| HeraldNet - Snohomish County's online news source |
 FRIDAY, MARCH 12, 2010 6:42 am |
ADVERTISEMENT |
|||||||||
 |
||||||||||
|
||||||||||
|
||||||||||
|
|
||||||||||
|
|
||||||||||
Local News 
|
|||||||||||||||
Lawsuit blames county and weed inspector in man’s death VERLOT — Three times Daniel Wasilchen asked a Snohomish County weed inspector to leave his property, a witness said.When the weed inspector came back a fourth time, Wasilchen, 44, reportedly got a gun. By then Snohomish County sheriff’s deputies had been called. The final confrontation on May 29 ended when deputies fatally shot Wasilchen. Now, the man’s family says the county and the weed inspector — the man they blame for instigating the confrontation — need to be held responsible. Wasilchen’s family on Thursday filed a $5 million claim for damages against Snohomish County and H.F. “Sonny” Gohrman, the county’s noxious weed abatement coordinator. “This can’t happen to anybody else. That’s why we’re doing this,” Wasilchen’s stepfather, Marvin Verlinde, said. The Seattle man, 65, was with Wasilchen when Gohrman arrived that afternoon. He left prior to the shooting. The investigation into the shooting continues. Gohrman reportedly had tried to talk to Wasilchen about weed eradication, officials have said. Wasilchen refused and an argument ensued. Gorhman called 911 and Wasilchen reportedly threatened police with a weapon before being shot. The Snohomish County deputies involved in the shooting have been returned to patrol. The claim accuses Gohrman of trespassing, being hostile and maliciously and deliberately violating Wasilchen’s constitutional rights. “If Sonny Gohrman had simply followed Washington law, Daniel Wasilchen would be alive today,” the claim said. Raymond Dearie, a Seattle trial attorney and former Snohomish County deputy prosecutor, filed the paperwork. County rules require county workers to be professional and courteous, Dearie said. State law requires weed-abatement officials to seek a warrant if homeowners refuse to allow them onto private property. “Instead of doing that, (Gohrman) came back … and incited a tense situation,” Dearie said. Verlinde said Gohrman was enraged, yelling and refused to back down. “I wouldn’t let this guy on my property the way he was acting,” Verlinde said. Gohrman has been with Snohomish County Noxious Weed Control Board since 1999 and remains employed there, said Steve Thomsen, the county’s public works director. He’s faced no disciplinary action as a result of the May 29 incident. Gohrman’s salary is paid by the county, but he reports to the countywide weed control board, a separate government entity. In an e-mail Gohrman wrote days after the incident, he said he felt threatened by Wasilchen. The message was obtained by The Herald under the state’s public disclosure laws. County officials wrote that Gohrman apparently did the right thing by backing off and calling for help, records show. The Snohomish County Multiple Agency Response Team, or SMART, is investigating the shooting to determine whether anyone broke the law. The team is a group of homicide detectives trained to look into incidents when police use deadly force. The detectives will forward their case, once complete, to Snohomish County prosecutors, who will determine whether the shooting was legally justified. Verlinde said he and his brother-in-law had been looking for gold up the Mountain Loop Highway the day Wasilchen was killed. Driving home that afternoon, the two men saw Wasilchen in his yard near Granite Falls and stopped to visit. “We were actually enjoying ourselves,” Verlinde said. Wasilchen was talking about a car he’d recently purchased. The Boeing crane operator had a great love for cars, especially World War II-era Jeeps, Verlinde said. Wasilchen grew up in Everett and played football and wrestled at Mariner High School. John Lovick, now Snohomish County Sheriff, was his boxing coach, Verlinde said. Wasilchen joined the Army after high school and served in the 82nd Airborne as a paratrooper. After military service, he started work at Boeing and purchased the property along the South Fork Stillaguamish River. Before working at Boeing’s Everett plant, Wasilchen commuted more than 80 miles a day to Renton, his stepfather said. “The guys at work really enjoyed him,” Verlinde said. Gohrman confronted Wasilchen. The weed inspector insisted on interrupting the three men, Verlinde said. Wasilchen asked not to be bothered because he was entertaining guests. He also said he was worried about the impact of