Ken Schram: A lack of judgment from Seattle police
»Play Video
One guy called it "mutual combat."
It's a fancy term for what's basically a street fight.
Believe it or not, Seattle police say it's not illegal so long as no one watching is injured and no property is damaged.
So early Friday, Seattle cops stood around and watched as self-described superhero Phoenix Jones duked it out with a guy who had earlier been intimidating people in the U District.
He then called Jones out.
Not much mutual in the combat that ensued.
Jones basically took the guy out with a single punch as Seattle police officers sat back on their haunches and took it all in.
Officers then asked the decked guy if he wanted any medical help and when he declined, they walked away.
This is one of the dumbest damn things I've heard in a while.
The idea that Seattle police would sit back and watch some guys throw down and claim that as long as no bystanders get hurt and no property is damaged that the law is good to go with it.
Seems to me that the cops on the scene were likely amused by what was happening - a self-described, costumed superhero going mano y mano with some nut job.
I'd say SPD should take a hard look at the lack of judgment on the part of the officers on scene and reprimand them appropriately.
---
Have something to say to Ken? Login or signup below to post a comment. Just be sure to read the rules and keep things civil. You can also e-mail him at kenschram@komo4news.com. You can also connect with Ken on Facebook.
It's a fancy term for what's basically a street fight.
Believe it or not, Seattle police say it's not illegal so long as no one watching is injured and no property is damaged.
So early Friday, Seattle cops stood around and watched as self-described superhero Phoenix Jones duked it out with a guy who had earlier been intimidating people in the U District.
He then called Jones out.
Not much mutual in the combat that ensued.
Jones basically took the guy out with a single punch as Seattle police officers sat back on their haunches and took it all in.
Officers then asked the decked guy if he wanted any medical help and when he declined, they walked away.
This is one of the dumbest damn things I've heard in a while.
The idea that Seattle police would sit back and watch some guys throw down and claim that as long as no bystanders get hurt and no property is damaged that the law is good to go with it.
Seems to me that the cops on the scene were likely amused by what was happening - a self-described, costumed superhero going mano y mano with some nut job.
I'd say SPD should take a hard look at the lack of judgment on the part of the officers on scene and reprimand them appropriately.
---
Have something to say to Ken? Login or signup below to post a comment. Just be sure to read the rules and keep things civil. You can also e-mail him at kenschram@komo4news.com. You can also connect with Ken on Facebook.
Ken, Washington is one of the few states where there is no prohibition against Dueling (except if you are in the national guard). It is kind of crazy but it is so. However, Dueling can more peaceable if the parties select a non-violent method (eating hot dogs or rock-paper-scissors etc.) to resolve a dispute. Thus, absent property damage, bystander injuries, willing combatants can fight in this state. Post Dueling though, if there is an injury or worse, the local DA can charge you with a crime.
the shrammies Monday morning quarterbacking !!
So, a couple of guys elect to have an impromptu sporting event on the street and they should be arrested? Puhleeese. So, sledding in the snow should be illegal. Street basketball should be illegal. High school wrestling too? No harm, no foul. That is the basis of a free country. Do a couple of people wishing to settle their differences via a mixed martial arts match, at no harm to others, need to have the confines of a ring to do so? Mr. Jones clearly won the match, accepted victory and moved on. Ditto for his opponent, he accepted defeat and it was over. Not much to crow about here Ken.
Ken, I have on several occasions restrained disorderly drunks who could have caused serious harm to civilians and law enforcement. I have even stopped a robbery at a cafe on Capitol Hill before it happened. Only difference is, I don't wear a cape or a suit, nor do I go looking for trouble.Â
Â
Phoenix may be a little out there with the superhero outfit, but he is doing a lot of good in risky neighbourhoods. He isn't an armed vigilante who goes around taking people out, he does inform law enforcement whenever he can.
Â
This bully deserved it.
Â
We need more people who can volunteer for neighbourhood watch working with law enforcement. The crime rate is through the roof. People are breaking into houses and killing and raping women.
Â
And our politically correct KOMO failed to give a description of the perps in yesterdays Burien incident.
Ken, a bleeding heart liberal protectingthe bully's right not to be confronted. Being too politically correct makes people think they can get away with "intimidating others". Boo hoo! He messed with the wrong guy, Phoenix Jones, and got put in his place.
