge cases and the incidents that do happen.

I've said it before, and I'll say it again: we live in a city. There will be murders, rapes, burglaries and assaults. If you're that concerned about your personal safety, buy a gun (an idea that a perfectly reasonable resident proposed at the Capitol Hill Neighborhood Safety Forum two weeks ago...and which was met with scoffs and sighs from much of the audience). But when preparing to step out that front door each morning, we should always remember that things aren't nearly as bad in Seattle as they could be.

• Print
• Comments (2)
• Trackbacks

Remember that woman at the Capitol Hill Neighborhood Safety Forum? The one I called out for saying that Capitol Hill is "beset with crime," despite having no evidence to back up her claim?

Turns out my criticisms were justified: data revealed today proves she really was wrong.

Some may have thought the speech given by Mayor Greg Nickels at last Monday's forum, where he said that crime in the Emerald City was at its lowest since 1968, was just puffery. Not so, according to the data released in a brief report on The Times' website - last year, Seattle really did experience its lowest crime rates in 40 years. The stats for 2007, as reported:

• Murder decreased 20 percent.
• Rape decreased 28 percent.
• Robbery decreased 9 percent.
• Aggravated assault decreased 12 percent.
• Burglary decreased 20 percent.
• Larceny and theft decreased 7 percent.
• Vehicle theft decreased 29 percent.

Last year, there were 64 crimes per 1,000 people. In 1968, there were 62 crimes per 1,000 people, according to the mayor's office.

The 2007 rate was 14 percent lower than the 2006 rate.

I don't know about you, but I feel like celebrating. 64 crimes per 1,000 people? That's a ridiculously low number. Locals who complain about the crime rates don't know how good they have it.

• Print
• Comments (5)
• Trackbacks (1)

Just got back from the Capitol Hill Neighborhood Safety Forum over at Group Health, which lasted about an hour and a half. My impressions?

First of all, the event was pretty packed. I got there at about 5:45 p.m. and was shocked at how few folks were in attendance; but by 5:55, all the seats in the room - I'm guessing there were between 150-200 - were filling up. By 6:05 it was standing room only.

And the people in attendance weren't just my Capitol Hill neighbors. On the news media side, I spotted the ever-friendly Casey McNerthney from the P.I. Elisa Hahn from King 5 was there with a cameraman, and commented to me that since the Carnation murders, there's seemingly been a noticeable increase in local crime. I noted that the holidays must bring out the worst in us Northwesterners.

And the politicians: outgoing Seattle City Council president Nick Licata was on-hand, along with councilmembers Sally Clark and Tim Burgess (the latter of whom was sworn in just a few days ago). Police officers were out in full force as well. Lieutenant John Hayes, a well-known figure on Capitol Hill for at least as long as I've lived here, played a prominent role in the evening's discussion, and East Precinct Captain Paul McDonagh fielded a vast majority of community questions.

Even Mayor Greg Nickels was there, shaking attendees hands and thanking them for coming. I wasn't expecting his presence, but it was a pleasant surprise. People can criticize the mayor all they want, but it was a nice gesture of him to come out on a rainy night and show his support for Capitol Hill.

After some obligatory introductions and 30 seconds of silence, McDonagh gave a rundown of Harps' murder and the ongoing investigation surrounding it. While officials couldn't say much - as is often the case with details of an ongoing investigation - one thing appeared clear: they still don't know whether Harps knew her assailant or not.

"We need to get this person," said Nick Metz, an assistant chief with the SPD who oversees their Investigations Bureau. "We don’t know whether this person knew Shannon or didn’t know Shannon, and these are things that obviously create a great deal of fear in the community.”

Shortly after this rundown came the "Community Questions & Concerns" portion of the forum. I've never been to an event like this, so I can't say if this is the norm...but it appeared that a lot of folks took advantage of the opportunity and used it as a soapbox. I counted a total of 20 questions from community members, the vast majority of whom either asked about off-topic issues or didn't ask a question at all, using the time ramble about some other vaguely-related safety matter. One man even took the time to subtly blame fiscal conservatives for Harps' murder.

I understand that this forum was partially to help the community heal, and for that I can see why some used the Q & A as a chance to vent the emotions that have been building since Harps' death. But I went into the evening expecting more insightful discussion about the problems in our community and what the city of Seattle is doing to improve them. Complaining about perceived negative interactions with SPD in the past is doing everything but addressing the issues of the future (which I assumed was the focus going into this event).