weed control on his three dogs, Brandy, Teddy and Freeway Joe, a mutt he’d rescued from the side of the freeway. “I take care of my own weeds,” Wasilchen said, according to Verlinde. Gohrman insisted the conversation take place then and there, Verlinde said. He wouldn’t give up. He was yelling, “You have to listen to me,” Verlinde said. Wasilchen placed his hands on Gorhman’s shoulders and physically pushed him off the property. Still, Gohrman continued. Gohrman shared his side of the story in an e-mail he sent to more than 50 people around the state, according to county records. “There really wasn’t an argument,” he wrote. Gohrman wrote that he had stopped at the property because there were people outside and he believed it would be a good time to talk to the owner. The conversation started with light-hearted jokes about weeds, Gohrman wrote. One of the people reportedly said there weren’t noxious weeds. Gohrman disagreed. “That’s when he went off on me and got aggressive and threatened to get a gun,” Gohrman wrote. Gohrman said Wasilchen pushed him. “If I had stood my ground, there would have been a fight,” he wrote. Verlinde remembers the encounter differently. He said Gohrman was outraged. “He was right in Danny’s face,” Verlinde said. Wasilchen wasn’t fazed or angry, his stepfather said. “I couldn’t believe he was as calm as he was,” Verlinde said. Verlinde and his brother-in-law left. While driving out of town, they saw police cars rushing past the other way. Gohrman reportedly left Wasilchen’s property and drove to where he was able to dial 911. “We led the sheriff in,” Gohrman wrote in the e-mail. That’s when Wasilchen got a gun and pointed it at Gohrman and his assistant, according to Gohrman’s e-mail. Multiple shots rang out and Wasilchen died, police officials said. Verlinde learned of the fatal shooting watching the news on television that night. When a reporter mentioned noxious weeds, Verlinde knew the boy he’d raised was dead. “It’s been really rough,” Verlinde said. “I dream about it every night.” In addition to his stepfather, Wasilchen also leaves behind a sister of Marysville, a brother of Gold Bar and his mother, who lives in Everett. Reporter Jackson Holtz: 425-339-3437, jholtz@heraldnet.com. |
- Woman still in critical condition after Monday crash on Highway 9
- Cut through solid-white lines and it could cost you $411
- Study: Boeing tanker seen as big job producer
- County to pay builders $1.7 million to settle suits
- Marysville girl on bike in critical condition after struck by car
- Lawmakers act to roll back state ferry workers' travel perk
- Fugitive charged in toddler's slaying accused of robbery
- Mariner notes
- Special session likely to finish budget, tax increase
- Everett man pleads guilty to murder on Tulalip reservation
- Cut through solid-white lines and it could cost you $411
(22) - Tulalip man accused in a toddler's death is a no-show (19)
- Special session likely to finish budget, tax increase (12)
- Woman still in critical condition after Monday crash on Highway 9 (11)
- Fugitive charged in toddler's slaying accused of robbery (11)
- County to pay builders $1.7 million to settle suits (10)
- Marysville girl on bike in critical condition after struck by car (8)
- Bill passes making cell phones, texting while driving primary offense (7)
- Wanted: Downtown Everett renters (5)
- Community Transit cuts will hurt; just ask a rider like Crystal (5)
- Meadowdale boys refuse to fold, but rally falls short in 3A state opener
- Prairie’s zone defense stymies Lynnwood at Class 3A state girls basketball tournament
- Ellensburg takes it to Archbishop Murphy girls at 2A tourney
- Beyond the ‘Woodstock Generation'
- Magical run for Jackson
- Schools, public debate budget cutting ideas
- Farrand watercolors on exhibit at MLT library
- FD1, FD7 could merge
- Boeing to Offer NewGen Tanker to US Air Force
- New CEO at Valley General Hospital
- Dan Koffman's ‘TopSpin' marketing astounds, inspires, motivates, produces — just for starters
- Economic forecasts for Snohomish County, Everett, Marysville offer some bright moments
- Government officials influencing home prices
- Massive EPA energy regulations meet challenge
- Washington state healthcare reforms also needed
|
|
 
|
|
|
|
| TODAY'S TOP JOBS |
| View All Top Jobs |
| Top Cars |
|
| Top Homes |
|
|
ADVERTISEMENT |
|
|
|Contact Us
|Advertiser Services
|Home Delivery
|Newsstand Locations
|Classifieds
|Feedback
|About the Company
|Work@the Herald
|Site Map |
|
COMMENTS
Log in or register to post a new comment.
