Category Archives: Uncategorized

Study: Forest Fire Smoke Leads to Increased Criminal Activity

Bellingham Defense Attorney, Drug Offenses, Mount Vernon Criminal Defense Attorney, Skagit County Criminal Defense, Uncategorized, Violent Crime, Whatcom County Criminal Defense, , , , ,

Summer approaches. And with it, wildfires are on the rise. In Washington State, the wildfire season usually begins in early July and typically culminates in early October when regular rain returns to the Northwest. around the globe. Ever more frequent, severe and longer lasting fire hotspots are expanding to new territories, as the fingers of climate change reach farther around the planet. This isn’t just hazardous to our physical health, it’s impacting people’s mental wellbeing as well.

Interestingly, the most insidious threat is only now being understood. New research has found that wherever the smoke goes, a rise in crime may not be far behind.

THE REPORT

Doctoral researcher Lion Kircheis is a political scientist from the University of Konstanz. He analysed crime report data from the Seattle Police Department from 2013 to 2023, and identified smoky days caused by wildfires on the basis of satellite data, analyses of wind direction and local monitoring stations.

What he found surprised him. According to his report, For 11 years, assaults were higher on days when nearby wildfires had released smoke and particulate matter into the Seattle air. anD when the particulate matter increased by 7.0 μg m−3, there were 3.6 per cent more assaults on these smoky days.

“That’s equivalent to around one additional assault per day in a city the size of Seattle. The statistical increase of 3.6 per cent is not high but, crucially, it is consistent. On those days, when air pollution is up by 7.0 μg m−3, it’s not as if the sun gets blocked by a thick haze of smoke or anything – the air still looks clear. But what is striking is that even a little bit of smoke in the air has an impact on people.” ~Lion Kircheis, Political Scientist

Kircheis looked for any other likely causes for the increase in violence, such as more traffic jams or an increase in police response time. But neither of these were the case. Interestingly, domestic violence call numbers didn’t rise when wildfire smoke was present. That suggests that outdoor exposure to wildfire smoke was the culprit – not indoor air pollution.

And, of course, socio-economic background then comes into play – although we might think we all breathe the same air, it’s not the case for those who work outdoors or do not have access to filtered indoor air.

This doesn’t mean the average person will become more violent just because they’re inhaling invisible wildfire smoke. What is more likely is that aggressive conflicts will spill over into violent actions when there is wildfire-induced smoke in the air. And it’s not just civilians who are susceptible. Police statistics suggest that officers in Seattle responded with more physical force on those smoky days.

The findings are supported by another study that used crime data from 21 major US cities from 2007 to 2020. This research showed that violent and drug-related crimes were particularly prevalent when wildfire smoke was in the air, with a 0.88 per cent increase in violent offences and a 1.35 per cent rise in drug-related crimes.

Please contact my office if you, a friend or family member are charged with a crime during wildfire season. Hiring an effective and competent defense attorney is the first and best step toward justice.

U.S. Supreme Court Sides With Death Row Inmate in Challenge to Racial Discrimination in Jury Selection

Bellingham Defense Attorney, Constitutional Rights, Homicide & Manslaughter, Jury Selection, Mount Vernon Criminal Defense Attorney, Race & Law, Skagit County Criminal Defense, Uncategorized, United States Supreme Court, Whatcom County Criminal Defense, , , , ,

In Pitchford v. Cain, the U.S. Supreme Court reversed a Black death row inmate’s criminal conviction and death sentence. By a vote of 5-4, the court agreed with Defendant Terry Pitchford that the judge at his 2006 trial had not properly analyzed whether the prosecutor in Pitchford’s case violated the Constitution’s ban on racial discrimination in jury selection.

Forty years ago, the U.S. Supreme Court’s  Batson v. Kentucky held the Equal Protection Clause bars prosecutors from exercising peremptory challenges based on race. In Batson and subsequent cases, the Court has spelled out a three-step process for a trial court to determine whether a prosecutor employed a peremptory challenge based on race.

