Seattle waterfront shooting

[rtschl]

An idiot shoots man in wheelchair. But the story and the suspect involved makes one's head explode:

Suspect accuses guy in wheel chair of "Stolen Valor" and takes (steals) military patch from disabled man. The man in the wheel chair attempts to follow to get his property. Guy in wheel chair pulls out what is later identified as an airsoft gun. Suspect that stole his patch pulls a weapon from his backpack and shoots guy in wheel chair and demanding to see his ID. Suspect is also guy accused of driving vehicle into Trump voter registration tent in Florida in 2020. The victim in the wheel chair is in serious but stable condition.

He will probably try to claim self defense, but it is not self defense when you are committing a crime. They need to lock him up for the rest of his life, but it's Seattle.

Video:
https://x.com/Breaking911/status/1955694903628853520

Newspaper:
https://nypost.com/2025/08/13/us-news/s ... len-valor/

[LSUTiger]

My IANAL legal analysis is this:

The fact that the wheel chair guy was infact a veteran and the gun he tried to pull out was an airsoft gun are irrelevant.

This initial aggressor steels a patch from the wheel chair guy and walks away. Not a smart move.

The wheel chair guy follows the aggressor and tries to pull out a knife and gun. Not a smart move. The agressor retreated. Even wheel chair guy felt threatened by a disparity of force by being in a wheelchair, the aggressor had walked away. He should not have followed the initial aggressor. He still could have been possibly justified to pull his weapon if he felt he was still in danger. But following when he had no mitigation circumstance caused doubt.

At this point the initial aggressor has backed away from the wheel chair guy who is stopped and still fumbling trying to pull out a gun. The initial aggressor was alone and could have easily fled the scene. There was no mitigating circumstances to stay like he was with someone else. Even if there was no duty to retreat he should have just left.

The initial aggressor had 9 seconds to pull a gun and shoot, he had time to create distance.

My first impression is that the Initial aggressor initiate the incident, had ample time to flee, was threatening a man in a wheel chair who he had a significant advantage over and the wheel chair guy feeling threatened especially in his condition was in fear and disparity of force is at play here, hence the initial aggressor guy is wrong and guilty as charged.

However, since the initial aggressor retreated and then the wheelchair guy followed and then tried to pull a gun, the legal nuance could be that the initial aggressor had regained the right of self defense and the wheelchair guy became the aggressor, he didn't seem to be in fear, and due to stand your ground the initial aggressor did not have to retreat and was legally justified to defend himself.

My feeling is that the initial aggressor will be found not guilty because of the wheelchair guy following him. And the wheelchair guy will not be charged with anything.