Friday, March 19, 2010

Who Really Killed David Sequoia?

What we know about this matter is what is reported in the Friday, March 19, 2010, Times-Standard “Man shot by Eureka Police dies” written by John Driscoll. What is obvious, is that, once again, someone reported to possess some sort of weapon, in this case a handgun, is shot to death by the Eureka Police. What's the problem with that? Nothing, if the person was actually threatening someone. Unfortunately, according to the reporting here, the only one threatening anyone was Kris Coon.

The newspaper's secondary headline says: “David Sequoia was reportedly armed and struggling with resident when shot.” The article continues to define this struggle, “Coon said the man pushed him, and Coon wrestled him to the ground, THEN realized the man had a handgun in his belt.” Next he says, “The man refused to comply with officers' orders to give up the gun and an officer shot the man pointblank in the head.” “They gave him every chance in the world to comply.” All this while Coon is holding and wrestling with Sequoia on the ground.

The police arrive in the midst of a violent confrontation with two men grappling on the ground and order the man with a gun to give it up, then shoot him in the head because he was pointing it at them? How do you give a man every chance in the world to drop his weapon while rolling around on the ground in the midst of a fight with a belligerent attacker?

The resident, Kris Coon finds an unknown young man in his carport. He says, "Lurking around, looking very afraid." Next he says the man shoved him. Why was Coon that close to the man? "Coon says he wanted to search him and he was fighting him off when the police arrived." The man was obviously NOT threatening Coon – Coon was threatening him and followed that threat up by “wrestling him to the ground.” If David Sequoia was an aggressive, belligerent threat he would have used his gun to either assault or defend himself when confronted by Coon. He apparently did neither. Later in the article Coon says, “people in the neighborhood don't put up with illicit activity, and that he was only protecting his family when he went into his carport to investigate the commotion. When you consider what he said regarding the “quick response and action on the part of the police” that supposedly saved his life, why did he think he needed to protect his family by physically confronting someone simply in his carport? That's what the police are for and by the results, damned good at it too.

The simple truth is Mr. Kris Coon caused that man to get killed. No different than if he had pulled the trigger himself – “we don't put up with illicit activity” in our neighborhood!

Nothing in this report indicates any “illicit activity” other than someone simply being on someone's property or messing with that property; in this case simply “lurking around”. Nothing, certainly not “lurking around,” indicates any kind of activity by Sequoia justifying a violent confrontation “in defense of Coon's family”. If Coon's rational is justified anyone walking down an ally that gets close to someone's carport poses a threat and is subject to a violent assault.

Couple that with the fact that if the police even think there is some kind of a weapon, like a gun, knife, stick of wood, or a rock within a half a block your life is in serious jeopardy. Just ask a police officer sometime what the hell he's talking about and you will find yourself three words away from being tazered into arrest for threatening and resisting an officer. You never want to raise your hand a point a finger. That finger could provoke deadly force in a heartbeat! Even so, considering the attitudes of guys like Kris Coon, I'd say the police are probably justified dealing with people the way they do. Had Kris Coon left the matter to the police, they probably would have been able, since the man was armed, to peacefully disarm him and deal with that issue in a controlled environment. Coon deprived them of that right and justifies the man's death by trying to say HE was only protecting his family. Even if the man was only rustling around in his garbage, where is the immediate threat?

I listened to Coon's interview on News Channel 3 and he made me sick.

In the News Channel 3 report, Coon says “he wanted to search him” and Sequoia resisted -- “pushed” Coon. What gave Kris Coon that right? Apparently Sequoia was resisting Coon, they were both on the ground and “the cop put his gun up to Sequoia's head and shot him because he wouldn't stop fighting and drop his gun.” That sounds like nothing more than a simple execution. You can view the report here. []

Why is it that the police cannot effect an arrest anymore without getting the person's permission?



  1. The man was in his garage. Tresspassing. That's what gives him the right.
    Home defense.
    If someone was in my garage and when I confronted him he fought back and looked as if he was going for a gun?
    Yeah, I'd like to have shot first.
    WTF was he doing in someone elses' garage?

  2. Sarah, the man said "carport" not garage. Where did he say "going for his gun" I recall Mr. Koons saying "I saw the gun in his belt". "Home defense" means in the home not outside. Homeless people are in peoples garbage all the time collecting cans for recycle, should they all be shot for tresspassing?

  3. Thank you for this Joe. It's a subject that people are afraid to really examine...

  4. Was going to address this earlier. Wanted to say "Thanks" for the comments. I appreciate the support. (More than you know.)