FACTUAL BACKGROUND

in 2004, two black teenagers, Terry Pitchford and Eric Bullins, robbed agrocery store near Grenada, Mississippi. During the robbery, Bullins shot and killed the white store owner. Bullins reached a plea agree–ment and received a 20-year sentence for the homicide. The State charged Pitchford with capital murder and sought the death penalty. During jury selection at Pitchford’s trial, the prosecutor used peremptory strikes against four of the five black potential jurors.

Pitchford’s counsel raised an objection under Batson and made a prima facie showing that the strikes of the four black jurors were based on race (step one). The trial court asked the prosecutor for race-neutral reasons for each strike, and the prosecutor offered reasons (step two). The trial court declared the prosecutor’s stated reasons to be race neutral, but the trial court did not afford defense counsel an opportunity to rebut the prosecutor’s race-neutral reasons as pretextual (step three). Nor did it make any findings regarding whether the prosecutor’s stated reasons were pretextual.

At the close of jury selection, defense counsel sought to raise the Batson issue again, but the trial court twice cut off defense counsel. The empaneled jury, consisting of 11 white jurors and1 black juror, convicted Pitchford of capital murder and sentenced him to death.On direct appeal, the Mississippi Supreme Court concluded that Pitchford had waived his Batson objection by not arguing to the trial court that the prosecutor’s proffered explanations were pretextual.

Pitchford later filed a habeas corpus petition in U. S. District Court. Applying the applicable standard to obtain federal habeas relief under the Antiterrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act of 1996, the District Court concluded that the Mississippi Supreme Court had unreasonably applied Batson and had unreasonably determined that Pitchford waived his Batson objection. The District Court explained that no state court had conducted the full three-step Batson inquiry, and that the trial court had “thwarted” the “attempt by Pitchford’s counsel to argue pretext.” The Fifth Circuit reversed the District Court, concluding that the Mississippi Supreme Court’s waiver finding was reasonable. The United States Supreme Court granted review.

COURT’S ANALYSIS & CONCLUSIONS

the Supreme Court reversed the 5th Circuit’s decision and sent the case back to the lower courts. Justice Kavanaugh’s delivered the majority opinion. His analysis in his opinion for the majority was succinct. “After a prosecutor asserts race-neutral reasons for a peremptory strike,” he explained, “the defense counsel must at least have an opportunity to argue that the asserted race-neutral reasons were not the actual reasons—that is, the reasons were pretextual. Then, the trial court can determine whether those asserted reasons were the actual reasons or instead were pretextual.” Here, however, Kavanaugh emphasized that the Batson analysis was not correctly or accurately provided:

“Whether due to confusion, oversight, an overly hurried jury selection process, or some other cause, things broke down, and the ordinary trial-court procedure for resolving Batson claims at step three never occurred—notwithstanding the repeated efforts of Pitchford’s counsel to pursue and preserve the Batson objection.” ~U.S. Supreme Court Justice Kavanaugh

Kavanaugh conceded that, in cases involving AEDPA, federal courts normally are “deferential to the state court. But deference does not mean abdication,” he stressed. And here, “the Mississippi Supreme Court’s conclusion that Pitchford waived his opportunity to rebut the prosecutor’s proffered race-neutral reasons was unreasonable.”

Please contact my office if you, a friend or family member are charged with a crime. Hiring an effective and competent defense attorney is the first and best step toward justice.

City of Bellingham to Lower Speed Limits

Bellingham Defense Attorney, Mount Vernon Criminal Defense Attorney, Reckless Driving, Reckless Endangerment, Skagit County Criminal Defense, Street Racing, Traffic Infractions, Uncategorized, Whatcom County Criminal Defense, , , ,

The Bellingham City Council recently voted to lower speed limits 5 to 10 mph. This means slower speeds in most neighborhoods, including arterial streets and in the downtown core.

THE DATA

In recommending the new speed limits, Public Works officials sought guidance from the “City Limits” report prepared by the National Association of City Transportation Officials. The data included the following information:

  • Over the past decade, the total number of crashes on Bellingham roads has declined, but their severity has risen.
  • From 2015 to 2019, there were five traffic deaths on Bellingham streets. That includes a 2017 crash that killed a bicyclist.
  • From 2020-2024, there were 15 traffic fatalities, including 10 bicyclists and pedestrians. Two people have been killed on Bellingham streets so far this year, including one pedestrian.
  • Bellingham has 670 “lane miles” of streets.
  • More than half of Bellingham streets have a 25 mph speed limit, and more than a third of its streets have a 35 mph limit.
  • Only 3% or streets have a limit of 50 mph or higher.
  • Lowering speed limits will require a change in city policy, which now uses a system that sets speeds as a function of how fast 85% of drivers are going on a particular street.

