HeraldNet: Everett officer pleads not guilty to manslaughter charge amid a show of support

COMMENTS

To read other terms and conditions, click here

Don't forget who the criminal was.
I can't belive what I am reading. People with there personal insults, mean and nasty name calling to Officer Meade. I don't see you posting those kind of name calling remarks to the murderer that killed the Seattle policeman in cold blood. Was that officer drunk and trying to flee from law inforcement? Did he have the chance to stop? Was he warrned? No, he was executed. You people would rather insult and send a police officer to death row rather than a cop killer. Where you there that night? Did you see what happend? Because of people like you the police have less rights than the criminals. He didn't shoot out the tires because that's illegal. Maybe he should have let him go. He can't persue him because they aren't aloud to have high speed persuits in Everett. Just let him go? Maybe down the road the drunk driver speeding away could hit and kill your family driving home. The criminals have too many rights. Why not give the cops some more options and maybe something this tragic would have been avoided. Give this officer his day in court. Don't judge him with out all the facts. The police are here to keep us safe and 99.9% of the time they do. It seems like the only people that are quick to judge, may have been in trouble with the law before themselves. At the end of the day maybe Officer Meade saved lives by taking one.
William Gaylord | Nov 6, 2009 9:28 am | 1 replies | Request removal
Post reply

WITNESS
Remember the number one witness was one of his brothers, and he did not support the action of shooting.
todd christensen | Nov 6, 2009 7:08 pm | 1 replies | Request removal
Post reply

Prosecutors undercharged the officer.
Whoever decided to charge manslaughter instead of murder needs to go back to law school.

What happened was most certainly felony murder, and not manslaughter. Anyone who knows anything about our criminal murder statutes knows for a fact that the facts and circumstances surrounding this incident support the filing of murder charges.

There are truly three separate and unequal systems of justice in the United States - one for the police, one for the wealthy, and one for the rest of us.
Doug Vavrick | Nov 7, 2009 11:50 am | 0 replies | Request removal
Post reply

A sad case of over reaction
Law enforcement attracts a wide variety of people, most wishing to serve their communities and help protect all the things they hold dear. Other hopeful applicants don't have such noble intentions, but instead seem more attracted to the power they perceive attached to those who carry a badge and a gun.

Thankfully, by the time they go through police training academies most of the latter have been weeded out. Unfortunately, not all. From newspaper accounts, eye witness statements, and the testimony of Officer Steve Klocker, it appears Troy Meade is one of the latter, one of those who's psychiatric profile somehow failed to indicate his unfitness to serve.
peter kartak | Nov 6, 2009 5:46 pm | 1 replies | Request removal
Post reply

Shootin at tires
Ok, seriously....we are told not to shoot at tires because it just doesn't work. It's not because it's illegal..sigh. Here's why...

What are tires made of? yes, that's right, rubber (and other stuff)

What do tires contain? yes, that's right, air (oh yeah, at pressure)

What does a bullet do to said tire? it creates (most of the time) a small hole. before you start slamming me, yes, I'm talking about shooting a tire with a handgun; you might get a different response with a higher caliber weapon. Obviously a .50 cal is going to destroy a tire; that's NOT what we're talking about here.

Ever puncture your tire and drive home without knowing you have a flat? ever wonder why? Often times the pressure inside the tire (and other things) causes the hole to reseal, until the pressure lowers, allowing the hole to reopen and let the air out, causing the tire to deflate. this happens even if you drive at slow speeds...

How long does that take? well, how long did it take the last time that happened to you? IS THAT THE SAME for each tire and each circumstance? Probably not.

Bottom line: shooting at tires doesn't work (most of the time), won't necessarily stop the car, and is DANGEROUS.

Now lets talk about the metal surrounding the tires and what that does to a bullet's trajectory...

Ever look at how thick and solid just the rims on your vehicle are? Ever thought about why rocks and other debris from the road don't cause a lot of damage to them. we're talking about driving at speed and an object strikes them, so no dings, dents, divots? well, it's metal. and we're just talking about the rims here.

so...the bullets I fling downrange at a car's tires could, a) come back and hit me, b) go off and strike someone else, c) hit the ground and ricochette (spelling?) again, d) do something else entirely until the kinetic energy the bullet contains dissapates (again, spelling?).

This is NOT TV where a bullet from a handgun throws someone through a plate glass window or causes a car to explode here, people. Please do not expect Hollywood physics to work in the real world; it just ain't that way.

