Tag Archives: Washington State Supreme Court

King County judge on why repeat offenders get no punishment: “We’re just talking about property crime”

As I’ve told you about many times, demorat-run Seattle/King County has a serious problem with homeless criminals and repeat offenders. See the following examples:

Seattle repeat offender attacks man outside courthouse; was just released from jail earlier this month
Homeless harassing King County Courthouse workers: “It’s a reflection of the courthouse location”
How many convictions does it take for Seattle City Attorney to place a homeless criminal in jail after his latest assault?
Resident in liberal utopia of Seattle who has been targeted by homeless: “Our community is just falling apart
Violent repeat offender in Seattle assaults toddler with coffee, two days after his jail release

A study done earlier this year showed that repeat offenders cycle through “with little accountability and no apparent impact on their behavior.”

Part of the problem? The “justice system” and court laws don’t work to protect law-abiding citizens and their property that criminals damage.

Judge Jim Rogers

King County Superior Court Presiding Judge James Rogers did an interview with MyNorthwest.com that was very revealing. Excerpts from his interview:

“…according to court rules, people charged with crimes that are not capital crimes should be released on personal recognizance, unless they 1) fail to appear in court, 2) intimidate witnesses, or 3) are highly likely to re-offend.

“With Mr. Chilcott (repeat offender), because it wasn’t a violent crime that was charged, we’re just talking about property crime,” Rogers said, adding, “I’m not saying he didn’t act violently with police when they tried to arrest him, but there was no underlying charge, so we’re really looking, in our view, at a property crime.”

While judges “are bound by criminal rules approved by the Washington State Supreme Court — and they do give a very strong presumption of release, unless certain factors are met,” they still “take the rights of victims seriously.”

The “presumption of release” is likely stronger with property crimes than with violent crimes, Rogers guessed. He said that the jail is full of people charged with violent crimes who do not get set free on their own recognizance.

“When it comes to a property crime, we’re really restricted to talking about whether or not they’re going to appear [in court],” he said.”

Read the whole story here.

Both the City of Seattle and King County prosecutors are progressives who are committed to “criminal justice reform.”

So much so that property crime is not considered a major offense. Criminals KNOW what they can get away with and KNOW that they will not do serious time for breaking the law.

After all it’s just YOUR property being destroyed, not theirs.

DCG

Better than Drudge Report. Check out Whatfinger News, the Internet’s conservative frontpage founded by ex-military!

Please follow and like us:
error130
Tweet 20
fb-share-icon20

Share and Enjoy !

0Shares
0 0 0
 

Ka-ching: Court rules Seattle can impose an income tax in stunning decision

I am no tax attorney yet I can read the Revised Code of Washington (RCW). From the Washington State Legislature, RCW 36.65.030: “Tax on net income prohibited. A county, city, or city-county shall not levy a tax on net income.”

If this ruling survives the Washington State Supreme Court, I can guarantee you every other city, county – and the state – will follow suit in grabbing more taxpayer dollars.

From MyNorthwest.com: The Washington State Court of Appeals handed down a shocking decision Monday, ruling that the City of Seattle has the legal authority to impose an income tax.

It was roughly two years ago when Seattle City Council unanimously passed an income tax on high earners. But the 2.25 percent tax on total income above $250,000 for individuals, and $500,000 for married couples has yet to be imposed.

A legal battle has ensued ever since, over the fact that Washington is one of the few states that doesn’t impose an income tax. Monday’s ruling called that restriction into question.

The appeals court ruled that while the tax levied against high earners by the City of Seattle is unconstitutional, the city still has the authority to impose an income tax, provided it’s uniform across all tax brackets. Essentially, if Seattle — or any city in Washington — wants an income tax, it would need to be applied evenly across every household, regardless of what they make yearly.

“I was dumbstruck by the way the court reached its decision,” Attorney Matthew Davis told KIRO Radio. Davis represents Michael Kunath, one of the plaintiffs in the case filed against Seattle’s initial proposed income tax.

“The decision itself was not a surprise at all — how the court got to its decision was a big surprise,” he added.

Next, both Davis and the City of Seattle will look to bring the case before the Washington State Supreme Court, each for different reasons. For Davis, the hope is to uphold the ruling stating Seattle’s proposed tax on high earners is unconstitutional, but overturn the appeals court decision allowing Seattle to impose a uniform income tax.

The City is looking for the opposite outcome: For the Supreme Court to overturn the ruling on the high earner tax, and uphold the uniform income tax decision.

“We’re pleased that the Court held the City had the statutory authority to enact an income tax,” the Seattle City Attorney’s Office said in a written statement. “The City has always recognized that ultimately the Washington State Supreme Court is the proper place to overturn the bad precedent holding an income tax is a tax on property. We intend to petition our Washington State Supreme Court for appeal.”

DCG

Better than Drudge Report. Check out Whatfinger News, the Internet’s conservative frontpage founded by ex-military!

Please follow and like us:
error130
Tweet 20
fb-share-icon20

Share and Enjoy !

0Shares
0 0 0