WILL DECREASING SPEED LIMITS LEAD TO INCREASED PRETEXTUAL POLICE STOPS?

Probabaly, yes. A pretextual traffic stop happens when a police officer pulls someone over for a minor traffic or equipment violation to try and find evidence of another more serious crime. The legality of these stops is highly controversial, relying on deeply established federal law and evolving state-specific restrictions.

KNOW YOUR RIGHTS
  • Duration Limits: Officers cannot legally prolong a routine traffic stop beyond the time it takes to issue a warning or citation unless they develop a new, independent suspicion of a crime.
  • Consent to Search: You have the right to refuse a search of your vehicle unless the officer has probable cause or a warrant.
  • Legal Defense: Because these stops walk a fine line, experienced criminal defense lawyers often challenge the validity of the initial stop or the scope of the officer’s search in court

Please contact my office if you, a friend or family member are charged with a driving-related crime. Hiring an effective and competent defense attorney is the first and best step toward justice.

Admitting Evidence of “Common Scheme or Plan” Under Evidence Rule 404(b)

Bellingham Defense Attorney, ER 404(B), Mount Vernon Criminal Defense Attorney, Sex Crimes, Skagit County Criminal Defense, Uncategorized, Washington Supreme Court, Whatcom County Criminal Defense, , , , ,

In  State v. Stearns, No. 103908-5 (Mar. 26, 2026), the WA Supreme Court held that evidence of a defendant’s prior bad acts may be admissible under ER 404(b) to show “common scheme or plan” if the prior bad acts were markedly similar to the charged crimes.  Also, the victims in the prior bad acts do not need to be markedly similar to each other for the prior bad acts to be admissible to show common scheme or plan.

FACTUAL BACKGROUND

In 1998, Crystal Williams, a 33-year-old Black woman, was found dead in Lavizzo Park in Seattle’s Central District. Ms. Williams worked as a sex worker. Six years later, the Defendant Mr. Stearns’ DNA matched the DNA in the semen found at the crime scene. Police interviewed Mr. Stearns, who was then serving time in prison for another crime. The prosecutor determined there was probable cause to charge Mr. Stearns with Ms. Williams’ murder but failed to bring charges until 12 years later.

The State charged Mr. Stearns with felony murder in the first degree, based on first- and second-degree rape, with sexual motivation. At trial, the State offered, and the court admitted over Mr. Stearns’ objection, evidence of two of Mr. Stearns’ prior rape convictions. The State sought to admit these prior acts under the common scheme or plan exception to ER 404(b) to establish forcible compulsion and to rebut the defense of consent. Defense counsel objected, arguing that the other wrongful acts were not part of a common scheme or plan and that the evidence was unfairly prejudicial.

The trial court overruled the objection, concluding that the probative value of the evidence outweighed any prejudice and that the court would give a limiting instruction to the jury about the purpose of the admitted evidence. The trial court stated that the ER 404(b) evidence’s relevance to prove forcible compulsion and rebut Mr. Stearns’ claim of consent was “critical” to its ruling.  The trial resulted in a hung jury. After numerous appeals and reversals, the WA Supreme Court granted certiori to decide the isue of The trial court did not abuse its discretion in admitting evidence of the prior rapes under ER 404(b) to establish forcible compulsion and to rebut the defense of consent.

COURT’S ANALYSIS & CONCLUSIONS

The WA Supreme Court discussed the parameters of Evidence Rule (ER) 404(b). Under this evidence rule, a trial court may admit the defendant’s other wrongful acts to show a common plan or scheme if the other wrongful acts are (1) proved by a preponderance of the evidence, (2) admitted for the purpose of proving a common plan or scheme, (3) relevant to prove an element of the crime charged or to rebut a defense, and (4) more probative than prejudicial. However, the WA Supreme Court also said a court may not admit evidence of a defendant’s other wrongful acts to show that the defendant has a propensity for criminal behavior. ER 404(b). The reason for this prohibition is the risk that the jury will simply punish a defendant for their other wrongful acts or will assume they committed the current alleged criminal act.

