Vandals hit homes of Seattle mayor and city council members, ‘Guillotine Jenny’ spray painted on home

Share:

SEATTLE, WA – Remember when various officials warned that with all the madness ongoing, we’d eventually see protests leak into residential neighborhoods and the same style of vandalism strike the suburbs instead of just the commercial districts?

Welp – looks like those notions aren’t so crazy anymore these days. And Seattle’s own mayor, as well as two city council members, were the recipients of some not-so-friendly graffiti outside of their homes recently.

Mayor Jenny Durkan and Councilmembers Alex Pedersen and Debora Juarez were said to have been paid a visit by some malefactors recently, the very kind that fancy the idea of the Seattle Police being defunded.

Outside of Mayor Durkan’s home, the phrases “Guillotine Jenny,” and “Resign Bitch,” were spray painted on the roadside. Because nothing says “peacefully” protesting quite like calling for someone’s head to be lopped off 18th century style.

As for Pedersen’s home, some scoundrels apparently thought his windows could use some redecorating on his home – so they adorned they with such phrases as “Fuck You,” and “Don’t be racist trash.”

When it came to the home of Councilmember Juarez, hoodlums decided to employ a bullhorn to likely scream incoherent nonsense – which was then followed up by someone spraying “corporate bootlicker,” on the street outsider her home.

The harassment that Juarez suffered did not sit well with local Native Americans in Seattle, as the councilmember is also a member of the Blackfeet Nation tribe. Leonard Forsman, chairman of the Suquamish Tribe, stated the following about the incident:

“The Suquamish Tribe supports (Juarez) and her right, as an elected official, to do her job without verbal harassment and vandalism at her home.”

So, while it’s become painfully obvious that protesters have voiced a disdain for Mayor Durkan over the past several weeks, what was all the hubbub regarding the City Council members? Well, it turns out that while both Juarez and Pedersen support some reductions on the Seattle Police budget – they’re not on board with a 50% reduction that has been called for by rioters.

Apparently, another council member was paid a visit as well, namely Tammy Morales. However, she proclaimed to have engaged in a “brief conversation” with the malefactors that arrived at her home and that she appreciated “the opportunity to listen” to them.

Some online are calling that a load of nonsense – noting that whatever Morales conveyed or exchanged verbally with the mob that came to her home was an effort to avoid the extortion-like tactics of these vandals and troublemakers.

While City Council President Lorena Gonzalez is used to herself and her colleagues getting crude messages online via email and the ilk, she was in no way supportive toward protesters going to people’s homes to instill fear:

“Demonstrations are a protest tool, but using that tool to create an environment by which people and their family members feel unsafe in their own home is not something I can support.”

Do you want to join our private family of first responders and supporters?  Get unprecedented access to some of the most powerful stories that the media refuses to show you.  Proceeds get reinvested into having active, retired and wounded officers, their families and supporters tell more of these stories.  Click to check it out.

LET Unity

Speaking of protests and rioters making their way into the suburbs, here’s what going on with the couple who were criminally charged for protecting their home from rioters in Missouri.

In the charging documents against Patricia McCloskey, Assistant Circuit Attorney Chris Hinckley stated that the gun she waved at protestors was “readily capable of lethal use.”

According to the St. Louis police crime lab, when the gun arrived at the lab it was deemed “inoperable.” However, crime lab experts reassembled the gun and wrote that it was “readily capable of lethal use”. 

In Missouri, police and prosecutors must prove that a weapon is “readily capable of lethal use” when it is used in the type of crime with which the McCloskey’s have been charged. While the gun was at the crime lab, staff members field stripped the handgun and found that it was originally assembled incorrectly.

According to the crime lab staff, specifically, the firing pin spring was put in front of the firing pin, which was backwards, thus making the gun incapable of firing. Firearm experts put the gun back together in the correct order and test-fired it.

When the gun was test-fired, they found that the gun worked just fine. According to reports from the crime lab, the workers photographed the disassembly and reassembly of the handgun.

Allegedly, the McCloskey’s said that the handgun Patricia McCloskey waved at protestors was inoperable because they had used it prior as a prop during a lawsuit they once filed against the gun manufacturer.

Apparently, in order to bring the handgun into the courtroom, they had to make it inoperable.

The McCloskey’s attorney, Joel Schwartz confirmed that they intentionally misplaced the firing pin on the handgun and that it was in that same exact position when Patricia McCloskey waved it at protestors.

Their attorney also claimed that it was in that condition when they turned it into their former attorney, Al Watkins.

On Monday, St. Louis Attorney Kim Gardner announced charges against Patricia and Mark McCloskey for displaying weapons to defend their property after violent protesters broke through a locked gate and into their private neighborhood to march to the mayor’s home back in June.

Gardner, the city prosecutor, charged the couple with one felony count each of unlawful use of a weapon. According to Gardner:

“It is illegal to wave weapons in a threatening manner. That is unlawful in the city of St. Louis.”

According to Fox News, if the McCloskeys are convicted, she is recommending a diversion program as an alternative to jail, which would enable them to later have the charge removed from their records. Gardner said:

“I believe this would serve as a fair resolution to this matter.”

Within hours of the ruling, Missouri Attorney General Eric Schmitt filed a brief seeking to dismiss Gardner’s charges against the McCloskeys on the grounds that their second amendment rights are being violated.

Gardner also declined to discuss why Missouri’s “castle doctrine,” a law that justifies deadly force for those who are defending their homes from intruders does not apply in this case. In a statement, Schmitt said:

“The right to keep and bear arms is given the highest level of protection in our constitution and our laws, including the castle doctrine, which provides broad rights to Missourians who are protecting their property and lives from those who wish to do them harm.”

With tensions high in St. Louis in the wake of nationwide protests sparked by the death of George Floyd, the McCloskeys said they were defending themselves. The McCloskeys said that the crowd of demonstrators broke an iron gate marked with “No Trespassing” and “Private Street” signs. They also said that some protestors violently threatened them.

In a statement from the couple’s attorney, Schwartz called the decision to charge:

“Disheartening as I unequivocally believe no crime was committed.”

Missouri Governor Mike Parson said in a radio interview on Friday that he would likely pardon the couple if they were charged and convicted. According to Fox News, Parson says that he has also spoken with President Donald Trump regarding this case and the president has promised to do everything he could within his powers to shield the St. Louis couple from prosecution.

_

Want to make sure you never miss a story from Law Enforcement Today? With so much “stuff” happening in the world on social media, it’s easy for things to get lost.

Make sure you click “following” and then click “see first” so you don’t miss a thing! (See image below.) Thanks for being a part of the LET family!

Facebook Follow First

Share:
Related Posts