Seattle Crime Reports : Seattle Crime Blog : Seattle, Washington

• Print
• Comments (1)
• Trackbacks

Saw this flyer on a light post at the corner of 13th Avenue East & East Thomas Street yesterday:



The gist of it is that community residents are upset about perceived drug dealing in their neighborhood. This surprised me on a few fronts: most notably, the fact that I walk down East Thomas on a near daily basis and rarely see anything suspicious (in fact, the entire area from Denny to Harrison between 12th and 17th has always seemed like a very quiet neighborhood). On top of that, local blogs and newspapers have said nothing on the issue.

So I did what any self-respecting crime blogger would do: sent an e-mail to the address listed on the flyer. Turns out that part of the reason we hadn't heard anything on the matter was because the original flyers - posted last week - were ripped down over the weekend.

The community member behind this campaign, who identified themselves only as 13th Avenue East Resident, provided some background on the issue (I've added emphasis at certain points):

13th Avenue East held a block party and garage [sale] on Saturday, June 28th for residents between John and Harrison Streets. The intent of this was to clean out the closets and more importantly, get to know our neighbors.

One unexpected benefit to getting to know our neighbors is that we became aware via the neighbors that our building in the 300 block of 13th Avenue East has a drug problem. ( not sure which type).

Reports from two different neighbors informed us that our building has is being regularly used as a place to purchase drugs from. People are seen making phone calls on the corner of the block or waiting at the front door of our Condo building until they are met from somebody inside the building. The deal then goes down around the corner or inside the building.

We are not 100% able to identify the residents / or Guest of a resident who are selling - but we have a pretty good idea. And thanks to our neighborly tips - we are on the look out.

This is community policing at its finest: residents getting together with other folks from the neighborhood to identify socially deplorable behavior and tackle it from the ground up. While I have no problem with responsible drug use by adults in the privacy of their own homes, blatant dealing in a shared apartment building is a whole different story: distrust between neighbors, potential for more crime, and undesirable individuals who otherwise have no reason to be there are just a few reasons why.

So what will come of this? So far, very little. According to 13th Avenue East Resident, reports to the Seattle Police Department have had little impact so far:

I have gone to the police, but I was a bit disappointed in their response. The response was to call 911 when I see it happening. Otherwise, they really can't do much, but they have been place on notice to our issue.

Not surprising that the police aren't able to do anything on this based on hearsay (no matter how reliable it may be), but the fact that they're clued in is progress enough at this point - after all, awareness of the issue seems to have only come about after the block party two weeks back.

Should be interesting to watch where this one goes: just what, exactly, is going on around 13th & Thomas? If drugs really are being dealt, what types, and how widespread is the issue? Are other community members aside from 13th Avenue East Resident taking action? Only time will tell.

In the interim, this proactive community member is looking for suggestions on how to end drug dealing in this otherwise peaceful neighborhood. If you've got any ideas, shoot them an e-mail.

• Print
• Comments (3)
• Trackbacks

Central District News makes clear what most of us already knew:

[A]t the end of 2006 the area for the ban was enlarged to include Capitol Hill, the University District, and most of the CD (the map was carefully drawn to include every convenience store in our neighborhood). And now, 18 months later, we've got the first report on how it's working: hardly at all.

The ban was placed on specific brands of drinks such as Night Train and Colt 45, and so the businesses have just gone and rebranded the same drinks to avoid the ban. And the alcoholics, not caring too much about brand loyalty, have made the switch.

In the P.I. piece CDN links to, reporter Angela Galloway notes that city officials call the ban "doomed without reforms to deal with market changes"...

...so does that mean I can have my Strawberry Cisco again?

• Print
• Comments
• Trackbacks

Abortion of justice. That's the term that has been making headlines since it was first uttered yesterday by the Reverend Al Sharpton, outraged after a judge acquitted three NYPD officers charged with murdering Sean Bell on the night before his wedding.

Personally, I don't agree with Al (the circumstances of the case show that these officers were in the right, and it seems the more vocal segment of New York's African American community are turning a crime issue into a racial one). But Sean Bell isn't what this post is about.