Next, the WA Supreme Court reasoned that when analyzing a defendant’s “common scheme or plan,” courts must consider the acts, the victims and the circumstances of the crimes. On this, the Court reasoned that evidence may be admitted under this exception when a person uses one plan to repeatedly commit separate but very similar crimes. The separate crimes do not have to be identical, but they must be markedly similar acts of misconduct against similar victims under similar circumstances. Further, the acts must have such a concurrence of common features that they are naturally explained as being part of a common plan.

Against that backdrop, the WA Supreme Court ruled that because Mr. stearns’ other acts of sexual assault were sufficiently similar to the present case, it was within the trial court’s discretion to admit that evidence under ER 404(b). First, the other wrongful acts committed by Mr. Stearns were markedly similar to the acts here: he hit each victim on the head, strangled them, and sexually assaulted them, and there is evidence that all three victims were robbed. This factor weighs strongly toward showing a common plan, said the Court.

Second, the dissimilarities between the victims do not weigh heavily in this case. Each woman was a victim of a seemingly random act of violence, who was attacked in Seattle’s Central District in a similar manner. These similarities between the victims are sufficient. Finally, the circumstances of the crimes in this case were similar in that Mr. Stearns was able to attack each victim by tricking them:

“Mr. Stearns entered BG’s home around midnight with a ruse, telling her someone was chasing him. Mr. Stearns attacked DH from behind after appearing to be passed out and lying in the gutter. While many details of Crystal Williams’ death are unknown, based on the circumstances it is likely the killer approached Ms. Williams under the guise of offering drugs or money for sex.” ~Justice Salvador A. Mungia, WA Supreme Court

With that, the WA Supreme Court reversed the Court of Appeals and reinstated Mr. Stearns’ conviction.

Please contact my office if you, a friend or family member are charged with a crime. Hiring an effective and competent defense attorney is the first and best step toward justice.

Whatcom County Approves New Criminal Justice Sales Tax

Uncategorized, , , ,

WHATCOM — The Whatcom County Council considered and ultimately approved a new 0.1% sales and use tax for criminal justice purposes after a public hearing held on April 14.

A preliminary discussion was first held with the county council during the Feb. 24 meeting, with an understanding that the county executive would bring forth an ordinance at a later meeting.

According to a staff memo, rising costs within the criminal justice system are creating pressures on the 2027-2028 biennium budget. Existing revenue sources are unable to keep up with labor costs and inflation, as revenues sources are projected to grow more slowly.

“Further, the county has already initiated critical services — most notably expanded jail medical services — without a designated, sustainable revenue source,” the staff memo states. “This revenue is needed, not to launch new programs, but to sustain obligations already underway and prevent a more rapid deterioration of the general fund trajectory.”

The sales tax is expected to bring in about $6.5 million to $7 million and could be used to offset operating obligations, such as jail health and food services, sheriff’s office lease and criminal justice labor costs across several departments. Revenue collection can begin July 1.

The public hearing came with mixed feelings, with some saying it should help a broader range of services and that the tax is needed to fund various programs while others said they don’t trust the government to not squander the funds and that it should not be threatening cuts to the sheriff’s department should the tax not pass.

After holding public comment, council voted 5-2 to approve the new tax, with council members Mark Stremler and Ben Elenbaas voting against it. Stremler and Elenbaas then voted on a separate ordinance to instead send the tax increase to the voters. That ordinance did not pass, as the five other council members voted against it.

However, the county’s attorney advised that the council does not have the authority to put the tax on the ballot in this specific instance. Elenbaas and Stremler said they disagreed with the interpretation.

“We want to have the voters of Whatcom County decide if they want to pay this or  do they not want to pay this tax,” Stremler said. “That’s the bottom line.”