AS FOR THE REST OF THIS CASE: I WILL NOT comment on the details because I DON'T KNOW THEM and neither do you. HOW OFTEN does the news media not get EVERYTHING right in a story before they post it? HOW MANY OF YOU post on other articles, slamming the reporters for not getting it right there either? Before you go there, yes, I too read the affidavit of probable cause. Do you think that's everything the case file contains? Seriously?

There's a reason that we went to a criminal justice system back in the day, because of just this type of thing, people rushing to judgement. People decided that, hey, maybe I'd like to have my say too before I get strung up...There's a reason we have public defenders.

Judge not, lest yee be judged yourself (yeah, I'm pretty sure I screwed up some spelling there too).
christopher leyda | Nov 7, 2009 9:59 am | 0 replies | Request removal
Post reply

shooting a drunk driver is a justified mistake
11 year veteran of police work. war veteran. did not give a statement to the police. smart cop. my guess he has attended a few street survival seminars or better, massad ayoob's lethal force institute. (a good read for armed citizens: check out "in the gravest extreme").

thinking...< since when is it ok to get fed up with trying to stop a fleeing drunk driver and shoot him? uh, since NEVER?

here is the rule (in a nutshell): an officer can use deadly force when faced with imminent grievous bodily harm or death.

pretty clear. but, he hadnt reached the imminent part yet. logically though, when the imminent part is reached, there will be no one in a position to prevent the horrific crash.

if i had a bomb and i was in a plane, do you shoot me down as i attempt take off or wait until my finger is on the trigger and near my target?

here is another thought. just because i believe it SHOULD be ok to shoot a fleeing drunk driver doesnt mean that i would disregard department policy and the law. we are a nation of laws and we must expect all to follow, all the time, especially the police. right?

i have wanted to shoot MANY people for various reasons on countless occasions but lucky for me (then them), the thought of "severe consequences" came screaming into my head.

this soon to be ex-officer made a logical decision to stop an imminent threat to innocence, knowing he may not get another chance. on the side of his prowl car is should have read "to protect and serve, even to my own peril". he did us all a service, whether you realize it or not. however, he made a fatal mistake in assuming he would be supported or protected by the laws of our land and by the department policy.

this is not the first time this issue has come up. i have seen hundreds of vehicle pursuits. most end without tragedy. some left me scared for life.

in my view, this officer is guilty of doing the right thing for the right reason and at the right time but it was not and probably will never be, sanctioned by law.

he is guilty of caring too much. he shoulda thought,"hell, i'm not in danger, i guess i'll let this guy get away and maybe kill a family going out for an ice cream. it's not my family. sh*t happens, oh well, i'm hungry, where's my doughnut and that sexy nurse?

you'd be shocked to learn just how many cops have learned to cope by thinking this way.
bob david | Nov 7, 2009 9:37 am | 0 replies | Request removal
Post reply

(No heading)
Really people? those of you who sit in your lazy chair drinking your warm cup of coffee who know everything, JUST STOP TALKING!!!!!!!! let’s look at some things here. He was 3x the legal limit, he was angry, he wanted to leave. Now he gets in his 5,000 pound battering ram and starts to drive off.
I guess I can’t figure out why you think you know everything. I have read the responses to the articles and just can’t believe what people suggest. If a tazer didn’t work why would pepper spray do ANYTHING?!!!!!!! For those of you who don’t know, the pepper spray Officers carry is very powerful stuff, I know I work closely with them. If a tazer designed to STOP someone didn’t work, pepper spray would only enrage and blind an already dangerous man.
The family filed a $15 million dollar law suit, they are grieving and I understand that but really 15 million? Would this man have made that much in his life? And the Herald painting this man out to be a saint and slandering an Officer who not only is professional but a veteran of war, and has spent 11 years as an Officer.
I support Officer Mead 100%, when an Officer is sent to the academy they are t rained to shot to stop the threat if they have to use deadly force. This man was a threat as long as he is behind the wheel. Let’s not forget that Officer Mead and his family read these as does the other family.
So if you weren’t there, then just stop talking about it and get on with your pathetic little lives, next time you feel like being a Monday morning quarterback, stop for a second and think about how you would feel if someone judged you based on what they read on a piece of paper.
jason daoust | Nov 6, 2009 5:39 pm | 1 replies | Request removal
Post reply

(No heading)
Most of you here have never(nor will ever) be in the situation Officer Meade was in that night. To hear many of you here you think that what a Police Officer does is an "Easy" Job, It is not.

