Arrests Made re: TESC Riot

Navigation

User login

Online users

Crenshaw Sepulveda
agathafrye

Support OlyBlog

OlyBlog is run by volunteers who care about Olympia. If you like what we're doing, make a donation:

OlyBlog is powered by:

Who's new

dopenessmeter
CindyM
Arts From The Heart
patr
Peter Alden Stroble

Upcoming events

Oly Barter Faire Work Party this Sunday!(3 hours)
Community Rhythmcircle (Drumcircle) at Traditions(2 days)
How the War on Iran has already started(3 days)
Olympia Village Building Convergence Schedule of Events(5 days)
Secret Cafe for I-69 Resisters(5 days)
Exhibition at Alley Cat Tattoos(6 days)

Poster Calendar

Arrests Made re: TESC Riot

Submitted by Merwyn Haskett on Wed, 03/05/2008 - 9:10am.

Three people have been arrested in connection with the Feb. 14 Ded Prez riot at Evergreen. Two more arrest warrants have yet to be served. According to The Olympian Breaking News four out of five warrants were for TESC students, with the first arrest being at student housing this morning at 7:00.

Merwyn Haskett's blog
Login or register to post comments

Great news, welcome to the

Submitted by Merwyn Haskett on Wed, 03/05/2008 - 9:11am.

Great news, welcome to the Real World kids.

You say that a good cause will even sanctify war! I tell you, it is the good war that sanctifies every cause!
Friedrich Nietzsche

Thank god!

Submitted by paisleyboxers on Wed, 03/05/2008 - 4:08pm.

I was really getting itchy knowing that skin-privileged people were getting rewarded for violent and destructive behavior, instead of getting some reality handed to them instead.

Friendblog: None are known to exist since bloggers don't have friends.

Since you put it that way, I

Submitted by Merwyn Haskett on Wed, 03/05/2008 - 4:20pm.

Since you put it that way, I was given the impression (in this very forum, no less) that it was those with a skin-disadvantage that were being centered on in this incident. I don't suppose Silberman, Ragan and the rest came from a low-income area where the system denied them basic rights and privileges which others take for granted? What's the justification for their frustration?

You say that a good cause will even sanctify war! I tell you, it is the good war that sanctifies every cause!
Friedrich Nietzsche

Good news!

Submitted by Tschida on Wed, 03/05/2008 - 9:43am.

One of the great non sequiturs of the left is that, if the free market doesn't work perfectly, then it doesn't work at all-- and the government should step in.

Thomas Sowell

UPDATE

Submitted by Merwyn Haskett on Wed, 03/05/2008 - 9:54am.

All arrests have been made: Three men, Two women. Four students. Only one is over 21. All arrests are for felonies.

You say that a good cause will even sanctify war! I tell you, it is the good war that sanctifies every cause!
Friedrich Nietzsche

Now to see if they are actually prosecuted for the charges.

Submitted by Tschida on Wed, 03/05/2008 - 10:00am.

One of the great non sequiturs of the left is that, if the free market doesn't work perfectly, then it doesn't work at all-- and the government should step in.

Thomas Sowell

Yay!! Four young lives ruined for stupid youthful mistakes!

Submitted by Rob Richards on Wed, 03/05/2008 - 10:12am.

FRY 'EM!!!

Oh Oh...

Submitted by JstPlnOnry on Wed, 03/05/2008 - 10:13am.

I see another thread getting shut down any time now...

"A point of view is only a view from a point..." ~ Unknown

You're so clever :)

Submitted by Rob Richards on Wed, 03/05/2008 - 10:14am.

I think that's irresponsible

Submitted by Merwyn Haskett on Wed, 03/05/2008 - 10:20am.

I think that's irresponsible of you, Rob. Your FRY EM rant is just the sort of thing to get the sides going at each other, after which you or another docent can conveniently shut this down.

As for lives ruined, they're learning the adult consequences of adult choices and adult actions.

You say that a good cause will even sanctify war! I tell you, it is the good war that sanctifies every cause!
Friedrich Nietzsche

OK I'm sorry

Submitted by Rob Richards on Wed, 03/05/2008 - 10:30am.

I don't think my statement was any different than the others as far as motivations go. There are ways to say things that are respectful, and then there's publicly cheering 5 young people who may go to prison during their formative years.

Adult? Weren't all but one under 21? I know they're all "legal" adults, but do you remember how you acted when you were their age? I know I was no angel at that age. We're talking about a victimless crime here, it's a piece of property and they could get 10 years? I just don't think that's something to celebrate about. Yeah, these kids made dumb mistakes, but they're in college for eff's sake, they have their whole lives in front of them. If convicted of a felony it becomes nearly impossible to get a job or find someone to rent to you. Does that punishment really fit this crime? Are lives being ruined worth celebrating about?