According to a presentation from Deputy Executive Kayla Schott-Bresler, had the tax not passed the county would need to cut millions of dollars across all county departments. Even with the tax, some modest cuts will still need to be made.

Here are key takeaways:

• What it costs you: The tax adds 10 cents to every $100 purchase, amounting to about $25 to $45 annually for the average Whatcom County family.

• When it starts: The tax takes effect July 1 and could raise $6.5 to $7 million annually for the county.

• Why the county says it’s needed: County Executive Satpal Sidhu called the tax a “crucial step toward fixing the structural imbalance in the county’s annual budget.” Without it, the county faces a $12 million deficit by 2028 and potential cuts to the Sheriff’s Office, courts and Prosecutor’s Office.

• No public vote — for now: A companion advisory referendum failed 2-5. A voter referendum under state law isn’t allowed until 2028, according to Deputy Prosecutor Kimberly Thulin.

• Where the money goes: Funds will pay for health and food services at the county jail, a lease on a new Sheriff’s Office building and labor costs.

My opinion? Criminal justice sales taxes (often known as public safety sales taxes) are a specialized tax, such as the 0.1% increase recently implemented in several Washington state jurisdictions. Whether they are considered “good” or “bad” depends largely on whether the need for immediate funding outweighs concerns about equity and tax fairness.

Please contact my office if you, a friend or family member are charged with a crime. Hiring an effective and competent defense attorney is the first and best step toward justice.

Marijuana Arrests Decrease

Bellingham Defense Attorney, Drug Offenses, marijuana, Mount Vernon Criminal Defense Attorney, Skagit County Criminal Defense, Uncategorized, Whatcom County Criminal Defense, , , , ,

The Marijuana Policy Project just released a new report on weed-related arrests in the United States. Based on FBI Crime Explorer data, the report examines cannabis arrest data in all 50 states, including a state-by-state breakdown of arrest data. In short, the report shows that states have turned to more pragmatic regulation and legalization of cannabis. The era of mass arrests is decreasing.

“Cannabis legalization across 24 states has driven a historic decline in cannabis arrests nationwide, from a high of nearly 900,000 to over 200,000 annually. That is still an alarmingly high number, with each of those arrests representing an actual person whose current reality and future prospects may well be derailed by a criminal record. Across half of our country, hundreds of thousands of Americans are still being funneled into the criminal justice system every year for a victimless ‘crime’ that is very likely legal in the next state over.” ~Marijuana Policy Project Executive Director Adam J. Smith

THE NUMBERS

The report found that annual cannabis arrests in the United States dropped from a peak of over 870,000 in 2007 to 211,104 in 2025. The findings show that cannabis arrest rates have dropped 85.53%, with possession arrests dropping by an average of 84.61% and sales arrests decreasing by an average of 80.39%.

In 2025, law enforcement agencies in states that have legalized marijuana reported 22,357 cannabis arrests, while states that continue to prohibit pot reported 186,581 cannabis arrests. The 24 states with legal cannabis made a total of 222,261 fewer cannabis arrests in 2025 compared to the year prior to their legalization of cannabis. Prohibition states made more than eight times as many cannabis arrests than legalization states in 2025, although they have a smaller total population.

My opinion? We’ve come a long way since nearly 900,000 annual arrests. Nevertheless, 200,000 Americans arrested every year for cannabis is still a human rights disaster that must end. Please contact my office if you, a friend or family member are charged with a Drug Offense or any other crime. Hiring an effective and competent defense attorney is the first and best step toward justice.

FBI Crime Data Shows Washington Is The Second-Most Dangerous State

Bellingham Defense Attorney, Mount Vernon Criminal Defense Attorney, Skagit County Criminal Defense, Studies, Uncategorized, Whatcom County Criminal Defense, , , ,

FBI crime data

Most Dangerous States to Raise a Family. SOURCE: Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) Crime Data Explorer

Washington has landed in the top five of a new list ranking the most dangerous states for neighborhood safety. Oregon came in at number four. The study, conducted by the Omega Law Group, placed Washington 5th overall after analyzing crime rates in residential areas and public parks across the country.