To read other terms and conditions, click here
The moral of the story is, don't go pointing guns at cops. It doesn't matter what the weed control guy did. Bringing a firearm into play is only justified when there is a threat. A weed inspector repeatedly asking to spray your property isn't a threat. When the cops show up with him it's exactly the wrong time to show a firearm. This guy wouldn't have been justified in shooting anyone, but he chose to bring a gun to the situation.
william edmunds | Nov 23, 2009 2:32 am | 0 replies | Request removal
Post reply
Dan shares responsibility here no doubt, but it took two other agencies to trespass on his property to kill him. He will be forever missed. Sonney Gorhman had no business returning to his home and confronting him. The police, God Bless them had no business letting Sonney return to the property either. Based on other first hand accounts of Sonney Gorhman he had a major major ego problem, a problem that got an innocent man killed. Seeing where Sonney was right in front of Dan and his front door with the police cruser off and almost out of sight, the first person Dan sees is Gorhman, not the police as I understand it. The entire situation could have been easily avoided.
The following week the intoxicated man boxed in by police and cars was shot to death. Their was some justice, they fired the cop.
Where are our men and women in blue, I miss them, now we have a WAR on people, cops dressed in SWAT gear, Black uniforms, black cars and CIA SUV's etc arm with the latest military equipment. Big government at its finest. They have a tough job, so do we as being citzens with out of control government.
Good Day.
Huckbolt | Nov 16, 2009 10:49 am | 0 replies | Request removal
Post reply
Whether the weed abatement officer followed or did not follow established procedures will be revealed in the proceedings. If he did not, he should be held accountable for not following established procedures. Period.
Wasilchen had the right and responsibility as a citizen to ask the weed abatement employee to leave his property and return when he had the authorizing paper work in order. Calm heads usually do prevail.
The investigation into the shooting of Daniel Wasilchen by the sheriff's deputies is seperate in procedure and will be treated as such. If there was any wrong doing on their part, that will be reported by the investigators; and they will be held accountable.
There are laws and constitutional rights regarding when it is legal for a property owner to defend themselves with a firearm. If you take on the responsibility of gun ownership, you also take on the responsibility of knowing what laws govern that ownership. Wasilchens decision to point a gun at responding officers was not a responsible decision.
debi y | Nov 14, 2009 1:19 pm | 1 replies | Request removal
Post reply
Gee Debi, thanks for the nice comments, now everthing is much clearer. I bet you write childrens books, you make everything sound so neat and orderly. Except for one thing Debi, Wasilchen was not pointing his gun at the Deputies, but at Gohrman. The Deputies were hiding in the trees waiting to shoot; it's called hunting! Debi.
Phillip Day | Nov 14, 2009 2:24 pm | Request removal
Good for Dan's family to seek redress for what happened to him. Hopefully to also get some answers and closure. Some questions I have and concerns based on some other responses:
"We led the Sheriff in?" That is what Sonny Gohrman said in an email? Sounds like he is proud of what he did. Did he also strategize that he would pull into Dan's driveway, to lure Dan out so he could be ambushed by the Sheriff deputies? Did Dan really have a gun in his hand as the perpetrator of this incident claims? And, did deputies enter Dan's home and pry open his gun safe, as a neighbor reported? Or maybe this wasn't an ambush, but why did the deputies park out of sight in a concealed location? Were the deputies following procedure? Was Dan shot in the back, as I was told, and without warning? Six months later there still is no report, why?
Why didn't Sonny follow his Board's procedures? An example of a report from Weed Board minutes that Sonny reported to the Board on December 11, 2008:
"Coordinator's Report
Knotweed
94 acres and 12.5 river miles were sprayed since September. 144 property owners were
assisted. 40 sites were skipped for various reasons. Herbicide efficacy shows a 99% reduction
at a waste area near Cicero Bridge and a 95% reduction on the stretch between the headwaters
of Squire Creek and the Swede Heaven Bridge on the North Fork. However, considering the
effort and time put into the area, the knotweed is not under complete control. Sonny gave a
power point presentation of the various areas that the crew worked since 2004. Some property
owners along Squire Creek may receive enforcement action if we can't contact them or they
won't sign hold harmless agreements."
The county board requires the hold harmless agreement be signed. So Dan's trying to protect his dogs is understandable. Would you give permission to anyone to enter your property when they want to be exempted from any liability or damage they may cause to your property or animals while they are spraying poison? Why were 40 sites skipped? Why did he demand access to Dan's property if he allowed other properties to be "skipped"?