I have followed this in the papers since the first night it happened, and if you read back in the articles you will find MANY inconsistencies with witnesses "at the scene".The Herald is in the business of selling papers and to them it is not in their(The Heralds)best interest to do anything but make Officer Meade look bad,it sells papers.

I for one support Officer Meade and am confident he will be found Not Guilty of these charges.I have had the pleasure of dealing with him on many occasions and he was always one of the most professional and upstanding of Officers. These officers do a job few of us can do, and when it comes to times like these too many are quick to "throw them under the Bus". I for one will continue to Stand behind Officer Meade.

I thank him for his many years of service and protection of the community.
H S | Nov 6, 2009 3:07 pm | 0 replies | Request removal
Post reply

Officer was doing his job.
I read this article along with another one with a much smaller headline and no photo about a funeral for a police officer shot to death while sitting in his squad car in Seattle. Police officers put their lives on the line daily to protect and serve knowing that every day they go out there, they may be injured, maimed or killed by an unpredicable public. And everyone knows that driving drunk or high is the same as firning a gun into a crowded room...you are bound to hit someone.

It sounds as though this officer gave the Stanwood man every possible opportunity to comply with his order to get out of the car, including calling for back-up and using non-lethal means first to try to obtain compliance. The man responded by driving off into a fence. What if the officer hadn't acted and he had sped off into traffic or into a crowd?

As I see it, the officer had no choice but to shoot to kill (AS THEY ARE TRAINED TO DO.) This officer had no way of knowing if the man was armed or what other mayhem he planned to do behind the wheel....he attempted to allude more than once already. And firing eight shots would not be unusual for an officer pumped with adreneline from trying to subdue a potentially deadly suspect.

This is a tragedy for all involved, but it should have never gone trial.
Grace Egesdal | Nov 6, 2009 2:58 pm | 0 replies | Request removal
Post reply

What if...
Meservey drove off drunk and killed someone? Then we all would be cursing the Everett PD for not stopping him. From working in the bar business I personally have called the EPD to report a belligerent drunk that insisted on driving. Drunks are unpredictable. One would think that Meservey at age 51 would have known when he had reached his limit and not continue drinking to the point of borderline insanity. I say insanity because if two officers had me at gunpoint I would be more than happy to put my hands up and get out of my Corvette.

Officer Meade has worked in and around my community for years, I have seen him pulling over speeders in my children's school zone, working with the best interest of the community in mind. It is tragic, the whole thing is tragic. But let us not rush to judgement, we don't know how we would have responded in that situation. The guy after several attempts would not get out of his car, he is pulling off, do you let him run over a bystander or give him the opportunity to head down Evergreen Way to run a red light and kill someone??

I am by no means a "cop lover" but I feel it would be very difficult to do their job and have to make the tough decisions they are faced with on a daily basis.
Jennifer Saltz | Nov 6, 2009 9:32 am | 2 replies | Request removal
Post reply

Women knocked over
Why was she that close to the car in the first place? From other stories I have read, she was the person who called the police. Every time I have ever seen the police called for anything they usually separate everybody. Also if her life was in danger, could it have not been in more danger by the cop shooting his gun off and hitting her too or by a bullet being deflected and hitting her?
david kirby | Nov 6, 2009 12:13 pm | 0 replies | Request removal
Post reply

NOT GUILTY
Ok, If an officer tazes someone and they have the stupidity to then start a car and try to drive off, shoot the poor S.O.B. do we need another drunk on the road? How many people were going to be put in danger if this idiot made it onto the road? 5? 10? I think the officer made the right choice. Its not just the safety of the officer that is in question...Its the safety of the PUBLIC. He hits a fence and almost ran someone over. I think that qualifies as use of deadly force.ty so much people
Matt Viger | Nov 6, 2009 12:07 pm | 0 replies | Request removal
Post reply

Abusive comments undermine forum
By any measure, this is big a big story that provokes emotional responses. A man has been killed. An officer faces criminal charges. And a police department must deal with the fallout.

Unfortunately, some readers are using this site to veer into ugly territory. Their distasteful and threatening insults could force editors to close down the comments section for these stories. As stated in its policies, HeraldNet discourages unverified conjecture and defamatory characterizations

Thanks to everyone who has tried to bring perspective to this grim situation. It will benefit everyone -- those touched directly by this story and those who are interested citizens and taxypayers -- if comments on HeraldNet are mature and responsible. Let's show respect for the family of the deceased. And let's remember that a criminal charge is not a guilty verdict.

