About That Folklife Shooting

Seems I might have been right to wonder if the person who has been charged with 3 counts of second degree assault in a shooting that injured three people at the "Folklife" festival over the weekend in Seattle might have been defending himself. Some articles and comments are suggesting that he was attacked by someone who spotted his ankle-holster (which was legal since he has a concealed carry permit). The attacker attempted to grab his gun and the person who was charged was trying to prevent the assailant from grabbing it when it went off and accidentally injured the assailant and two innocent bystanders.

Of course, the media is focusing on the accused person's medical and non-violent criminal history instead of the disturbing question of why the person who reportedly attacked him wasn't charged since he has culpability for the shooting as well. The articles also state that the police arrived fairly quickly as they were in the area and heard the shot... however, there was still no word on how nor who gave the accused person his injuries that were obvious in the photo taken of the arrest... (though several people commenting to one article were proudly crowing that the "peaceful folk-life crowd" gave him a beat-down.)

Others were wondering why someone would take a loaded weapon, that he was legally entitled to carry, to a "peaceful" folk (read hippy) festival... Well, given he might have been the victim of an assault trying to defend himself and was subsequently assaulted by a large group of people with the apparent permission of local police officers... it seems that question might have already been answered.

It'll be interesting to see how this progresses, but it wouldn't be the first time the SPD let a crowd get away with mob mentality brand "justice" only to end up punishing an innocent victim while letting the real assailant go free.