Glen Halverson | Nov 14, 2009 11:59 am | 0 replies | Request removal
Post reply
Phillip Day | Nov 14, 2009 7:26 am | 0 replies | Request removal
Post reply
Sad story. That's what happens when you point a gun at cops. They don't have any other options when it comes to that.
william edmunds | Nov 14, 2009 1:32 am | 0 replies | Request removal
Post reply
This event reads like some sort of poorly written novel, as if at each turn every character makes a bad decision that only servers to further some horrible plot line. To bad this inst a novel and a man is actually dead. Looking back at this it seems as if every could have and should have made better decisions. However, in my opinion the one action that what would have been the difference maker in keeping this obnoxious argument just that, an argument, was the decision of Daniel Wasilchen to point a loaded gun at a pair of sheriffs deputies. While it may be true that the weed inspector was being an aggressive, obnoxious, douche it was Daniels mistake to bring a gun into the situation. As on reader has already pointed out, what else was supposed to happen in that situation? You don't pull a gun on the police, or any law enforcement for that matter, and expect to not be shot at.
Dave Smith | Nov 13, 2009 4:04 pm | 0 replies | Request removal
Post reply
You are an idiot. this has nothing to do with the Police. They did the correct thing when haveing a gun pointed at them.
This is all about a pig headed over zealous county employee that thinks he can bully our citizens. This county is full of them. The entire blame for this incident rides on his shoulders.
Randy Moser | Nov 13, 2009 6:49 am | 2 replies | Request removal
Post reply
Apparently, you're an idiot too. Since when is it appropriate to grab a gun in a situation like this? And moreso, when is it ever appropriate to threaten cops with a gun?
The family's OK about going to court for compensation, but if this clown really felt he was being harassed by a county employee he should have resolved it the same way. Instead, he grabs a gun...ready to use deadly force against an unarmed bureaucrat.
S Sully | Nov 13, 2009 7:16 am | Request removal
I love it when people just go ahead and post when they read the comments. Rather then reading the actual article. Since when does a county weed control employee have the authority to pull into someones driveway after an altercation. This county worker took it upon HIMSELF to beat the police to the victims home. Believe it or not citizens os the united states do have a right to protect themselves. I'm not going to say that danny having a gun was the right way to handle it. But then the county worker had no right to come back to potential hostile environment. Caused by the him in the first place.
jason merrill | Nov 13, 2009 3:04 pm | Request removal
You're funny.
Eat Me | Nov 13, 2009 2:25 pm | 0 replies | Request removal
Post reply
I grew up in Everett. Everyone knew Everett because it smelled from the paper mills. The mills closed but the Smell has never gone away.
Arnie Ziphel | Nov 13, 2009 2:11 pm | 0 replies | Request removal
Post reply
Actually, a property owner is not allowed to maintain noxious weeds and have them spread. Other weeds, it doesn't matter, they can spread to the owner's delight or frustration.
Here are some of the noxious weed laws which may be relevant: 17.10 RCW which can be found at http://apps.leg.wa.gov/RCW/default.aspx?cite=17.10
and WAC 16-750, 16-752
The WA Noxious Weed Control Board website has more info and lists of weeds which are noxious: http://www.nwcb.wa.gov/index.htm
My condolences go out to the family and all involved.
Kerry M | Nov 13, 2009 7:15 am | 1 replies | Request removal
Post reply
I have heard from other people who have had a run in with the weed guy. He is said to be a very arguementive and very unwilling to listen to any one who choses to not listen to his B/S.
He is a classic case of a person who thinks he is entitled to give out his version of the weed law.
Had he just let well enough alone and not sprayed Dan would still be alive. Even after he was told to get off private property he continued to be try and level his own take on things. I can tell you that this isnt the first time the weed guy has ran into a home owner that he has had a dissagreement with.
Rich Wynn | Nov 13, 2009 12:38 pm | Request removal
All this man had to do to survive the situation was not bring a gun to a weed fight. There are plenty of ways to resolve this type of issue without pointing a gun at a man trained to shoot people who do so. What did he think was going to happen? What do you think would happen if YOU did the same thing, regardless of the reason? Sheesh.
Eat Me | Nov 13, 2009 12:24 pm | 0 replies | Request removal
Post reply
This is a case of:
A person overly zealous in his authority.
A police force not defusing a problem.
A land owner expecting he has rights.
In the end a man is dead.
