Comments

2
I don't know, maybe people in the Puzzle Palace are trying to see if he produces links to other people/organizations/unsolved crimes/conspiracies?

I don't like to see people tried and convicted on the internet. On the other hand, it would be awful if someone, whether mentally ill or ideologically directed, committed murder when it was preventable. Why not just put up the best available likenesses, digitally enhanced if possible, so that people study them, make flyers, and post them in clubs. His name adds nothing at this point. Even someone who read this post would be unlikely to remember it if asked a few hours later, and any close friends (whether below or above-board) will have already tipped him off, if he somehow missed the hubbub himself.
3
similar to @1, i was going to Tom-Clancy-it-up and wonder if this guy wasn't under federal protection because of what/who he might know back home in Libya; essentially a member of a CIA spy protection program. certainly this is the sort of local authority twitchy behavior that we'd expect if such unlikeliness were the case.
4
I think the explanation for the SPD behavior is becoming obvious. They don't think this was attempted mass murder, they think it is like a car prowling--they'll get to it if they have time (which they won't). And to make you feel nice, they'll even have a detective give you a card you can call if you solve it yourself.
5
@1: Fuck off with your bohemian grove inside job crazy idiocy in this thread about what sounds to be a mentally ill person who may have attempted to harm people we care about.

Everyone else's life is a tool to advance your dumb ideology.
7
I want to remain anonymous because I know this guy and frankly i'm afraid of him. He is mentally ill and his progressive breakdowns over the past two years have been escalating. It is sad. He is sick. He needs real legitimate help and has been bailed out time and time again by his family. My friends and I have been wondering where and how it was going to escalate and here it is. I just thought it was going to be with a gun or a deadly confrontation with the police. What he did was wrong but again, the dude is sick. He is not in control. No one is home.
8
Have you guys gone to Murray and Harrell's offices? They're supposed to be the elected oversight here as Mayor and chair of the committee with the most supposed control over SPD. The theories from 1 & 2 are frighteningly plausible.
9
@5:
Fuck off with your bohemian grove inside job crazy idiocy in this thread about what sounds to be a mentally ill person who may have attempted to harm people we care about.
Nobody has said this. All that we know is that he is a person of interest, and is NOT a suspect right now. You are making shit up and smearing this man's name without knowing the facts. If anybody needs to be told to fuck off right now, it is you.
10
I think the real answer is that this is just how slow police work tends to go. As soon as somebody is arrested the action has to be justified in court. It's worth taking time to get everything in order before you take another action.

However is there any reason not to publish the person of interest's name? Not really. As long as the police don't release it there's no judicial problem. Assuming the person knows something about the arson it puts pressure on the perpetrators and their friends and family raising the potential for someone to come forward with additional information.

And even the discussion with Neighbors makes sense. I attend many meetings with people in the LGBT community who don't necessarily want their picture on the front page of a newspaper.
11
@9: I'm responding to his assumptions.

The "sounds to be mentally ill" is in response to his confirmed behaviors.
12
The first "his" being doom, the second being the person of interest in this case.
13
@9
Maybe you should fuck off, Nancy Grace.

He's not officially a suspect, but do you seriously think the lynch mob isn't going to treat him like one? Making shit up starts up above @1, where we get a bunch of scary foreigners--and not the ones from Ireland, obviously--out to get us all. Sure sounds a lot more like smearing a lot of men's (and women's) names without knowing any facts than what you're accusing @5 of.
14
@11: No, you are making shit up and defaming him. There is no evidence that has been released that indicates that he was responsible the crime. None! And even insinuating that he "may have" done it is gross defamation. This applies to your comment as well as the others in this thread that have made that unfounded association. If you follow police stories long enough, you will learn not to jump to conclusions. The police are often wrong, and jumping to conclusions can have real consequences for innocent people. So act like an adult and wait for the facts.
15
I could probably phrase it better, but I acknowledge that the mentioned multiple assaults, violating anti-harassment orders, etc along with feeling protective of the crowd at Neighbors are skewing my ability to speak rationally about this.
16
@13: I didn't respond to @1 because I generally ignore anything sgt_doom says.
17
@14: This guy needs to be monitored for his own safety as well as ours. That's guaranteed, whether it needs to be published on the Slog or not.
18
@16

I humbly withdraw my suggestion to fuck off; I misunderstood your meaning. But undead is working off what the bartenders have said about the guy, which, while not "official" in the police sense may be taken as more than just rumor, so I wouldn't characterize this as smearing his name.
19
Seriously shitty civic communication going on right now. Come on, SPD. (And If they can't give us any useful information, step the eff up for us, Mayor Murray.)
20
@17,18: The biggest issue right now is that the SPD isn't explaining jack or shit, so people naturally start theorizing based on the trivial amount they have released. And their apparent disinterest in this case is only fueling amateur sleuthing. But right now, we only know two facts: someone intentionally tried to light the exit to the nightclub on fire in a way that could have caused a lot of deaths and the SPD wants to ask a man some questions related to this case.
21
@20: "SPD wants to ask a man some questions related to this case."