The more i watch this video, the more our media angers me. Folks like Ken wont be happy until the "Orange Shirts" like this jackknob and his henchmen completely rule the streets, and innocent citizens like you and me have to run scared from their intimidation. A few brave folks step up to face this problem head on and Ken falls all over himself to see that the cops are reprimanded for allowing a citizen to stand up for himself and give this idiot the punch in the nose he has CLEARLY been needing for a long time, and of course the cops cant deliver to him lest they hurt this tough guys widdle feelings here in this criminal coddling state.
Â
Ken Schram: A lack of judgment indeed.
Â
And again R.I.P. Tuba Man, murdered in the streets almost exactly 4-years ago. I only wish Phoenix had been there to punch your killers in the face before they got to you.
Seattle is never happy. Seems Seattle always wants to blame someone.Â
Well Ken you left out a few things. Did you mention that the perp threatened to follow Phoenix home and do harm to him and his family?? Did you mention too, that the perp was also exhibiting aggressive behavior?? So next time you make a judgement call Ken, relate all the information, not just what feeds your blather.......
 @Busyhands 100% agree with you, I think it's BS that this was not mentioned. A threat was made to Phoenix and his home aka family. They left that out in the entire report. Poor job for the Komo news crew.
Ken, your problem should be with the law that makes this legal. I don't see what the big deal is personally. That guy got what was coming to him.
 @Dredd57 The law makes it illegal, it's very specific that fights in public are illegal because of the risk of a nonparticipant getting hurt or property getting damaged.
 @CommutingGuy Nothing got damaged and no third parties were injured. They were given plenty of room. No laws were broken.
No harm, no foul! When you tie the officer's hands with all these "oversight" committee's this is the responses you will get!
 @RTNavy If you actually read SMC 12A.026.25 you will find that it is not about "oversight committees" or anything other than what is written in the specified city ordinance.
This is what you get when the city of Seattle is openly hostile toward its Police Dept. officers on the street are starting to adopt a "damned if you do damned if you don't" approach and figure that it's better to stand there and do nothing than it is to jump in a take action and then be accused of racism or police brutality or whatever the fake outrage of the day dictates. Congratulations Seattle. You threw your cops under the bus and now their thanks you is to let crime have its way.
 @Mag Thomas I'm not sure what is the more ignorant part of this post, deciding for yourself what a few million citizens think based on sloppy, one-sided media coverage of a few publicized incidents, or believing these officers "let crime have its way" when two idiots broke no laws and hurt no innocent bystanders, and the officers merely stayed on scene to ensure it remained that way.Â
 @Faux_Shaux You're right. Sometimes the best way is to let it happen in a supervised manner. The guy provoking Phoenix was obviously a nuisance. Phoenix didn't use overwhelming force, didn't continue the fight after the guy was down. The guy basically got his arse kicked and will hopefully think twice before behaving like this again. The SPD should legally have stepped in. But sometimes you just have to learn by doing. And in this case the guy learned don't go around challenging people to a fight because you might just get your arse kicked. What's worse it was done by a faux super hero.
Ken you're a fool. sometimes a few punches need to be thrown..Â
Ken, I don't agree with you on this one. Seattle Municipal Code states it is illegal to fight in a public place, unless it is authorized by law. In this case, it appears the police made sure it was a mutual agreement, and they tried to talk Phoenix Jones out of it as well. I don't see what the problem is here.
Fights in a public area endanger anyone in the area. Too many cops are bullies with a badge and enjoy the display of violence. Another case of arrested development or bad judgment.