I've said my piece and I know that we disagree, and so I'm not going to go back and forth with you. You may take this opportunity to slander me all you want, I promise I'm not going to respond.

It was not a...

Submitted by Tschida on Wed, 03/05/2008 - 10:46am.

Victimless crime. It was a felony. 18 is an adult, when it comes to the law I believe. Actions have consequences. If they go to jail, fine by me. They chose to behave in a manner that was against the law and cost the tax payers 50k. Because they are in college doesn't mean their actions should be excused. When they are done paying their fines, and serving the likely sixty days to six months, they will still have their whole lives in front of them. Yes the punishment fits the crime, if and when there is a punishment. Lastly disagreement is not slander. C.

One of the great non sequiturs of the left is that, if the free market doesn't work perfectly, then it doesn't work at all-- and the government should step in.

Thomas Sowell

Oh Rob, I have no intention

Submitted by Merwyn Haskett on Wed, 03/05/2008 - 10:48am.

Oh Rob, I have no intention of slandering you. I don't even have a problem with you saying your piece, the method was my only gripe.

If these people don't have a significant criminal history then they shouldn't get the maximum. However, even if this is a first time offense they shouldn't just get a slap on the wrist.

I should clarify: I don't know what specific charge is against each specific individual. One guy had the backseat of the destroyed vehicle in his home; for all I know he wasn't even in attendance and was merely in possession of stolen property.

If it's proven someone took part in damaging the vehicle, they disabled an emergency vehicle and made it more difficult for lives to be saved.

If it's proven someone was the one who took the stolen laptop, that's a bit more serious than standard stealing and fencing. What was on the laptop? Perhaps nothing, but what if? And what if it was given to one of the well-known anti-cop groups in Olympia, of which some of the members are technically sound in hacking information out of these things.

Despite what Prof. Bohmer may have told them, it would be in these kids' best interest to cooperate at this time, especially if this is the first time they've been in trouble. If they can put on a believable appearance of remorse, or at least a believable admittance of wrongdoing, it will help in society (and perhaps the courts) cutting them a break.

If instead they want to fight with philosophy and claim they were justified either because of police over-reaction, or because of the plight of some political situation, they won't be doing themselves any favor.

Of course if they really didn't do anything illegal, and the wrong people are arrested, then of course they should fight to clear their name.

You say that a good cause will even sanctify war! I tell you, it is the good war that sanctifies every cause!
Friedrich Nietzsche

I wasn't going to respond but I can't help it.

Submitted by Rob Richards on Wed, 03/05/2008 - 10:54am.

The back seat was in his house? What kind of moron would do that? That's the most hilarious thing I've heard all week. Merwyn, you just made my day.

At least he wasn't a

Submitted by Merwyn Haskett on Wed, 03/05/2008 - 11:05am.

At least he wasn't a moran?

Maybe I shouldn't have said that.

I'm not in the "shoot them - fry them - lock them away forever" crowd, I'm also not in the "let them go - understand where they come from - nobody was hurt" crowd either.

You say that a good cause will even sanctify war! I tell you, it is the good war that sanctifies every cause!
Friedrich Nietzsche

Victimless crime?

Submitted by Jurjen S. on Wed, 03/05/2008 - 1:00pm.

Sorry if I seem to be dogpiling here, but this is not a "victimless crime." Evergreen is reimbursing TCSO for the damaged squad car; that's 50 grand that will not be going towards new books, equipment, tutoring programs, hiring new faculty, what have you. That essentially makes the 4000+ Greeners who did not participate in this riot the victims.

As a Greener I will not

Submitted by ashley on Wed, 03/05/2008 - 1:12pm.

As a Greener I will not accept being labeled as a victim of this event. I'm very much of the camp of "it happened, now let's figure out how to address it" even though I'm upset that it happened. That does not make me a victim.

Additionally, the college administration made a decision to pay for that cop car, with no student review that I'm aware of. I view this as a way of accepting blame on behalf of the student body, prior to a thorough investigation. I want to separate TESC's decision to fund the cop car from the actual riot. If I'm a "victim" of the riot, am I a "victim" of the administration's fiscal policies?

I'm a Greener too, pal

Submitted by Jurjen S. on Wed, 03/05/2008 - 2:46pm.

I'm also a taxpayer in Thurston County. One way or the other, the expense of replacing the wrecked Crown Vic potentially affects me. Whichever way this would play out, somebody is going to be negatively affected as a result of this crime, even if it isn't you or me personally. We have a word for a person who suffers injury (in the widest sense of the term) as the result of a crime, and that word is "victim." As for the administration's decision to reimburse the TCSO, I would interpret that as an admission of civil liability, without necessarily entailing culpability.

"Pal"?In regards to your

Submitted by ashley on Wed, 03/05/2008 - 3:53pm.

"Pal"?