Ultimately, I got the impression that a lot of these people expect SPD to put an end to all crime, immediately. Many seem unaware that they live in a neighborhood that I'll bet sits comfortably in the top 5% of safest urban communities in the world. Have we begun to take our incredibly high standard of living for granted?

One woman went so far as to claim that Capitol Hill is "beset" with crime, a claim that all personal experience and statistical data would disagree with. As Mayor Nickels noted at one point in the evening, Seattle's crime rate is at its lowest since 1968. Last year, while similar sized cities (D.C., Milwaukee & Boston) had between 66 and 181 homicides, Seattle had 24. Crime can't be eradicated completely...the idea that it can is a fallacy. But SPD has done a damn good job at keeping crime rates down, and thankfully a couple individuals used their chance on the microphone to note this.

Still, one legitimate concern of community members that came through loud and clear was their unified agreement on one issue: that in darkness, outdoor lighting on Capitol Hill sucks. While I can't say I agree with them, it's interesting that this is a concern shared by many locals. And judging by the reactions of SPD and representatives from the City Council, I have a feeling that lighting on the Hill - or the lack thereof - will be addressed in the very near future.

For a more detailed rundown of the overall event, check out the coverage over at Big City Hippie.

• Print
• Comments
• Trackbacks

As you are probably already well aware, I took a serious break from blogging for the past couple weeks. I used my normal blog time well: visiting with family, relaxing, ringing in the new year with style.

It was a welcome break, and though I missed the opportunity to cover a lot of interesting local crime - the I-5 trooper's shooting of a potentially deranged man and the Carnation massacre, to name a couple - I did get the chance to recuperate and prepare for 2008.

Now that it's January 3rd, I'm back in the blogosphere for good. This should be a great year - while I can't say I'm hoping for some exciting crime, I have little doubt that it will occur. And I'll be here, blogging as much of it as I can possible stand.

Stay tuned.

• Print
• Comments (1)
• Trackbacks

It's no secret that criminals don't take vacation. And sure, there's probably a lot of crime going on in the Puget Sound area today. But who wants to hear about all that? It's Christmas.

Happy Holidays, readers. Without your continued support, this blog - or, more specifically, my interest in writing for it - would cease to exist.

Regardless of who you are or where you may find yourself, this is the Seattle Crime Blogger wishing you the best...today, tomorrow and into 2008.

• Print
• Comments (2)
• Trackbacks

Can somebody explain to me how this interview from ABC News is the slightest bit newsworthy?

The article, which was first published December 14 and features four of Amanda Knox's UW friends espousing the virtues of their incarcerated pal, brings little to the table: the news it provides is largely available elsewhere already, and the bulk of it is - perhaps not surprisingly - light-hearted opinion. They paint her as a morally infallible, girl-next-door type who simply could not have been involved in the murder of Meredith Kercher. I don't know Knox, so I can't argue with the first part of this claim...but how it automatically leads to the second is beyond me.

To put it simply, this interview is something better suited for the UW Daily, or perhaps a "Free Amanda" blog. But ABC News? C'mon.

The money quote:

"The media took all these things off her MySpace, you know, very out of context, and applied them how they felt they could twist their story the way they wanted to," said Andrew. "You can do that with anyone's MySpace. You could take their pictures, their blogs and take different pieces here and there. And all of a sudden, you have this new person, that you've just created."

I'm not saying that Knox's friends don't deserve a chance to voice their feelings. Of course they do. But they are friends of the suspect, and it is fairly obvious the reaction that they're going to have. The fact that they claim to know any better than the rest of us whether Knox is guilty or innocent is obscene.

Nobody knows exactly what goes through another human being's mind. All the things that these people are saying, about a good friend who gave great hugs and loved "making people happy"...all this is good and fine, and could very well be true. But it doesn't mean she's automatically exempt from suspicion in a murder case that she has inexplicably found herself at the center of.

On a similar note: I should set the record straight on something I've been getting some flack about from readers. On one side, I've got Knox supporters chiming in and saying that I've painted her unfairly. On the other side, folks are bitter that I'm casting doubt on other witnesses or information that makes her look bad in an attempt to prove her innocence.

The fact of the matter is, neither of these claims are true.

Look. I'm a skeptic. I'm skeptical of everyone involved in this case, from the main suspects themselves to even the most unimportant witness. My job is to make calls on this case, and on the news surrounding it, as I see 'em. And the fact that I can't win with folks on either side of the debate in many ways reaffirms my belief that I'm doing my job right.