@contraryjim
 And if the cops tried to stop fight, you would have sniveled and whined that the cops butted into a civil, lawful disagreement had they tried to prevent this idiot from learning a much-needed lesson on self-respect and living in a society.Â
Â
You would have squealed endlessly about how it's OK for cops to be physical, but they have higher standards for citizens, and whined about every incident in recent news coverage where you believed the cops should not have interfered, and where you believe their interference actually made things worse, not better.Â
Â
What exactly is the problem here Ken? Two people resolve their issues without costing everyone time and money. By far this is the most logical and awesome thing i have seen the police do (outside saving lives) and I completely endorse their role in this. Logic is a very great thing to have and it seems it was used in this instance. You may wonder why it's so awesome so I'll enlighten you. Simply put there is this thing i like to call reality, some people live in it and some live way beyond it. Those who live in reality know logic where as those who live beyond it do not. I like the Police living in reality, don't you? It also seems important to point out that reality dictates logic so those who use logic are adhering to something good. Props to the Police on this one. =)
@Glenn Gordon doesn't hide ) Hey Glenn, the 911 call was in reference to a crime, when the cops showed up, they should have acted on that crime, not watched a fight. That's where their lack of judgement came in.  Like you , i don't mind orange getting his comeuppance, but I do mind the police's lack of follow thru on the 911 call. ( I as I understand it, there was a car window busted) to watch a fight. It is my opinion, that they should have detained everyone that was mouthing off, with cuffs if needed, and investigated the crime that generated the 911 call. Remember, orange and his buddy's were the alleged car vandals.
It IS illegal to fight in public. Read the very 1st sentance again: "A. It IS UNLAWFUL for any person to intentionally fight with another person in a public place AND THEREBY create a substantial risk of:" Meaning, it IS illegaly BECAUSE...yadayada. Mind you, this is Seattle law (SMC) not Washington State law (RCW). RCW as well does NOT have a so-called mutual combat law. Regarding DV...WA domestic violence law require officers to make an arrest if a crime has occured. If 2 dudes (not falling under DV definition) can fight all they want if it's mutually agreed and not in a "public place".
@jixxer Perhaps you should read the ordinance again. Was there
"Substantial risk of
1. Injury to a person who is not actively participating in the fight; or
2. Damage to the property of a person who is not actively participating in the fight. "?Â
Â
The answer is NO, therefore the fight was 100% legal.Â
why were the cops called, because of the auto breakin, that was witnessed, or because they kept harrassing PJ?
Â
if the former, then the cops should have detained and questioned the alleged perps, got statements from witnesses, etc... not let PJ fight it out with the guy.
Â
However, if that was not the case,  911 must have been called to report a crime. What crime was that, and why were they not taking any action on the crime that initiated the 911 call?
Â
other than these two potential oversights on their (police)Â responsibilities, many have shown that two consenting adults can agree to fight, so that part seems to be lawful.
 @Dave Lancaster A call to 911 doesn't equal a crime.  Police in our neighborhood are always telling people to call 911 if they see something they feel is suspicious and they will come check it out.  I've had 911 called on me more than once for legally carrying a firearm on my hip, no crime.
Not shocking, Seattle has clearly said they don't want their police to use physical force because it doesn't look good. SPD isn't going to stick their necks out and engage in a use of force when KOMO and company are just waiting to lambast them for it because it doesn't look like a hug. You wanted a neutered police force Seattle/Komo, don't cry because you got what you wanted.
@RealityCheck  I so agree. It seems all the media can do is nitpick at the police. I'm not saying there are some police officers who have crossed the line, because we all know better. I just think the media stirs up more than is deserved!
 @RealityCheck I wouldn't call the police's actions neutered in this case, but I do agree with your points about our idiotic, drama queen media who prefers feces-stirring over actual news reporting, especially when it comes to cowardly keyboard attacks on cops.Â
You should know about lack of judgement, Ken. Yours is on display every time you post an article.
This is kinda like the octopus hunt...Was it legal, or not? The answer is a resounding, Yes!                                     Don't like it?    Change the law or shut up.
 @bagsofdirt Ironic you should say change the law or shut up as if one doesn't go with the other. Why you gonna tell people what to do? Shutting up is only constructive in select cases. Laws are not those cases.
 @Glenn Gordon doesn't hide )  @bagsofdirt Gotta agree with bagsofdirt on this one, if you don't like it change the law or shut up. All comes down to put up or shut up.
Those of you who watched the video cannot tell me Phoenix Jones did anything illegal the guy was a racists SOB who threatened to come to Phoenix House and with how much his d-bag friends got all shirt tossing lets go boy after their bigger buddy took a helping of Jone's fist it would not surprise me if the morons try and come to the next piece armed... and if heaven forbid that happens those pieces of dodo all will need to be on the business end of a public mob ripping them to pieces! Racists have no place in WA and they should stay down south where they belong!
