The male and female arrested for a burglary in Snoqualmie’s Deer Park neighborhood on January 8, 2013 were officially charged in King County Superior Court on January 24th.
Sean Paul St. Clair was charged with 1st Degree Burglary, 1st Degree Unlawful Possession of a Firearm and 2nd Degree Assault. Katie Ruth Glore (AKA Katie Ruth Anderson) was charged with 1st Degree Burglary. They both entered not guilty pleas.
The two remain in jail in lieu of bail. The King County Prosecutor recommended $300,000 bail for St. Clair and $100,000 bail for Glore. According to court documents, prosecutors recommended those bail amounts due to concerns the defendants would fail to appear for a court summons and/or might commit a violent offense. St. Clair, a convicted felon, also had a felony arrest warrant from the Washington State Department of Corrections at the time of his arrest.
A Snoqualmie Police Certification of Probable Cause stated when arrested on January 8th, the two were in possession of approximately $60,000 worth of jewelry pieces that were later identified as taken during a January 2, 2013 burglary on Cascade Ave in Snoqualmie.
According to Dan Donohoe, Press Secretary for the King County Prosecuting Attorney’s Office, a trial date has not been set yet. St. Clair will appear in a case setting hearing on February 27th and Glore will appear in her case setting hearing on March 4th. Case settings are informal hearings where prosecutors and defense attorneys discuss the case.
Donohoe said, ” It might be a couple of months before the case goes to trial.”
St. Clair faces a maximum 87-116 months in prison if convicted of all three charges. Glore faces 15-20 months if convicted as charged.
Comments
I submit that this was a poor choice for a headline on this story. Nearly all defendants of crimes plead “not guilty” upon advice of counsel, and lawyers who don’t often set themselves up for subsequent lawsuits for not properly defending them. When was the last time you saw a defendant plead “guilty” on any other grounds but insanity? It just doesn’t happen. Yet, the majority of the public (your readers) don’t know this, thus there is an implication in the headline that this may be an case of trying to game the judicial system. A more appropriate title would be “make their first court appearance”, which is accurate without misleading the reader. With that said, given these criminals were caught with the goods and a witness, chances are more probable than other burglary cases that they will be convicted.
Only problem with your ‘…first court appearance’ suggestion is that it wouldn’t be accurate. Their first court appearance would have been a bail hearing. This second appearance was arraignment where they faced formal charges.
Give the reader a little more credit?
I’m with Cheri on this. The headline of the article was accurate – the defendants did indeed plead not guilty. The judge and the jury cannot draw any inference that such a plea is trying to “game the judicial system,” but the general public is free to draw whatever inference they wish. In contrast to those individuals who seem to believe the readers of this article haven’t advanced their civics knowledge beyond the third grade, I think people see “not guilty” pleas as commonplace since they are mentioned all the time in the meadia. “Not guilty” pleas are pro forma in the arrangement proceedings, even for these unfortunate two who were caught in flagrante delicto, since it preserves the defendant’s bargining power in a plea bargin. Since 95% (or more) criminal cases plea out, this is the likely result for these individuals.
Well, you’re both obviously quite informed & legally knowledgeable people, who’re reading this in a similar manner as I. However, I submit that we’re a bit unusual from the “norm”. I was speaking with an artist friend (BA degree to boot) who reacted to the headline in the way that I suspect the majority of readers will: “Isn’t that a lot of gall, pleading guilty to a crime that they’re obviously caught red-handed in?”. Thus, “giving the reader credit” for knowing the normal legal process is wishful thinking. Even college educated people cannot be expected to typically know usual judicial process, unless they work “in the field” or have followed several other such cases. My point is that it’s possible to make a story headline accurate, and even interesting, without implying meaning that leads to misunderstanding by readers. To be clear: I’m not objecting to the content of the article, just the headline. You don’t typically find journalists/editors titling similar stories in this way. I know Danna, who is an outstanding community member and person, and just have to believe that this was simply an innocent oversight, ie no intent to “sensationalize” to induce the reader into reading. Regardless, I’m pleased to see her keeping the community abreast of developments in this case. (Full disclosure: I”m a career marketing guy, and we pay a lot of attention to the importance of headlines for ads etc, in order to induce viewers into reading the “small print”.)
Couldn’t be happier these two dirt bags are sitting in jail. Where they belong, forever.