Instead, we're talking about justice. And when I saw this article in today's Times on a man sentenced to death by the University of Washington Medical Center, "abortion of justice" was the first thing that popped into my mind:

Timothy Garon's face and arms are hauntingly skeletal, but the fluid building up in his abdomen makes the 56-year-old musician look eight months pregnant. His liver, ravaged by hepatitis C, is failing. Without a new one, his doctors tell him, he will be dead in days.

But Garon isn't getting a new liver. He's been refused a spot on the transplant list, largely because he has used marijuana, even though it was legally approved for medical reasons.

[...]

The Virginia-based United Network for Organ Sharing, which oversees the nation's transplant system, leaves it to individual hospitals to develop criteria for transplant candidates. At some, people who use "illicit substances" — including medical marijuana, even in states that allow it — are automatically rejected. At others, such as the UCLA Medical Center, patients are given a chance to reapply if they stay clean for six months. Marijuana is illegal under federal law.

Let me get this straight: we still use taxpayer money to provide social services for a homeless population that - at least in Seattle - is made up largely of drug addicts with no incentive to get clean. We allow welfare recipients to continue receiving their checks without ever questioning whether drug use is keeping them from getting back on their feet. But we're effectively ending a man's life because he smoked pot to relieve pain on his doctor's recommendation (and under the laws of Washington state)?

Dr. Jorge Reyes, a liver transplant surgeon at the UW Medical Center, said that while medical marijuana use isn't in itself a sign of substance abuse, it must be evaluated in the context of each patient.

"The concern is that patients who have been using it will not be able to stop," Reyes said.

Who does Reyes think he's kidding? We aren't all caught up in the fears of Reefer Madness still being propagated by the DEA. The idea that marijuana use puts you at serious risk for addiction is laughable to anyone who sees through the nonsense. Plus, the article points out that steady marijuana use after the transplant would be absolutely forbidden due to the potential health issues that could arise. Does the UWMC really think that if they gave Garon a new liver, the craving for a weed fix would cause him to disregard his recent surgery and put his life in danger?

This is despicable situation. Reyes and the rest of the folks at the UWMC, apparently willing to bend over and take it in the rear from draconian federal drug laws, should be ashamed of themselves.

• Print
• Comments (1)
• Trackbacks

The story of a 16-year-old who died from drinking "meth water" (the meth equivalent of bong water) got me to thinking about the meth problem in our state.

Within the city we don't see as much of a problem with meth. But in the rest of the state, the drug has long been a major issue. According to the drug resource site M-Files, Pierce County used to be one of the nation's top-3 "Meth capitals"). Luckily, our elected officials were able to employ some innovative techniques to lessen the problem considerably. Now other towns around the nation with meth epidemics are looking to copy our model.

But for those, such as myself, who wonder just how meth got so big. After all, according to an interview with Quentin Casey, meth expert Roger Lake - executive director of the Washington State Narcotics Investigators Association (WSNIA) - says the numbers skyrocketed almost overnight:

During the last years of Lake’s career, the state of Washington was hit hard by meth production and abuse. After California, Washington was the second state to experience a meth problem. Over a five year period starting in 1996, meth addiction increased by 240 per cent in Washington, he says.

In 1994, there were only 36 meth labs reported in the state. Four years later there were 349. By 1998, the number had reached 789 and in 2001 there are an astounding 2000 labs.

What caused the explosion? Here's a fantastic article that ran last year in Rolling Stone, which sheds light on the issue. It turns out the pharmaceutical industry blocked legislation that had the potential to pretty much wipe out the meth problem back in the mid-80's; because ephedrine is one of the key ingredients in meth, the companies did not want to hurt their bottom line by restricting how it was sold.

Just a little history. If any readers have further information on the meth problem in Washington State, I'd love to hear it...newer information on the topic is harder to come by.

• Print
• Comments
• Trackbacks

Turns out the government is finally trying to level the playing field between races when it comes to the court systems...though they're using a questionable method to go about doing so.

