Williams Shooting
Language of Smoke, Mirrors and Senseless Shootings
~ Katie Brown
Most readers are probably familiar by now with the events of August 30, 2010 in Seattle, Washington. A 50 year-old man, John T. Williams of Ditidaht First Nation, was fatally shot four times in the chest by an officer standing only nine feet away. Williams’ crime? He was a wood-carver, and carried with him a piece of wood as well as a knife for whittling, though the blade was closed. Being prone to drinking heavily, bouts with mental
illness, and partially deaf while wearing headphones, he most likely was not entirely aware of his surroundings, so you can add possible incoherence to the list. None of which seem too terribly egregious or life-threatening.
Ian Birk was a young officer, just two years out of training at 27 years-old, and not equipped with a taser. When he saw Williams with his knife in hand while driving his squad car, Birk halted, got out and approached Williams from behind, telling him to drop the knife. After about 5 seconds, Birk fired from point-blank range. A later inquest found that the bullets entered Williams’ chest from the side, indicating that he was not fully turned toward Birk, which means two things: Williams most likely did not even hear the officer, and Williams did not pose an imminent threat to the officer.
In the six months since the sudden tragic and needless shooting of John T. Williams, a series of questions and debates have arisen about the treatment of minority communities by the Seattle Police Department, as well as the possible inadequacy of the training officers receive and the unnecessary use of deadly force. Why wasn’t Birk equipped with a taser? What exactly did he find imminently threatening about a man with a piece of wood and a closed carving knife, generally regarded as “harmless” by the rest of the community? How can attitudes be changed so that the Seattle Police are a source of protection and not fear for the community they supposedly serve, especially minority and Native communities?
After a non-binding inquest into the shooting was concluded on Jan 20, and King County Prosecutor Dan Satterberg decided not to press charges, Williams’ family’s lawyer sent a request for a grand jury. On March 11, 2011, Satterberg announced in a letter that there would be no convening of a grand jury to consider criminal charges against Birk, who resigned on February 16, 2011 after the findings of the Firearms Review Board declared that his use of deadly force was not justified. Deputy Chief Clark Kimerer stated “Birk had not followed his training and should have called for back-up immediately.”
However, in his letter rejecting the formation of a grand jury, Satterberg said that “making a series of tactical errors is not enough … [to] support a conclusion that the officer acted with malice or acted in bad faith.”
Apparently, shooting a man who is not fully facing you, and is less than ten feet away, four times in the side of the chest is not malicious. Nor is it “bad faith” because according to Birk’s smokescreen, he felt seriously threatened and as though he were about to be attacked by a man who most likely did not even hear the officer and was quite possibly unaware the officer had even approached him. Birk and his lawyers took advantage of the subjectivity of the law’s language, which lends protection to a man who could not reasonably justify his use of deadly force, but was able to “prove” that he didn’t act “maliciously.” So, then, by Seattle law, at what point does pulling a gun on someone who doesn’t pose a threat become a malicious act? This case teaches us it is not malicious, not even after that gun has been used to shoot that same someone multiple times.
Gyasi Ross, a member of the Blackfeet Nation who sat in on the inquest hearing, submitted an article on behalf of a consortium of Seattle’s Native Community to Crosscut. He applauded the inquest for finding that Williams did not pose a threat to the officer, but accurately predicted that no criminal charges would be brought against Birk, knowing that Seattle authorities would hide behind smokescreens and manipulations of the language of the law: " As the saying goes, 'ded men tell no tales,' and in the inquest Ian Birk spread as many dubious kideas, inconsistencies, and stereotypes as he could about this dead Native man in hopes of saving his own skin. In this instance, however, the dead man does tell us all a story."
The story this dead man tells is that officers of the peace are spreading unnecessary violence behind the guise of protection and service. It tells that minority, particularly Native communities continue to be abused by those in power – but, that they also have a stronger voice now than ever. It tells that from tragedy can come the forces needed to create positive societal changes, although they may come slowly.
February 27, 2011, which would have been Williams’ 51st birthday, was declared John T. Williams day by the mayor of Seattle, Michael McGinn. To honor the wood-carver and his love of totems, the city is providing space from March 1 through April 30, 2011 at the Seattle Center for the carving of a totem in his honor, with a second phase at Seattle’s Waterfront Park beginning on May 1. A federal investigation into potential civil rights’ abuses by the Seattle Police Department has also begun, which may eventually lead to legal accountability, changes in officers’ training and, ideally, less abuse by the force. And community organizations, like the Chief Seattle Club, have been given a larger voice through their community forum to bring different sides of Seattle together and discuss police and safety in the city to hold its police force accountable, and most importantly, empower its citizens.
Banner Graphic: www.firstpeople.us