In regards to your comment: yes, we are negatively affected. I disagree with you that those negative effects automatically make us victims. That's a very loose interpretation. I do agree that the money could have been used differently a)had the car not been destroyed and b)had the administration not pledged the money so quickly, and I believe that the cost of the cruiser will impact projects I have been working on at the school. Regardless, I don't feel victimized, and I have a personal aversion to be described in such a way. You stated that all Greeners who did not participate are victims, and all I said is that as a Greener I disagree.

If you are a Greener and feel victimized, that's your prerogative, but I insist on the distinction between suffering negative consequences and "victimhood", just as I insist that the riot and the administration's subsequent actions.

Please don't use "pal" in responding to me. To the extent that it has gendered connotations, it's inaccurate, and beyond that your usage of it seems hostile.

I'll concede you your personal notions wrt victimhood.

Submitted by Jurjen S. on Thu, 03/06/2008 - 5:27pm.

It's rather irrelevant to my cardinal point, anyway, which is that the damage inflicted to the police vehicles is not a victimless crime in the sense that, say, certain actions that occur between mutually consenting adults do not, in and of themselves, result in injury to others (e.g. possession and/or sale of narcotics, "sodomy" prior to the Supreme Court's ruling in Lawrence v Texas, etc.) are victimless crimes.

"[J]ust as I insist that the riot and the administration's subsequent actions."
I think you missed the end of your sentence there; I'm curious to know what it was.

Regarding my usage of the word pal, I wasn't aware it had gendered connotations (I grew up speaking British English, not American English), I don't know what your gender identification is (nor do I particularly care), and while it may have been intended (I didn't really put much conscious thought into it) to convey a certain measure of snark, it was not intended to convey hostility. But hey, if you're into consciously not thinking of yourself as a victim, why would it matter either way?

The sentence was supposed

Submitted by ashley on Thu, 03/06/2008 - 6:15pm.

The sentence was supposed to read, "Just as I insist upon the distinction between the riot and the administration's subsequent actions." I was responding to what appeared to be a conflation of events; your point that it has consequences as both a student and a TC taxpayer clarifies your stance.

I'm glad that hostility was not part of your intent. And, I did not claim to be victimized by your use of the term- just irritated. Since I never claimed that, your last comment is clearly either snarky or hostile. Go ahead and take your pick which, since either way I'm done with this exchange.

That's not how budgets work.

Submitted by Rob Richards on Wed, 03/05/2008 - 3:50pm.

This isn't going to mean less money for any of the things you listed, nice try though.

Enlighten me, then

Submitted by Jurjen S. on Thu, 03/06/2008 - 5:39pm.

The money will have to come from somewhere (hence my use of the phrase "what have you" rather than "etc."). So how will the money be raised? Is it going to appear magically when the Budget Fairy waves her wand? Or is more likely that it will be raised either by cutting other expenses (with concomitant negative repercussion for the beneficiaries of the goods/services in question), an increase in tuition (with concomitant negative repercussion for the students), or extra funding from the state (with concomitant negative repercussion for the taxpayers)? If none of the aforegoing, then what?

Other than maybe the Hip-Hop

Submitted by Merwyn Haskett on Thu, 03/06/2008 - 5:43pm.

Other than maybe the Hip-Hop Congress having a car wash and bake sale (they currently can't have a benefit concert on campus) you're absolutely correct. Tuition keeps going up every year - to where, ironically, most of the marginalized people that TESC's culture embraces won't be able to attend.

You say that a good cause will even sanctify war! I tell you, it is the good war that sanctifies every cause!
Friedrich Nietzsche

OK

Submitted by Rob Richards on Thu, 03/06/2008 - 5:49pm.

When working out a complex budget, especially when services or facilities are involved, it's wise to budget for losses. Stores, for example, budget for theft, that way the losses don't hurt them. I would imagine that TESC has money budgeted for emergencies or unexpected events. Or, maybe their insurance covered it.

TESC does have emergency

Submitted by ashley on Thu, 03/06/2008 - 6:04pm.

TESC does have emergency funds, and they are quite separate from other monies. From my understanding, there exists both a rainy day reserve and a chunk of money written into the budget for unspecified/unforeseen expenditures.

What a strange world you live in

Submitted by Jurjen S. on Fri, 03/07/2008 - 2:43pm.

Yes, I'm sure institutions--be it stores or colleges--do budget a reserve so that an unforeseen expense doesn't deprive them of operating capital. But if that reserve gets used up, it can't be carried over to the next year, and so will have to be replenished from other sources. So in this instance, Evergreen will either have to divert funds from elsewhere to cover the shortfall, or it will have to run the risk of operating without this reserve. Fairly obvious, I'd have thought.

We have a saying here

Submitted by Guglielmo on Fri, 03/07/2008 - 2:58pm.

"play the ball not the person." You bring up a very good point in your post, but there's no need to characterize your fellow blogger's world as strange or otherwise.