My friend Dan will not be coming back, but I hope this will stop the government overrunning a person’s right to have his own castle. Dan’s pursuit of happiness was: his home , his cars, his dogs that’s it. He drove many miles to keep his home and to live out in the country. He always had a strong sense of right and wrong. We met in church when we where teens and stayed friends ever since.
I don’t know how the weed guy knew he had anything on his place. You can’t see his back yard from the road. The only thing you could see is his cars WWII jeep . My thoughts are that the weed guy wanted to pick a fight. Is that what we want in a government employee? He came back and back and back again? isnt there other ways of doing business? Was this the only place weeds are? And the sheriff office should be mad at the guy too. He hit the bees nest and then called them to protect him, what a slime ball! Why did the sheriffs take the word of a government person over a citizen’s rights? Do they know what the law is? Come back after things cool down. At lease divide the two in disagreement. It is a guy on his own property being harassed by a government worker. Is this an “us” versus “them” government? Defuse the situation or shoot? A Lack of prudence. I know I don’t want any weed killer on my land. I am trying to go organic. I know they would not dig it out just spray it. I am sure Dan feared for the health of his dogs. And didn’t want any weed killer on his place. He should have that right!
I am ranting! Angry ! sad ! And mad as hell !
So to Dan’s Dad and family Good Luck! This is a great thing in memory of Dan he would be very proud of all of you. And I hope A WIN for the people!
Richard Lee | Nov 13, 2009 10:23 am | 0 replies | Request removal
Post reply
This is a very unfortunate outcome to something that probably could have been avoided.
The county workers are usually pretty decent to work with. This all got out of hand. Ther is clearly no winner in this action. It troubles me how the state and county enforce rules. I have a commercial business that is adjacent to properties and projects that have been put off or abandoned. Under permitting rules they are to be maintaned for safety and looks. The municipality never does anything about these, yet, will go after a home or property owner in a neighborhood. Double standard because of $, I'm not sure, I see what I see. It's shameful that this man had to loose his life over some weeds.
Anthony Ramirez | Nov 13, 2009 10:21 am | 0 replies | Request removal
Post reply
Thank you for the link. I read the law you sited and according to RCW 17.10.140 the owner of the property CAN maintain weeds on their property, even noxious ones. There is a classification structure and as long as they are not Class A noxious weeds they can be maintained on the property as long as they are being prevented from spreading.
I have not seen reference to what classification of weeds the property owner had so I cannot say he was in the wrong. I was just pointing out that a property owner can maintain weeds on their property under certain conditions.
Allen Rountree | Nov 13, 2009 9:46 am | 0 replies | Request removal
Post reply
Anyone who listens to "cme everett" and his ranting needs to have their head examined.
Daniel Eakin | Nov 13, 2009 9:35 am | 0 replies | Request removal
Post reply
First of all... every home owner has the right to maintain noxious weeds along the street they live upon.
The county employee obviously wasn't educated on that.
2nd... POLICE, i thought, were educated to "talk down" arguments, not shoot first, diuscuss that later over a corpse.
No doubt, the county will lose this case. NO JURY will side with them.
None of this, even million$, will bring back a life recklessly lost. One has to hope that maybe, just maybe, our trigger happy police policies in this county will be "re-evalued" as this policy has obviously FAILED & tax payers/insurance will have to pay off this family for the wrongfull death.
Frankly, i am tired of paying off families from wrongful death civil cases. Police seem to just shrug it off & joe-taxpayer pays up. This has got to end.
cme everett | Nov 13, 2009 2:09 am | 2 replies | Request removal
Post reply
Actually, a property owner is not allowed to maintain noxious weeds and have them spread. Other weeds, it doesn't matter, they can spread to the owner's delight or frustration.
Here are some of the noxious weed laws which may be relevant: 17.10 RCW which can be found at http://apps.leg.wa.gov/RCW/default.aspx?cite=17.10
and WAC 16-750, 16-752
The WA Noxious Weed Control Board website has more info and lists of weeds which are noxious: http://www.nwcb.wa.gov/index.htm
My condolences go out to the family and all involved.
Kerry M | Nov 13, 2009 6:23 am | Request removal
And you're response would have been what?
while the guy was pointing a gun at you.
Stand there and try and "talk him down"?
See if he was seriously going to pull the trigger?
And if he had shot the weed guy, you'd have said what about the police then? probably something along the lines of "dumb@$$es should have shot him, what were they thinking?"
Really?
nunya business | Nov 13, 2009 8:41 am | Request removal