Â
Video link:
Â
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lVLvAOsX95M&feature=player_embedded Â
I'd like to see what would happen if a husband and wife decided to mutually fight, my gut tells me the dude is going to jail.
Oh the hand wringing. It's not against the law. You have the exact police department you asked for. Hands off.
Â
I don't blame them one bit, even if it was illegal.Â
Funny how the people who don't have a problem with this are the same people who WOULD have a problem with 2 members of the same sex entering an agreement (marriage). Silly regressives!Â
 @LeftWing
 No problem with this or gay marriage.Â
 @LeftWing Delete your comment, because you are clueless.  I'm pro same-sex marriage and I am also 110% OK with that punk in the video getting knocked out. Â
Â
LeftWing you have failed at the internet, you don't deserve that IP address your internet provider is giving you. Â It would be better if you donated it to someone who's worthy of the internet.
 @Landshark  Reading the comments in here on coverage of both topics, I'd say the majority of posters agree with you, including me.Â
And even if/when I disagree with one of your posts, your screen name is more than enough to offset it. :^D
 @LeftWing you are making assumptions, and that's always risky... I for one condone both gay marriage and mutual combat ... although I think mutual combat should be eliminated from domestic disputes altogether (slippery slope)
 @Komo Dragon  @LeftWing I often find your posts thought provoking but this one is non sequitur.
 @thebigteacher  @LeftWing maybe this article will shed more light into my thinking :Â
http://www.abuseandrelationships.org/Content/Controversies/myth_mutual_combat.html
Â
 @thebigteacher  @Komo Dragon  @LeftWing Really? I think not.
I disagree. There is nothing wrong with a good old fashion fist fight. If it had degraded into kicking someone in the head while they're down then someone should step in and end it. Been in a fair amount of good old fashion bar fights in the old days. Usually started over nothing, but its a good way to get the frustration out. I think the most police officers should do is to just break it up and not arrest anyone. Men will be men.
Ken,
The fight was legal under SMC (others in this thread have pointed specifically to SMC 12A..06.025) thus there was no poor judgement on the part of SPD, simply a lack of judgement on your part. I will suggest you actually read SMC before posting such articles in the future.Â
 @MRoutt From what I'm reading in the SMC, it is NOT legal.  It doesn't say it's legal if outsiders don't get hurt or if property isn't damaged.  What it says is, it is illegal, period, to fight in public, BECAUSE doing it in public makes it likely that outsiders could get hurt or property could become damaged.
Â
"It is unlawful for any person to intentionally fight with another person in a public place and thereby create a substantial risk of:
1. Injury to a person who is not actively participating in the fight; or
2. Damage to the property of a person who is not actively participating in the fight. "
@CommutingGuy @MRoutt  It is not illegal if it is authorized by the law, which appears to be the case here.Â
 @traceywo  @CommutingGuy Tracywo, while I agree with you in terms of the fight being legal, I think you need to re-read the ordinance. It does not state "if authorized by law" or "if authorized by law enforcement" or "if supervised by law enforcement". It simply states that the fight is legal if it does not pose substantial risk of injury or property damage to parties who are not participating in the fight, otherwise it is illegal.Â
 @CommutingGuy  @MRoutt By have SPD oversee the fight, they could eliminate #1 and #2. Controlled setting.
 @Komo Dragon  @CommutingGuy that seems like a stretch to me but OK.
 @CommutingGuy  @MRoutt *having
@CommutingGuy I think the key here is that both qualifiers in SMC state NOT ACTIVELY PARTICIPATING. Given that neither condition was true, the fight is legal. Now, had either of them started thowing punches at bystanders or breaking windows it would be a different story.Â
 @CommutingGuy I think you are still misreading the ordinance. Either way, the police would need probable cause to say that there was substantive risk of injury to bystanders or risk of property damage.
 @MRoutt But what I'm saying is, it doesn't matter that nobody got hurt and no damage occurred.  The law states that it is illegal to fight in public, because that creates a substantial risk of someone else getting hurt or damage happening.  It does not say that if none of that happens, then it was legal.  The fact is, during the fight one person could shove the other person into a bystander, knocking them down onto the pavement and giving them a concussion.  The risk is there because the fight is in public, therefore the fight is illegal according to the law.
 @CommutingGuy  @MRoutt They didn't "thereby create a substantial risk of:" So it is legal.