When you're old enough to drink, I'll buy you a beer,

Submitted by Rob Richards on Fri, 03/07/2008 - 3:47pm.

and tell you all about my strange world. In the mean time, I'm sure they have some classes at TESC where you can learn about how dynamic budgets are created and modified from year to year to adjust for any number of radicals (no pun intended).

Man...

Submitted by Guglielmo on Wed, 03/05/2008 - 10:49am.

You all (with the exception of Tsch) just waded in here ready to poke a finger into the nearest person's eye. Shame on you. :-(

Scapegoats

Submitted by rainy gray on Wed, 03/05/2008 - 10:50am.

I can't help but feel those young people are being scapegoated for poor police procedures which led to an out-of-control situation.

If they did what they are

Submitted by Merwyn Haskett on Wed, 03/05/2008 - 10:56am.

If they did what they are charged with they aren't really scapegoats. A scapegoat, which may or may not be guilty of its own crime, is made to take the crimes of others upon their back.

Even if the OPD was negligent I can't for the life of me see how that justifies destruction of the car or the stealing of property. That goes beyond self-defense against an out-of-control "goon squad"

You say that a good cause will even sanctify war! I tell you, it is the good war that sanctifies every cause!
Friedrich Nietzsche

Merwyn, you say that a

Submitted by ashley on Wed, 03/05/2008 - 12:27pm.

Merwyn, you say that a scapegoat can be either guilty or not guilty, but also has to take the crimes of others upon their back. These are the only people arrested out of a large crowd. While they may or may not have participated, they are being held responsible for the actions of the entire crowd simply because at this point, they are the only ones charged. Doesn't that fit the definition of scapegoat that you just stated?

If one of them is charged

Submitted by Merwyn Haskett on Wed, 03/05/2008 - 12:33pm.

If one of them is charged with stealing a laptop when the only proof against them is that they threw a rock, they'd be a scapegoat. If one of them is charged with flipping over the car when there's no video or photograph showing them near the car but they had stolen property in their home, they'd be a scapegoat.

If a person, through positive identification, was arrested for flipping over the car, but the ten others with him haven't been identified yet, he's not a scapegoat - and should the rest be found and arrested they'd earn the exact same charges.

If a face in the crowd is identified and arrested even though there's nothing linking them to any of the charges they'd be a scapegoat.

You say that a good cause will even sanctify war! I tell you, it is the good war that sanctifies every cause!
Friedrich Nietzsche

Wow, you can see the future?

Submitted by Jurjen S. on Wed, 03/05/2008 - 1:05pm.

How do you know that these five are the only ones TCSO intends to arrest and charge, rather than the first five out of as many as TCSO can identify?

I don't mean to condone what these young people did

Submitted by rainy gray on Wed, 03/05/2008 - 12:43pm.

They should have known better. But if law enforcement had handled the situation properly, it would never have developed to the point where crimes were committed and young lives were ruined. These students used bad judgment, but they are young and might have been drinking, and were swept along with the crowd. LE is trained to control situations like this, but instead they handled it very badly. I find their behavior less easy to excuse. I was very interested in this account of what occurred the night of the riot.

I agree. I think that if an

Submitted by ashley on Wed, 03/05/2008 - 12:48pm.

I agree. I think that if an unruly crowd can be held accountable for its actions, at a broad level and at an individual level, then it is equally relevant to question the actions of a trained and organized force that responds to commands and makes deliberate decisions.

rainy gray, thanks for the link- I hadn't seen this particular story and it's very interesting!

Thanks for the link, I will

Submitted by Merwyn Haskett on Wed, 03/05/2008 - 12:54pm.

Thanks for the link, I will keep an open mind in Kaylen's story.

The article mentioned something which I don't think anyone has grasped yet. There's lots of comments questioning the OPD's handling of the situation, saying "none of this would have happened" if the OPD used a different tactic.

It seems to me the trouble started with the poor handling of the concert security: said security was provided by the TESC chapter of the Hip-Hop Congress.

You say that a good cause will even sanctify war! I tell you, it is the good war that sanctifies every cause!
Friedrich Nietzsche

It's nice to see TC has a few detectives that are capable

Submitted by Norm on Wed, 03/05/2008 - 11:10am.

I'm not sure they should be locked away for forever though. Maybe being forced to watch COPS 8 hours a day, every day, and write a report on each encounter would suffice. If you run out of cops episodes, they could always ride with a real cop.

Unsubstantiated word in the

Submitted by Merwyn Haskett on Wed, 03/05/2008 - 11:24am.

Unsubstantiated word in the rumor mill is that the only evidence (outside of the stolen seat) was from the arrested being identified in video or pictures, and that they are arrested in hopes of them talking to bring others in.

Again this is Unsubstantiated rumor but I found the thought interesting enough to bring into the conversation.