• Print
• Comments (1)
• Trackbacks

I know it's been a while since I updated on the Amanda Knox case. My real world commitments have taken precedence over those in the blogosphere, but as of today I'll be back to a regular blogging schedule.

There have been some developments, albeit nothing extremely huge - aside from a bloody fingerprint linking Ms. Knox to the scene of Meredith Kercher's murder - on which I'll begin updating again this afternoon.

Today, an Italian judge will rule on whether Knox and fellow suspect Raffaele Sollecito can remain behind bars. More details as they come...

• Print
• Comments (17)
• Trackbacks

Today a commenting reader linked us to this gallery at la Repubblica.it. According to our tipster, the poster pictured above is being plastered around Perugia.

The website seen on the poster is for an organization called Forza Nuova. According to Wikipedia, they are New Force, an "Italian nationalist and neo-fascist movement" that is strongly against immigration.

While I'd guess the words on this poster have something to do with immigration opposition, I'm interested to find out exactly what they say. I typed "Contro ogni droga/dio patria famiglia" into an online translator, and in English the message appears to read: Against every drug. God native land family.

I'm sure the real slogan is much more elegant. Anybody speak Italian who can decipher for us?

• Print
• Comments (8)
• Trackbacks (1)

Hope you all haven't filled up on pumpkin pie, because this evening, those tireless reporters from across the pond bring us a late night Thanksgiving treat: Rudy Hermann Guede, the convicted drug dealer and YouTube buffoon recently arrested in connection with Meredith Kercher's slaying, has been officially linked to the victim's body.

And it gets better. According to reports from The Times Online, DNA found on Kercher's corpse offers definitive proof that Guede had sex with the victim the night of her death.

Someone better stick a fork in Guede: like so many other turkeys on this fourth Thursday in November, he's done.

There seems to be little argument against his presence in Kercher's bedroom that night, judging by the evidence as reported:

Last night’s results showed Mr Guede’s DNA matched that found on a tampon which indicated that Ms Kercher had what was described as “violent” sex on the night she died. It also matched the DNA found on toilet paper in the bathroom.

The article claims that Guede has admitted to being in the house when the murder occurred, but that  an unknown "Italian man" committed the crime. The only Italian man I've seen mentioned so far in connection with this case is Raffaele Sollecito. Is that who he is referring to? Or is it someone else entirely? One way or another, the simple fact that Guede admits presence but denies any wrongdoing makes it clear that like Sollecito and Amanda Knox, this suspect has joined in the never-ending blame game.

When speaking to a German judge, the Times Online reports, Guede even went so far as to claim that he was in the bathroom when the actual crime was committed and (valiantly, no doubt) attempted to resuscitate the victim after finding her throat slit.

But wait...don't earlier reports say it took Meredith Kercher an excruciatingly long time to die? I'm no doctor, but I'm almost positive that you can't resuscitate someone who is still alive and conscious.

Judging by their response in the article, Guede's lawyers are desperately trying to keep this new DNA link from sinking their case:

One of Mr Guede’s lawyers, Vittorio Lombardo, said the test results did not mean his client was guilty. He said: “These results need to be carefully looked at. Rudy has not denied being in Meredith’s house, and the tests do not say that the sex was not consensual.

“Rudy maintains he was in the bathroom when Meredith was killed, and these tests do not show anything which contradicts that.”

Keep on working for that paycheck, Vittorio. We'll see whether the sex was consensual - and whether "Rudy" was actually in the bathroom at the time of the attack - as more details are revealed.

Meanwhile, the featured story at CNN.com this evening relates to Amanda Knox's recently released jailhouse note (which we reported on earlier today). Nothing too exciting about this piece, although it does give a little more of the text from Knox's note regarding why she initially placed blame on her employer Patrick Lumumba:

In her statement, Knox said she saw Lumumba in "flashes of blurred images."

"I saw him near the basketball court. I saw him at my front door. I saw myself cowering in the kitchen with my hands over my ears because in my head I could hear Meredith screaming," she wrote.

"But I've said this many times so as to make myself clear: These things seem unreal to me, like a dream, and I am unsure if they are real things that happened or are just dreams my head has made to try to answer the questions in my head and the questions I am being asked.

Then, the quote of the century:

"But the truth is, I am unsure about the truth."

And that's what they used to hold Lumumba in custody for two weeks?

Jesus. Maybe the Italian judicial system really is fucked.

• <