News More Details from the Police Report
The account given at yesterday’s press conference and in today’s papers leave out some dramatic details about Friday’s shooting at the Jewish Federation—the target Haq chose with an internet search. Particularly noteworthy: Details about victim Dayna Klein, the pregnant woman who Haq shot in the arm as shielded her stomach, and the 911 call she placed that brought the shootings to an end.
After being shot, Klein got to a phone and called 911.
I’ll just quote the report from here:
She told the 911 operators that the gunman had shot people and was holding her hostage. As the 911 operators asked where the gunman was the wounded victim said ‘right here’ and the gunman took the phone. The gunman got on the phone and said, ‘this is a hostage situation, I have a hostage.’ The 911 operators asked the gunman’s name he replied ‘Naveed Haq.’ Haq said, ‘This is a hostage situation and I want these Jews to get out.’ He sated he was ‘at 2131, the Jewish Federation, on 3rd Ave.’In response to various questions Haq stated, ‘I’m upstais. I’m not upset at people. I’m upset at your foreign policy. These are Jews and I’m tired of getting pushed around and our people getting pushed around by the situation in the Middle East.’ He repeats that his name is Naveed Haq and gives his social security number as XXX-XX-XXXX. He states, ‘I just want us to get out of Iraq, I’m an American too but I want our people out Iraq.’ Haq states that he has one pregnant female at gunpoint and ‘I shot her once, I shot her in the arm.’
He states he wants the Police to call the media and tells the 911 operators ‘I have this gun pointed at her head.’ When 911 operators say she needs an ambulance he states, ‘I don’t care.’ Haq tells the 911 operators he is ‘acting alone,’ that he has not been drinking today.
He suddenly states, ‘I’ll give myself up.’ In response to questions he states he is ‘wearing a green shirt, blue pants, I’m in jeans.’ He sates, ‘I’ll put my gun down.’ He sates, ‘She says my gun is down.’ The 911 operators ask whom and Haq states ‘the woman I just shot.’
It is common knowledge that the couples who sued the state for Equal Marriage lost.
It is not common knowledge that they have the right to file a motion to reconsider.
I spoke to one of the plantiffs in the case and she didn't even know that this was an option. This blew me away. She hadn't even been informed that this was an option! She said she had not ever heard of it. She told me to ask Jamie Pederson, who was one of the lawyers involved in the case.
So, I spoke to Jamie Pederson face to face and he told me that they (the lawyers involved in the case) were not likely to file a motion to reconsider because they (the lawyers) don't think it will change the outcome. That just doesn't sit right with me. There was no guarantee that they would win when they went into this suit and there's no guarantee that it won't change the outcome. The lawyers still have approximately 20 days left to file. Apparently, the lawyers are not asking the LGBT community what it wants to do and they are not asking the couples if they would like to file for reconsideration with the court. Outrageous! Where is the conviction, the principle?
In the Stranger (online) there is an MP3 file where Justice Alexander says at least 4 times that the plantiffs have 30 days to file for reconsideration of the ruling.
If they don't file I want to know WHY?
I told Mr. Pederesen that if they don't file that the lawyers on the case would be remiss in their duties to their clients and to the broader community. If this is the case, I will be writing letters to the
editors of every paper in Washington State in order to let the LGBT community know that 2nd best is just fine with Democrats and that 2nd class is just fine with the couples' lawyers. Even if the outcome is the same they would at least get more exposure and continue to stand on principle. That is, afterall, the whole point.
The opinion of the Washington State Supreme Justices who sided with the 'right wingnuts' out of fear sided on the wrong side of the constitution and we have to fight them on their decision with a motion to reconsider! They need to understand that their ruling was not happily received.