You say that a good cause will even sanctify war! I tell you, it is the good war that sanctifies every cause!
Friedrich Nietzsche

Merwyn, according to the

Submitted by ashley on Wed, 03/05/2008 - 12:22pm.

Merwyn, according to the rumor that you heard, does that mean that these people were only identified as being present or maybe particularly close to the action-- rather than the people most responsible for the destruction? Or does the rumor mill say that yes, they were responsible and are expected to turn in others who were causing the damage?

The rumor mill, which I

Submitted by Merwyn Haskett on Wed, 03/05/2008 - 12:29pm.

The rumor mill, which I freely acknowledge is suspect and not to be blindly believed, implied what you said.

However, the next turn of the mill countered that they were matched to the prints and/or blood recovered from the vehicle (which I'm prone to disbelieve at this early stage without further proof - for one thing, how would the pundit know that unless they were LEO or an employee of the crime lab? And if they are, why would they be participating in the Haloscan comments?)

You say that a good cause will even sanctify war! I tell you, it is the good war that sanctifies every cause!
Friedrich Nietzsche

If that is the case, I

Submitted by ashley on Wed, 03/05/2008 - 12:33pm.

If that is the case, I wonder if their status as student athletes is a factor in their arrest (meaning, arresting them as opposed to other potentially identifiable folks). They could be particularly vulnerable to a conviction, and they're all pretty young. Isn't TESC talking about stripping people of their student status in addition to whatever criminal consequences are imposed? So that means a derailed athletics career in addition to being expelled from college, plus jail time and fines. Huge incentive to talk. Idle speculation on my part.

If they were caught on video

Submitted by Norm on Wed, 03/05/2008 - 12:36pm.

there is a strong possibility that they have information. The authorities know they were there. Plus, just because someone is arrested doesn't mean they are going to jail. I'm sure you know that, but I want to point that out to everyone. Just because you are charged, does not mean those charges will stick, or even make it past the prosecutors desk. Being arrested as part of an investigation could mean lots of things. Hopefully some of these teens will rat out people they know were involved with certain aspects, and justice can be spread out, rather than focused on a few.

As far as bringing others to

Submitted by Merwyn Haskett on Wed, 03/05/2008 - 12:39pm.

As far as bringing others to account that's a good tactic, but then it brings up another question.

Why should athletes be the ones given a chance to cut a deal - why not known activists or some other group.

I've always considered TESC different in regards to that but in most other schools the jocks get away with a lot, including bullying.

You say that a good cause will even sanctify war! I tell you, it is the good war that sanctifies every cause!
Friedrich Nietzsche

Very good news

Submitted by NWarty on Wed, 03/05/2008 - 12:13pm.

Very good news

No Bail For Any Of Those Arrested

Submitted by JstPlnOnry on Wed, 03/05/2008 - 2:00pm.

TCSO In-Custody Inmate Info

"JAKE DANIEL SILBERMAN"


COURT:	SUPERIOR COURT
CAUSE NUMBER:
CHARGE:	RIOT- IF ARMED WITH A DEADLY WEAPON
BAIL:	NO BAIL

COURT:	SUPERIOR COURT
CAUSE NUMBER:
CHARGE:	MALICIOUS MISCHIEF 1ST DEGREE
BAIL:	NO BAIL

"PETER BENJAMIN SLOAN"


COURT:	SUPERIOR COURT
CAUSE NUMBER:
CHARGE:	RIOT WITHOUT DEADLY WEAPON
BAIL:	NO BAIL

COURT:	SUPERIOR COURT
CAUSE NUMBER:
CHARGE:	MALICIOUS MISCHIEF 1ST DEGREE
BAIL:	NO BAIL

"CHASE EDWIN HILL"


COURT:	SUPERIOR COURT
CAUSE NUMBER:
CHARGE:	THEFT 2ND DEGREE
BAIL:	NO BAIL

"MONICA LYN RAGAN"


COURT:	SUPERIOR COURT
CAUSE NUMBER:	081004361
CHARGE:	RIOT WITHOUT DEADLY WEAPON
BAIL:	NO BAIL

COURT:	SUPERIOR COURT
CAUSE NUMBER:	081004361
CHARGE:	MALICIOUS MISCHIEF 1ST DEGREE
BAIL:	NO BAIL

"NINA RENEE HINTON"


COURT:	SUPERIOR COURT
CAUSE NUMBER:	091437
CHARGE:	RIOT WITHOUT DEADLY WEAPON
BAIL:	NO BAIL

COURT:	SUPERIOR COURT
CAUSE NUMBER:	091437
CHARGE:	MALICIOUS MISCHIEF 1ST DEGREE
BAIL:	NO BAIL

"A point of view is only a view from a point..." ~ Unknown

Have they already gone befor a judge?

Submitted by Guglielmo on Wed, 03/05/2008 - 2:09pm.