Separate to the previous discussion, if they only wanted information from him and him alone, would they have bothered to publicly label him a person of interest? Wouldn't that move be more to find persons more familiar with him who might have evidence to or contrary to any involvement with the attempted arson?
22
@21: For all we know right now, the SPD might have been trying to compile a list of statements from every person who was in the nightclub or who had recently been in it. Then they found a person they couldn't identify, so they asked the public for help. But the fact is that we really don't know why the SPD wants to talk to him.
23
@22: That's reasonable, thanks.
24
Jesus H. Christ.

If there anything dependable in this universe it's that you count on the crazy of the internet (and SLOG specifically) to speculate insanely on shit they know nothing about. Fuck if SLOG admins had any integrity as all they would delete the revolting ravings of morons like Doom. This is a mans life here. Okay?

Here are some facts I know:

Musab is an American citizen. He was born here. His parents live in Libya. He didn't have any family in this town. So cops aren't trying to smoke out anybody or what ever.

He wasn't an "informant", a radical muslim (judging by the amount of beer he used to drink during Ramadan), or a Reptillian, or what ever stupid fucking thing slides sideways into your deranged paranoid pseudo-cortex's.

He was in New York through most of the fall staying with a relative because he was having severe financial and emotional distress.

He didn't hate gay people as far I know. Since most the people he hung out with were gay, that would be odd if he did.

He did become more religious as his mental state and cannabis use grew worse. His religious outbursts were tangential to his impulsive behavior. But before that he was a great guy which is what makes this doubly terrible.

I don't know what's up with SPD. But I'd imagine determining all the details about somebody as itinerant as Musab and getting a proper mental health evaluations etc change the nature and timing of an investigation. They can't arrest anyone until they have evidence. They DID have him in custody on the separate assault charge, but could only hold him so long.

It took nearly a week for a SPD detective to call me back - after a desk officer let me leave the 12th Precinct without taking a word of my information and insisting I call the Arson unit my self -which is infuriating.

It sounded like there were a number of other people who identified him from the photos (and later probably the video) and the detectives (or detective - since I bet there was only one assigned to this) had to be very methodical about contacting each of them. So I'll cut them/him some slack.

But you guys? Tolerating all this insane conspiracy shit on SLOG is just too much.
25
At least only one other person was dumb enough to come to doom's aid.
26
@25 yeah. I count three. Regardless, the Stranger shouldn't let that asshole poison the well with the first comment being so fucked up. After all they pulled one comment I see but not Dooms. Which... Christ... I mean... really?
27
@26

raindrop maybe? I'm trying to recall if I had seen that monicker on this thread.
28
@27: No.
29
I don't think the word "suspect" exists anymore in police vernacular. There are no suspects anymore, only persons of interest.
30
I love how the internet has allowed everyone to be sit at home juries! It's AMAZING!!!!
31
@30 - Of course you do. Considering how much you judge everything else, I'm sure you feel right at home.
32
@24: Tkc wrote, "It took nearly a week for a SPD detective to call me back - after a desk officer let me leave the 12th Precinct without taking a word of my information and insisting I call the Arson unit my self -which is infuriating."

Anyone can file a complaint by completing and submitting a form on City of Seattle's website. Given that you did not receive the service you think our public staff should provide, I hope you will file a complaint.
33
@29: I, as well, suspect so. I figure they were burned one too many times by publicly naming someone as a suspect, so they quit using the word and instead publicly name people as "persons of interest."

Would one of you people throwing around the terms suspect and person of interest here please let us all know what you think the difference is?
34
Same thing happened here. Owner of this bar was habitually crazy, and the police refused to do anything. He was a neighborhood nuisance for years. Then, this:

http://www.seattlepi.com/local/article/G…

36
Maybe SPD doesn't want the video released for reasons other than the arson. There could be undercover narcotics officers partying in there for all we know. There have been long, ongoing stings in other bars so why not Neighbours? It's not as if party boys are averse to banned substances.
37
@35: Nope, you're still a xenophobic, apparently also misogynistic pile of fecal matter.

My "vagina" is pretty irrelevant to you being an unhinged crank. Masturbating to Alex Jones isn't thinking.

Throughout your Slog career (and elsewhere on the internet I see you post under that account name) I've never seen any actual fact or insight offered from you. Just ranting.
38
Is it possible that he is a "person of interest" for the NSA, and the feds have ordered local police to keep their grubby mitts off him?
39
Did ya'all ever stop to consider that...

Maybe letting the "person of interest" know exactly what video evidence you have on him before you can question him --by stupidly leaking that video to the press-- effectively takes away a huge advantage you would have had during the questioning and blows to hell any chance you might have had of catching him in a lie & vastly improving your chances of getting a solid conviction at trial.

It's possible the Arson Unit may be more concerned with doing the investigation right --albeit slowly and methodically-- and getting the guy actually convicted, rather than just placating the hurried deadlines of an impatient, over-media-saturated public that thinks the case is always suppose to get solved before the next commercial break. (Because that's what happens on CSI, after all.)
40
@38: Oh look, more stupid.

Please wait...

Comments are closed.

Commenting on this item is available only to members of the site. You can sign in here or create an account here.


Add a comment
Preview

By posting this comment, you are agreeing to our Terms of Use.