Thanks for covering this, Ms. M.

Agreed with Gus - most excellent reporting.

I feel lame for writing the same thing but really I'm very glad that you are covering this so thoroughly. It gives great insight into the justice system for a police officer.

.Previewing Your Comment
Re: Williams Inquest Day Seven: The Jury Deliberates
1. On August 30, 2010, did Seattle Police Officer Ian Birk observe John T. Williams crossing the street? Yes
2. Was John T. Williams holding an open knife at the time he was first observed by Officer Birk? Yes
3. Did Officer Birk get out of his patrol car to contact Williams? Yes
4. Did Officer Birk gesture to John T. Williams to come back to Officer Birk's location? Unknown
5. Did John T. Williams have a knife in his hand when Officer Birk contacted him? Yes
6. Did Officer Birk order John T. Williams to put the knife down? Yes
If your answer to question 6 was yes, please answer the following questions:
6a. Did Officer Birk order John T. Williams to put the knife down more than once? Yes
6b. Did John T. Williams have sufficient time to put the knife down after Officer Birk's order? No
6c. Did John T. Williams try to put the knife down after Officer Birk's order? Unknown
6d. Did John T. Williams put the knife down before Officer Birk began to fire his weapon? No
7. Was the front of John T. Williams' upper body partially turned towards Officer Birk when Officer Birk began to fire his weapon? Yes
7a. If no, was John T. Williams turning towards Officer Birk when Officer Birk fired his weapon?
8. Did Officer Birk fire his weapon at John T. Williams on August 30, 2010? Yes
9.When Officer Birk fired his weapon, did John T. Williams have a knife in his hand? Yes
9a. If yes, was John T. Williams blade open when Officer Birk fired his weapon? Yes
10. Did Officer Birk believe that John T. Williams posed an imminent threat of serious physical harm to Officer Birk at the time Officer Birk fired his weapon? No
11. Based on the information available at the time Officer Birk fired his weapon, did John T. Williams then pose an imminent threat of serious physical harm to Officer Birk? No
12. Did John T. Williams die in King County on August 30, 2010? Yes
13. Did John T. Williams die of gunshot wounds caused by Officer Birk? Yes

6b could be claimed by some to be a little unclear. "sufficient time to put the knife down" before what?

Valpey, I'd suggest that both q2 and q9a are "unknown" rather than yes.

Great work, Cienna! As someone who's worked with the homeless in Toronto, I must admit that I've never had the experience of a news outlet caring so much and following so closely after we've had deaths and serious injuries caused by police. You're a gift to your city.

Some of these questions are incredibly stupid:

"Did John T. Williams die in King County on August 30, 2010?"
"Did John T. Williams die of gunshot wounds caused by Officer Birk?"

"Did you get kicked in the head on your way to the courthouse?"

"Was Officer Birk making a legal stop?" -- whats the consensus on that?

1. No 2. Yes 3. Yes 4. No 5. Yes 6. Yes 6a. Yes 6b. No 6c. No 6d. No 7. No 7a. Yes 8. Yes 9. Yes 9a. Unknown 10. No 11. No 12. Yes 13. Yes

@Canadian Nurse
I wouldn't say you are wrong. Mostly I was trying to work within the bounds of the "only answer 'unknown' as a last-resort cop out. " I would much rather assign probabilities or something like that. I can easily imagine that Williams was trying to close the knife or had just closed it when the first shot was fired so I was tempted to say "unknown". Instead, I am basically trying to apply Occam's razor which would tell me that the knife was probably at least partially open at the time of the first shot. Regardless of the knife's position, however, the most critical finding should be that the answer to number 10 is no; Officer Birk did not believe that John T. Williams posed an imminent threat of serious physical harm.

I would find that Birk made an irrational snap decision to punish Williams for not obeying him. Since his sidearm was already drawn and his muscle-memory was already very familiar with quickly shooting scary-looking-people-cut-outs-holding-knives. His training overwhelmed his judgement and both are at fault. I don't believe for a second that Birk felt the least bit threatened.

@ 10 - Completely agree w/yr last paragraph.

I'd only add that, IMHO, Mr Birk should stand trial for murder, at which point he can enter such defenses as 'muscle memory' and SPD training.

Aw, thanks guys. Compliments on Slog are hard earned--they're worth, like, 100 in real life. I appreciate it.

also joining the choir in voicing appreciation for your coverage Cienna. Very well done.

Given that most of the witnesses appear to have thought the officer involved probably was a gang thug, since he didn't identify himself as a cop, I can't see how any jury would fail to convict.

Then again, having served on a jury, I'll be surprised if the victim will get justice.

I find it interesting that the official list of questions not only does not include whether the stop was legal, but whether or not Birk identified himself as a police officer.