It's hard to believe they'd be held without bail unless they were serious flight risks or a danger to the community.

I Can't Find Anywhere Where They've Been Arraigned Yet

Submitted by JstPlnOnry on Wed, 03/05/2008 - 2:32pm.

but given the early hour of their arrest, I'm sure they could have gotten on at least the afternoon arraingment hearing docket. That's generally a 1:00 PM docket and the morning one is at 9:00 AM I believe. I doubt they were processed into the county jail in time to have made the morning docket.

But you can watch that site to the TCSO and enter their last names for bail updates. If they've been granted bail, it will appear on that site. If you can't find them on the In-Custody listing, they've most likely bailed out.

"A point of view is only a view from a point..." ~ Unknown

Yep

Submitted by Guglielmo on Wed, 03/05/2008 - 2:47pm.

You headline makes it sound like they are being held without bail (which is much different than whether or not they've yet to make bail). So I just wanted to clear that up.

I Could See Where That Could Be

Submitted by JstPlnOnry on Wed, 03/05/2008 - 2:49pm.

but technically they are being held without bail when I posted that. It could very well be they did make the morning arraignment docket, but I doubt it myself!

"A point of view is only a view from a point..." ~ Unknown

Just FYI

Submitted by Norm on Wed, 03/05/2008 - 2:55pm.

Last week my brother was in jail and being held on $5,000 bail. He went before the judge that afternoon, and was released on his own recognascence (sp?). I could have bailed him out prior to seeing the judge, so technically he was being held on that bail. I'm sure this will all change by the end of today or tomorrow morning. I can't imagine they are much of a flight risk.

No bail needed for all but one of the charged

Submitted by Guglielmo on Fri, 03/07/2008 - 2:56pm.

Though some heralded the bail dispossitions listed on the Thurston County Sheriff's website as "no bail for the rioters," yesterday's arraignment proved otherwise. Four of the defendents were release on their own recognisence and one was freed on $2,500 bail.

That's standard for

Submitted by Merwyn Haskett on Fri, 03/07/2008 - 3:18pm.

That's standard for first-time offenders, I would think.

They still spent an entire day and night in the Gray Bar Hotel before their arraignment - which would've been enough incentive for me to cooperate and cut whatever plea-deal I could get - instead of pleading Not Guilty when video evidence shows otherwise (Mainly referring to young Silberman and his stick...although I don't have a problem with him arguing his branch wasn't a weapon.)

1:22AM (Dispatch reads back this time to tape) "When Olympia comes in, let 'em know we need helmets, they're starting to throw stuff."

Thanks for posting the info JPO

Submitted by JT on Wed, 03/05/2008 - 2:10pm.

n/t

"I de-clutch, you know." Juan Manuel Fangio when asked how he avoids flat-spotting his tires when he spins the car.

Additional Info

Submitted by JstPlnOnry on Wed, 03/05/2008 - 2:29pm.

from KIROTV

Silverman was arrested Wednesday, accused of rioting with a deadly weapon. Prosecutors said he used a tree branch to beat on a patrol car as it was being destroyed.

Two member of Evergreen’s soccer team were among those arrested. Ragan is accused of stomping on a police car and smashing out its windshield. Police said the other soccer player, Hinton, is accused of rioting and malicious mischief.

Detectives said Sloan spray-painted a patrol car and other property at the riot scene.

All the suspects except Sloan are students at the college.

"A point of view is only a view from a point..." ~ Unknown

I'm certainly no apologist

Submitted by Merwyn Haskett on Wed, 03/05/2008 - 2:47pm.

I'm certainly no apologist for the rioters but I think a tree branch is stretching it - unless he swung, or implied he'd swing, at a person.

You say that a good cause will even sanctify war! I tell you, it is the good war that sanctifies every cause!
Friedrich Nietzsche

I Started To Say The Same Thing

Submitted by JstPlnOnry on Wed, 03/05/2008 - 2:50pm.

about not seeing how a tree branch could be considered a deadly weapon but...

Used against a person, it could be. Against a car...??? I think that's really stretching it too! LOL!

"A point of view is only a view from a point..." ~ Unknown

They're going out on a limb...

Submitted by Guglielmo on Wed, 03/05/2008 - 2:52pm.

Ah hahahahaha!

Submitted by JstPlnOnry on Wed, 03/05/2008 - 2:53pm.

wonder if they can make it "stick"!

LOL!

Get it? Make it STICK?

...never mind!

"A point of view is only a view from a point..." ~ Unknown

Technically

Submitted by Norm on Wed, 03/05/2008 - 2:53pm.

anything can be used as a deadly weapon....golf club, nerf bat, tree branch. It's a bit of a stretch though. I would guess that they are going to throw the book in this case, and see what charges stick. Start big, and dwindle down...y'know?

Deadly to a CAR?