THE DATA

The study utilized crime data from the Federal Bureau of Investigations (FBI) to create two metrics: ‘violent crimes’ and ‘property crimes’. The metrics include data from eight different types of crime: homicide, rape, robbery, aggravated assault, arson, burglary, larceny-theft, and motor vehicle theft.

In Washington, there were roughly 2,126 home-related crimes for every 100,000 residents. When it comes to parks, the study found about 76 crimes per 100,000 people. Although Washington is 5th overall, it actually has a higher home crime rate than Oregon and Utah, which ranked just above the state on the total index.

Meanwhile, in Oregon, there were 1,601 home-related crimes for every 100,000 residents, with a park crime rate of nearly 97, the highest park crime rate of any state in the top ten, according to the research.

HOW DOES WA STATE COMPARE TO THE REST OF THE WEST?

The West Coast and Rocky Mountain regions dominated the top of the list. New Mexico took the number one spot as the most dangerous state by a wide margin, followed by Colorado, Delaware, and Utah. Apparently, the Northeast appears to be the safest region in America. New Jersey was ranked as the safest state for neighborhoods, followed closely by Maine and West Virginia.

While the Northeast consistently stays at the bottom of the rankings due to different policing strategies and community investments, states in the West continue to struggle with higher rates of residential and park-related incidents.

Please contact my office if you, a friend or family member are charged with a crime. Hiring an effective and competent defense attorney is the first and best step toward justice.

Mutually Violating No-Contact Orders With Protected Parties

Bellingham Defense Attorney, Burglary, Domestic Violence, Mount Vernon Criminal Defense Attorney, Skagit County Criminal Defense, Uncategorized, Whatcom County Criminal Defense, , , ,

In State v. Veith, the WA Court of Appeals held that Washington’s second-degree burglary statute does not require a “nexus” between the unlawful entry and the crime the defendant intends to commit in the building.  Here, the defendant committed second degree burglary by (1) unlawfully entering a grocery store in violation of a trespass order, and (2) with the intent to commit the crime of violating a Domestic Violence No Contact Order, the defendant entered the store together with a protected person.

FACTUAL BACKGROUND

On August 17, 2023, a grocery store trespassed Mr. Veith from its premises. Ten days later, on August 27, Veith went to the store and bought groceries with his ex-spouse. The store’s loss prevention officer observed Veith grocery shopping on surveillance video and called the police. Later, police contacted Mr. Veith and his ex-spouse inside a van in the store parking lot. It was determined there was a no-contact order (NCO) prohibiting Veith from being in the presence of his ex-spouse. The State charged Veith with felony violation of a protection order—domestic violence and second degree burglary. At trial, the jury found Veith guilty as charged.

On appeal, Veith argued that the second degree burglary statute should be read as requiring a “nexus” between the unlawful entry into a building and the intent to commit a crime therein. However, the Court of Appeals (COA) disagreed.

COURT’S ANALYSIS & CONCLUSIONS

First the COA explained that the second degree burglary statute sets forth the elements of second degree burglary: (1) entering or remaining unlawfully in a building other than a vehicle or dwelling, and (2) with the intent to commit a crime against a person or property therein. Next, the COA raised and dismissed Veith’s arguments that a “nexus” must exist:

“Nothing in the plain language of the second degree burglary statute requires a nexus between the unlawful entry and the crime being committed within the building and we cannot add words to the otherwise unambiguous plain language of the burglary statute.” ~WA Court of Appeals.

With that, the COA affirmed Mr. Veith’s conviction.

My opinion? This case reveals how seriously our courts consider cases involving DV and No-Contact Orders. It’s generally known that violating a no-contact or restraining order would result in a burglary charge if you unlawfully enter a protected person’s home or premises with the intent to commit a crime, such as assault or harassment. Nowadays, simply being in a public place with a protected party who mutually consents to violating the NCO right along with you can result in burglary charges.

Please contact my office if you, a friend or family member are charged with Burglary, Domestic Violence or any other crime. Hiring an effective and competent defense attorney is the first and best step toward justice.