6b and 11 are both undeniably "No." Birk was not threatened and Williams didn't have enough time to react. Together that's enough for at least a manslaughter charge. 10 (did Birk think he was threatened?) is more of a judgment call but I think the answer is also No. If it is, then Birk should be indicted for first degree murder because "[u]nder circumstances manifesting an extreme indifference to human life, he...[engaged] in conduct which [created] a grave risk of death to any person, and thereby [caused] the death of a person." I think you could even convict on murder 1 if the answer to 10 is yes, because even if he thought he might be under threat his other actions demonstrated indifference to human life.

In fact, I'd like to see an indictment on first degree murder to pressure Birk to plea for manslaughter. Give him one chance to show remorse and get a lesser sentence; otherwise, trial and conviction.

And to think, I was on jury duty the week before this jury was selected, and I chose to defer to that date. If I'd chosen a week later I might be on this jury, though I'd probably have been thrown out during voir dire for knowing too much about the case in advance.

6b. Did John T. Williams have sufficient time to put the knife down after Officer Birk's order?
Yes

9a. If yes, was John T. Williams blade open when Officer Birk fired his weapon?
No

11. Based on the information available at the time Officer Birk fired his weapon, did John T. Williams then pose an imminent threat of serious physical harm to Officer Birk?
Yes

@8, @15,

The reason the question of the stop's legality is not being asked is because juries are strictly limited to determining issues of fact. The legality of the stop, as an issue of law, is for a judge to decide. If and when Birk ends up in court as a defendant, the judge will instruct the jury as to the legality of the stop before they are asked to make their decision.

(My amateur legal opinion is that the stop was obviously illegal. Minding his own business as he was, Williams with his legal knife was no more suspicious than a kid with a baseball bat or a mechanic with a tire iron.)

The other question, as to whether Birk identified himself as a police officer, is in my opinion salient, and conspicuous in its absence.

Here is my best effort to guess what the jury will find as to the facts in this inquest. These are not my personal beliefs. I am just trying to guess what the jury will decide.

1. On August 30, 2010, did Seattle Police Officer Ian Birk observe John T. Williams crossing the street? Yes

2. Was John T. Williams holding an open knife at the time he was first observed by Officer Birk? Yes

3. Did Officer Birk get out of his patrol car to contact Williams? Yes

4. Did Officer Birk gesture to John T. Williams to come back to Officer Birk's location? Yes

5. Did John T. Williams have a knife in his hand when Officer Birk contacted him? Yes

6. Did Officer Birk order John T. Williams to put the knife down? Yes

If your answer to question 6 was yes, please answer the following questions:

6a. Did Officer Birk order John T. Williams to put the knife down more than once? Yes

6b. Did John T. Williams have sufficient time to put the knife down after Officer Birk's order? No

6c. Did John T. Williams try to put the knife down after Officer Birk's order? Unknown

6d. Did John T. Williams put the knife down before Officer Birk began to fire his weapon? No

7. Was the front of John T. Williams' upper body partially turned towards Officer Birk when Officer Birk began to fire his weapon? Can't guess. (I think the jury will ask for further instructions on this one. What does "partially towards" mean? If Williams was oriented 179° away from Birk, would that mean he oriented 1° towards Birk, or still 89° away from him?)

7a. If no, was John T. Williams turning towards Officer Birk when Officer Birk fired his weapon? Yes

8. Did Officer Birk fire his weapon at John T. Williams on August 30, 2010? Yes

9.When Officer Birk fired his weapon, did John T. Williams have a knife in his hand? Yes

9a. If yes, was John T. Williams blade open when Officer Birk fired his weapon? Unknown

10. Did Officer Birk believe that John T. Williams posed an imminent threat of serious physical harm to Officer Birk at the time Officer Birk fired his weapon? No

11. Based on the information available at the time Officer Birk fired his weapon, did John T. Williams then pose an imminent threat of serious physical harm to Officer Birk? No

12. Did John T. Williams die in King County on August 30, 2010? Yes

13. Did John T. Williams die of gunshot wounds caused by Officer Birk? Yes

@10, @11,

Amen.

Our cops are indoctrinated with the idea that anyone who fails to prostrate themselves when so ordered should be subdued with lethal force. Birk saw his encounter with Williams through the lens of all that shit-ass training, and it overwhelmed his capacity for reasonable human judgement. Both are at fault here, and ought to be rebuked.

@19 --

Our cops are indoctrinated with the idea that anyone who fails to prostrate themselves when so ordered should be subdued with lethal force.

Subdued with lethal force?

Are you suggesting that Williams is the only person who ever failed to prostrate himself when so ordered by Birk?

Cut out the subdued with lethal force bit of hyperbole, and I think I agree with your statement @19 completely.

Then again, if Birk acted according to his training, then how can you fault him for acting upon it?

When are you going to run for office?