Neal Pattison
Executive Editor
The Daily Herald
Neal Pattison | Nov 6, 2009 11:58 am | 0 replies | Request removal
Post reply

He FIRED 8 TIMES!
For all of you supporting this cop, you need to remember that he fired 8 times. The other officer with him did not fire AT ALL.

This tells me that this cop PANICKED. The only other possibility is that he intentionally assassinated the victim. I see no other realistic alternative.

In either case, this cop MUST be taken off the streets ... "FIRED with no possibility of rehire" if I had my way.

For now, it appears to be drunks ... what's next? Jaywalking?
Brad Ashforth | Nov 6, 2009 11:45 am | 0 replies | Request removal
Post reply

If Looks Could Kill
The Herald Photographer is lucky he did not have a Gun.
Gary Taylor | Nov 6, 2009 11:32 am | 0 replies | Request removal
Post reply

Poor Judgment
I for one feel sorry for all party's involved.The victims poor judgment of operating a vehicle,the barkeeps(must have been a trainee)to have over poured to that extreme,and finally the officer whom I suspect let his personal anger overwhelm his professional attitude . My thoughts and prayers for all involved.
Hopefully when he walks as most cops do shooting drunks won;t become the normal!

Well maybe on my street close to closing time would be ok.
GEORGE POPPS | Nov 6, 2009 10:35 am | 0 replies | Request removal
Post reply

the gal by the fence
the gal by the fence has indicated that she did not feel that her life was in any danger.
bob oblong | Nov 6, 2009 10:13 am | 0 replies | Request removal
Post reply

RE: Don't forget who the criminal was.
The "criminal" is dead at the hands of an over-reactive "police officer". Who's the criminal now?
R K | Nov 6, 2009 9:40 am | 0 replies | Request removal
Post reply

Old West?
Well Bobby, if we went back to the old west. The victims family would just kill the cop. He clearly snapped. Just like anyone else, he is not above the law. If any citizen unloaded eight rounds into an unarmed VICTIM we would be charged with 2nd degree murder.
Bill Proctor | Nov 6, 2009 7:45 am | 0 replies | Request removal
Post reply

I support him!
Knowing how tough a job police officers have, I support this guy.

I wish we could bring back the days of the old west. Then we could clean up the gene pool.
Bobby G | Nov 6, 2009 6:35 am | 1 replies | Request removal
Post reply

I support him also!
Officer Klocker indicated that Officer Meade took "a big step backward" before shooting. According to the sketch, Officer Meade was less then 3.5 ft from the vehicle in any direction when he began shooting - that means he was located right next to the vehicle when Meservey started the engine and decided to use his vehicle as a weapon.

I have no respect for people who drive drunk, fail to head the warnings of law enforcement officers and, finally, decide to drive away while putting people (the gal that was knocked over as well as the officer) in harms way.

With the evidence present so far...NOT GUILTY!
Louise Smith | Nov 6, 2009 7:33 am | 0 replies | Request removal
Post reply

How can you support Him?
I cannot believe that anyone supports the actions of this Police Officer! How in the world can you support the fact that he shot someone SEVEN times when the guy he shot was sitting in his car and no threat to anyone?

Yes I read the whole story of the happenings of this sad case. I think that this Police Officer should not only be found guilty, I think(and I don't know why they only charged him with manslaughter) he should be tried for murder...That's what he did. He murdered someone! He pulled his service pistol out on an unarmed drunk who was in his car and "hemmed" in and shot him because he wouldn't get out. That is disgusting!
Steve Crofford | Nov 6, 2009 7:30 am | 0 replies | Request removal
Post reply

Abuse of Power
If he was afraid the man was going to drive off and potentially kill someone, why not shoot out his tires. 8 shots in the back was totally a clear sign of abuse of power.
Beverly Moulton | Nov 6, 2009 7:27 am | 0 replies | Request removal
Post reply

(No heading)
He should plead not guilty to manslaughter and plead guilty to murder. His life was never in danger.
R K | Nov 6, 2009 7:19 am | 0 replies | Request removal
Post reply

(No heading)
I have met with this officer a few times at Providence Hospital and he was always polite to me. Sometimes people just snap, not that its an excuse.

This is a bad situation for all involved.
Mike Flavin | Nov 6, 2009 5:21 am | 0 replies | Request removal
Post reply

very sad day indeed...
unfortunately... those saying "not guilty" are indeed the sadistic of them all.
cme everett | Nov 6, 2009 2:04 am | 0 replies | Request removal
Post reply