According to the P.I., the U.S. Sentencing Commission apparently voted in December to reduce the sentences of thousands of criminals in prison for crack cocaine offenses, including 29 in Washington state:

In December, over the objections of the Justice Department, the U.S. Sentencing Commission voted to ease the way courts meted out penalties for drug crimes to rectify disparities in the way judges have treated crack crimes versus those involving powder cocaine.

It seems 80% of crack cocaine offenders are black, while most powder cocaine offenders are white. And the penalties weren't adding up. I'm not quite sure how giving special treatment to both races helps solve the problem of sentencing disparities, but apparently the government thinks it is worth a shot.

But rest easy, drug fearing citizens....marijuana offenders are still getting the maximum sentence in cities across the country. And everyone knows that's the "gateway" drug. 

Right?

• Print
• Comments (1)
• Trackbacks

For those who have followed the emergence of home pot-growing industries in Washington State (literally enormous weed growing/selling operations run out of mostly suburban homes), the final stats from "Operation Green Reaper" - a 13-month investigation launched by local police and federal agents - should prove quite interesting:

At a news conference this afternoon, First Assistant U.S. Attorney Mark Bartlett, flanked by DEA Special-Agent-in-Charge Arnold Moorin, said the 13-month investigation involved seizure of more than 15,000 marijuana plants.

To put that into perspective, the average cannabis plant can produce up to a pound of marijuana, which sells for an average of $2,000 on the street. That's $30 million of weed seized in a little over a year, all from home-growing operations.   

Pot is already a top-10 cash crop in Washington state...and that just reflects the amount of weed seized during raids, without accounting for that which gets traded behind the backs of watchful federal agents.

The funniest thing about these raids is that they have proven in the past to do very little in terms of curbing the trade of marijuana. There's a lot of potheads in this state of ours, and something tells me they'll remain determined to get their fix no matter what the government does to stop them.

• Print
• Comments (1)
• Trackbacks

There was an interesting post at the Miller Park Neighborhood Association Blog earlier this week dealing with a local anti-crime initiative...one that up until this afternoon, I never knew existed. It's called the Stay Out of Drug Area (SODA) program, and is basically a legal electric fence around known drug dealing hotspots designed to keep out hooligans. It's been in the works for the past year, and looks to become a reality in the very near future.

In a letter to the public, King County's Senior Deputy Prosecuting Attorney Ellen O'Neill-Stephens provides more details:

Seattle Police precinct commanders have identified geographic locations in their precincts as high narcotics trafficking areas. These areas were identified as such based upon citizen and business complaints, crime statistics and police observations.

King County deputy prosecutors will soon be asking Superior Court judges to order defendants arrested in these SODA zones to stay out of these zones as a condition of their pre-trial release. This order will also authorize the Seattle Police Department to contact and/or arrest defendants who violate the court's order.

On the surface this is a good plan: it cripples criminals by stopping them from doing business, while cleaning up neighborhoods in the process. Or at least that was what I thought until I saw the map with each SODA district clearly labeled (above, taken from MPNA).

I had expected 30-40 zones, a few blocks apiece. Not a chance. Instead, there are four zones, stretching from E. Prospect St. to I-90. These aren't just one or two city blocks; they're entire neighborhoods. By leaving the terms so broad, the idealists who designed this system seem to have gotten a bit too excited with their red pens. And I'm guessing that if SODA don't hold up to the Superior Court, these overarching borders will have something to do with it.

But wait. There's an even bigger problem. The SODA zones aren't aimed at ex-convicts or reputed gang members: instead, they mean to restrict those who have been arrested on drug charges and granted a pre-trial release. These people haven't even been tried for anything, let alone convicted of a crime...and it sounds like a very slippery slope.

I wasn't the only one whose inner libertarian perked up. A commenter at MPNA named Phil made a similar point to O'Neill-Stephens, who wrote back:

Judges often place restrictive conditions on a defendant charged with a crime. For example, judges almost always place no contact orders on defendants charged with assaulting others or stealing from stores. When a judge does this he/she is balancing the rights of the defendant with public safety issues or concern for the safety of alleged victims.