Submitted by rainy gray on Wed, 03/05/2008 - 3:43pm.

I don't know if the dwindle-down approach to justice is wise if the charges make the prosecution look ridiculous.

Deadly in general

Submitted by Norm on Wed, 03/05/2008 - 3:51pm.

If a firearm is used in a bank robbery, and the robber shoots a camera, it may not be deadly to the camera, but it is an armed robbery, and you are using a deadly weapon in the commission of that crime. It makes sense to me.....although at times (such as this) I can see a certain amount of sillyness. It could be a bargaining chip too ie drop the deadly weapon charge if he/she talks.

I think the community is hopped up enough about this right now, and probably for awhile, that most of the jury would understand the reasoning. Did the branch cause more damage then his feet or hands? If so it's considered a weapon.

Ok...after typing all of that out I'm a little torn on it. It makes sense in my head, but.....yeah.

I wonder where the "deadly" distinction is?

Submitted by The Original Yoda on Wed, 03/05/2008 - 11:06pm.

What thing can a person pick up (besidees sticks) and start swinging around and not get

hit with the "deadly weapon" distinction, really.

Pillows? Jellow? Pants?

hmmm

Submitted by enpen on Wed, 03/05/2008 - 11:11pm.

Goose down or synthetic? Zippers or buttons?

"In principle, I am an anarchist. Kurt Vonnegut once said he was an agnostic who respects Jesus Christ. I am an anarchist who loves democracy." - Kenzaburo Oe

Socks?

Submitted by security_six on Wed, 03/05/2008 - 11:14pm.

I had a really foul pair of socks onetime... I mean BAD SOCKS. The kind of socks that had my size 14 wide sneakers declared a superfund cleanup site.

I guess those would count :-p

"si vis pacem, para bellum"

oh come on

Submitted by enpen on Wed, 03/05/2008 - 11:19pm.

We're trying to find the fine line, not the obvious. Does rope only become deadly once around a person?

I'm sure there's a perfectly precedent driven definition for the State of Washington...but that's too legitimate and won't make me crack a smile, so I for one, am not going to look it up.

"In principle, I am an anarchist. Kurt Vonnegut once said he was an agnostic who respects Jesus Christ. I am an anarchist who loves democracy." - Kenzaburo Oe

Delete this if it is judged offensive...

Submitted by security_six on Wed, 03/05/2008 - 11:22pm.

Otherwise I hope it causes you to crack a smile :-P

"si vis pacem, para bellum"

bad form

Submitted by enpen on Wed, 03/05/2008 - 11:28pm.

His right arm should be square with his chest and his weight more evenly distributed to his left leg. Unless he has a hand full of diarrhea he couldn't hit a car in a traffic jam.

Pun intended, where do you find this shit? It's excellent.

"In principle, I am an anarchist. Kurt Vonnegut once said he was an agnostic who respects Jesus Christ. I am an anarchist who loves democracy." - Kenzaburo Oe

LOL

Submitted by security_six on Wed, 03/05/2008 - 11:29pm.

pyzam.com it's on the pic! Glad you find it funny.

"si vis pacem, para bellum"

Washington State

Submitted by The Fire Inside on Wed, 03/05/2008 - 11:30pm.

Washington State Statues

9.94A.602

In a criminal case wherein there has been a special allegation and evidence establishing that the accused or an accomplice was armed with a deadly weapon at the time of the commission of the crime, the court shall make a finding of fact of whether or not the accused or an accomplice was armed with a deadly weapon at the time of the commission of the crime, or if a jury trial is had, the jury shall, if it find[s] the defendant guilty, also find a special verdict as to whether or not the defendant or an accomplice was armed with a deadly weapon at the time of the commission of the crime.
For purposes of this section, a deadly weapon is an implement or instrument which has the capacity to inflict death and from the manner in which it is used, is likely to produce or may easily and readily produce death. The following instruments are included in the term deadly weapon: Blackjack, sling shot, billy, sand club, sandbag, metal knuckles, any dirk, dagger, pistol, revolver, or any other firearm, any knife having a blade longer than three inches, any razor with an unguarded blade, any metal pipe or bar used or intended to be used as a club, any explosive, and any weapon containing poisonous or injurious gas.

Mick Foley has successfully

Submitted by Merwyn Haskett on Thu, 03/06/2008 - 8:37am.

Mick Foley has successfully used a sock to be a three-time world heavyweight champion.

You say that a good cause will even sanctify war! I tell you, it is the good war that sanctifies every cause!
Friedrich Nietzsche

According To

Submitted by JstPlnOnry on Wed, 03/05/2008 - 3:23pm.