Maybe. But to a lot of folks, there is a huge difference between telling someone they can't hang around a certain person or business and restricting them from a large portion of urban Seattle.

I'm not defending open-air drug markets; I see my fair share of them walking around the city and curse their very existence. Devotee readers of the blog will know I have little tolerance for societally disruptive criminality. But this draconian plan isn't the way to shut it down.

What is? Good question. I'm as lost for words as the next guy.

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

It can't help but make an American proud to hear that our country's borders are being guarded by fine, upstanding young men like Desmond Bastian:

Bastian, 31, a U.S. citizen who lived in Surrey, B.C., and worked as a U.S. customs and immigration inspector, allowed [a British Columbia prostitute] to drive through the Blaine crossing while carrying large loads of marijuana and other drugs.

According to the woman's testimony at Bastian's trial, she would lift her skirt and bare her breast while being waved through the border station, and then would often meet Bastian afterward for sex.

Now, Bastian has been sentenced to 32 months in prison, where we're guessing his sexual experiences are going to be a might bit different than what this international playboy got used to at his old job.

• Print
• Comments (2)
• Trackbacks (1)

It seems high school students are somewhat protected by the First and Fourth Amendments, after the State Supreme Court ruled earlier this week that random drug-testing of student athletes (as practiced by the otherwise unimportant Wahkiakum School District) was a violation of the Constitution.

The court ruled that such testing set a dangerous precedent that could some day include random testing for any student.

Some potentially fun future issues arise with this one. It's not a big surprise that the court ruled this way, but it will be interesting to see how school districts try to get around the decision (for example, though the ruling said that there could be no uniform policy on random drug-testing, it left the door open for drug-testing under specific circumstances).

Though many see this as a no-brainer, the comments at the P.I.'s SoundOff page responding to the article give a good indication of how divisive the student drug testing issue really is. I suggest reading through them, as you'll come across gems from both sides of the argument.

And there is more anger over the court's decision than one would expect. Commenter Proud Army Wife wasn't afraid to show her outrage...

WHAT?!? Do these people realize how many high school student athletes partake in drug use? The ACLU is slowly letting anarchy reign.

... while Arcfault, citing personal experience, espouses the dangers of people who are "smoked out" on marijuana:

Ah, so someone smoked out on pot isn't a safety hazard? I'm sorry but I've smoked pot and I know what the effects are and I'll be damned if I let someone work with me while they are stoned. My work is too dangerous for me to work with someone who just had to "mellow out".

Guess it isn't just weed smokers who exhibit signs of paranoia.

Though the will of the people on random drug testing remains divided, one thing is clear: pot smoking student athletes are safe...for now. But I'll bet that the state's high court (no pun intended) hasn't seen the last of the student drug test debate.

• Print
• Comments
• Trackbacks

From The Seattle Times:

Four men who told police they'd moved to Seattle because they thought it was legal to smoke pot openly here were detained this week by police for marijuana-related offenses.

[...]

The men told police they had moved from Wyoming to Seattle because a friend of theirs told them it was legal to possess and smoke marijuana here.

It reminds me of an episode of COPS I once saw (and I paraphrase...it was a long time ago): in some neolithic state like Tennessee, police pulled over a man who they found to be in possession of a partially smoked marijuana cigarette. As they proceeded to arrest him, the pathetic suspect made a comment to the officer along the lines of: "Man, out west they just write you a ticket for this."

Indeed...and often less than that. The West Coast has developed a reputation that calls to pot smokers near and far: a utopia for open drug use in epic Summer Of Love proportions, where everyone's so stoned that they sit on the beach listening to reggae all day, and police officers who catch you in the act offer up a high five instead of a jail cell.

A literal pipe dream. Unfortunately, utopias don't exist (San Francisco is probably the closest we're going to get to one anytime soon). Sure, the drug laws out here in Seattle are progressive...but not that progressive. If these geniuses had taken the 10 seconds to Google "Seattle marijuana law," they might not have been driving on a busy downtown street in broad daylight, violating traffic laws and smoking weed...and they almost certainly wouldn't have moved more than 1,000 miles across the country to do so.