South Puget Sound Indymedia

SUPPORT RALLY
Submitted by Anonymous on Wed, 03/05/2008 - 15:59.
These members of our community are being held without bail, and will be arraignment Thursday (tomorrow) at 3:30 PM. This will be in the Thurston County Supior Court, 2000 Lakeridge Dr. SW in Olympia WA. It will be in Building 2, in Room 129.
THERE IS A CALL OUT FOR AN EMERGENCY RALLY AT COURT HOUSE IMMEDIATELY.
There will be a mass rally at in the parking lot of the Court House at 3:00 PM Thursday, prior to their arraignment. We need to flood the court room with supporting community members. Don't be afraid, come and show support.

"A point of view is only a view from a point..." ~ Unknown

Can you say...

Submitted by Tschida on Wed, 03/05/2008 - 3:25pm.

Enabling behavior? I knew ya could. C.

One of the great non sequiturs of the left is that, if the free market doesn't work perfectly, then it doesn't work at all-- and the government should step in.

Thomas Sowell

Crap!

Submitted by JstPlnOnry on Wed, 03/05/2008 - 4:06pm.

Now some goobers who post on the O's comments section think I'M organizing the rally tomorrow! Sheesh! LOL!

I just cut & pasted the info from SPS Indymedia! I wonder how I should have clarified I was NOT the organizer, only sharing info I found!

"A point of view is only a view from a point..." ~ Unknown

you

Submitted by enpen on Wed, 03/05/2008 - 11:12pm.

anarchist :-)

"In principle, I am an anarchist. Kurt Vonnegut once said he was an agnostic who respects Jesus Christ. I am an anarchist who loves democracy." - Kenzaburo Oe

Yeah...

Submitted by JstPlnOnry on Wed, 03/05/2008 - 11:16pm.

just call me Anaonery from now on! hehehe! : )

"A point of view is only a view from a point..." ~ Unknown

Do I sense a snipe?

Submitted by Anonymously Larry on Thu, 03/06/2008 - 6:44pm.

I sentence Onry to three days of "I love Larry" posts

I'm Down With That!

Submitted by JstPlnOnry on Fri, 03/07/2008 - 5:26pm.

Sure beats a WHY I Love Larry post! hehehe!

I LOVE LARRY!

There's 1!

"A point of view is only a view from a point..." ~ Unknown

Another Post From SPS Indymedia

Submitted by JstPlnOnry on Wed, 03/05/2008 - 4:47pm.

Again, I am just reporting what's being posted at South Puget Sound Indymedia

I AM NOT ORGANIZING THIS RALLY, NOR WILL I BE ANY PART OF IT! I am just informing the masses that may be interesting in knowing information!

A call out to anarchists and all those in opposition to the current social order
Submitted by Anonymous on Wed, 03/05/2008 - 17:27. Cascadia
Start: 03/05/2008 - 19:26
Timezone: Etc/GMT-6

From those who are in opposition to the police, the state, and the prison industry. We call ourselves Anarchist.

Tomorrow is the possible arraignment of five people who are being wrongfully accused of 1st degree class B felony of malicious mischief, suspicion of riot and 2nd degree theft charges. This happens while the police continue to rake havoc on our communities and in our every day lives. Enforcing the structures of hierarchy and dominance. This is a call for solidarity outside of the court house as well as in. Anarchists, and all those who are concerned with the current state of the world and our livelihood, solidarity is more than just theory, more than financial support, it is action. It does not matter one bit if the nature of this case is political or not, what matters is that we show support for those who are being threatened with time in a cage; although, the nature of this current witch hunt is political, they do not want another show of resistance (again, whether political or not) like the one they saw on valentines day. Lets show that we can show support and solidarity, revolutionary solidarity, for those being held captive. Because surely this will not be the end of this investigation. They will come for more, in the silent of night or in the early morning, they will come again to take unsuspecting people away to their prisons. Let it not end at the rallies, the work place, the school and the institutions that are part of the daily reproduction. This is our lives that are at stake and the lives of the people we care about around us. We can not allow them to beat us into compliance or terrify us into passivity. We need to fight back. This is our struggle. For abolition of their prisons, for abolition of their state. For abolition of the commodity and wage slavery. We call ourselves anarchist.

Rally for in solidarity at Thurston County Court House
8:30 am
the court house is 2000 lakeridge dr. sw in Olympia

Add new comment Calendar
CORRECTION
Submitted by Anonymous on Wed, 03/05/2008 - 17:39.
THE RALLY IS AT 3 PM.

The original call out for a rally was at 8:30 AM, because it was thought that their arraignment would be at 9 AM. Their arraignment is at 3:30, so be there by 3 PM!

"A point of view is only a view from a point..." ~ Unknown

I say let them try to

Submitted by Merwyn Haskett on Wed, 03/05/2008 - 4:52pm.

I say let them try to recreate the night of 2/14 at the TCS's home office. I'm curious how far they think they'll get.

You say that a good cause will even sanctify war! I tell you, it is the good war that sanctifies every cause!
Friedrich Nietzsche