“Velocity Renormalization” Is Making You Drive Too Fast

Bellingham Defense Attorney, Mount Vernon Criminal Defense Attorney, Reckless Driving, Skagit County Criminal Defense, Uncategorized, Whatcom County Criminal Defense, , , , ,

The majority of households in North America own at least one car and driving is a daily activity for most people. In fact, driving is so normal that it becomes a routine performed with minimal concentration. And that can lead to all sorts of dangerous actions behind the wheel, like texting, eating, daydreaming. But amid these well-known concerns lies a relatively overlooked phenomenon: velocity renormalization.

WHAT IS “VELOCITY RENORMALIZATION?”

Velocity renormalization, or velocitization, is when your brain adapts to a certain driving speed (like highway speeds) and misjudges other speeds. This makes slower traffic seem extremely slow or makes you feel like you’re crawling when you slow down. The perceptual shift that can affect speed judgment and lead to errors like unintentional speeding or over-braking after exiting a freeway. It’s an adaptation effect where your internal “normal” changes, affecting how you perceive your own speed and that of others, highlighting the need to regularly check your speedometer. 

When drivers leave a highway and have to merge with slower traffic, their perception of normal speed is altered and they often unconsciously misjudge their own speed. This also works in reverse. Someone who was moving slower can perceive a faster speed limit as being higher than it actually is.

THE SCIENCE 

George Mather, a Professor of Vision Science at the University of Lincoln, led a study into this subject, concentrating on the adaptation effect. The study looked into a person’s perceived norms of how fast something goes or should go after having experienced short periods of exposure to different speeds. After watching a slowed-down video of human movement, participants in the experiment were then shown normal speeds, which they perceived to be unnaturally fast. They required the natural-speed video to be slowed down for it to appear “normal”.

THE EFFECT ON DRIVERS

Velocity Renormalization is exactly what happens to a driver’s brain after they drive at a certain speed. In short, they will be prone to misjudging their velocity and, for example, approaching a highway exit ramp too fast. It can take time to mentally make the transition from faster to slower zones (or vice versa). Therefore, it’s important for drivers to double-check their speed when moving from one speed limit to another.

Because driving is so routine and natural for most people, it’s sometimes easy to forget that it’s a dangerous activity involving thousands of pounds of metal moving at high speeds. As Professor Mather’s research shows, drivers are also affected by a variety of effects that can alter their perception. All those factors add up and over 37,000 people die in car crashes in America every year—that’s over 100 a day.

Driving 35 mph, especially after you’ve been on the freeway, feels slow, while 35 mph on a bicycle feels like a bullet train. In a modern luxury car, even 70 mph can feel tedious. There are a few things going on here. Our eyes and our ears provide input for our perception of speed. On the freeway everything is far away, compared to city driving. The shoulders are wide, the road signs are set back, the closest trees might be 50 feet from the edge of the road, the other traffic nearly matches our speed. We don’t have any nearby markers to indicate how fast the world is zipping by. Compare that to when you’ve encountered a freeway work zone with concrete barriers at the edge of your lane. The lane width hasn’t gotten any narrower, but now you’re zooming past objects right next to you, and suddenly it feels too fast.

CAN YOU BE CRIMINALLY CHARGED FOR DRIVING TOO FAST?

Yes. Driving significantly over the limit (often 20-30 mph or more) or too fast for conditions (rain, fog, ice) can elevate a speeding ticket to criminal charges like Reckless Driving. Being convicted of this charge can lead to potential jail time, hefty fines, and license suspension.

Please contact my office if you, a friend or family member are charged with Reckless Driving or any other crime. Hiring an effective and competent defense attorney is the first and best step toward justice.

ACLU Maps Out Washington’s Anti-Homeless Criminal Laws By County

Bellingham Defense Attorney, Mount Vernon Criminal Defense Attorney, Poverty Defense, Skagit County Criminal Defense, Uncategorized, Whatcom County Criminal Defense, , , , ,

The Washington chapter of the ACLU gathered data on how many anti-homeless ordinances exist in Washington state, and how many unsheltered people are subjected to them across each county. They also tracked how many shelter beds are available in these counties. The information is very insightful on how cities and counties in WA state criminalize the homeless.

WHAT IS THE PROBLEM?

In its findings, the ACLU concluded that Washington is facing a severe housing and homelessness crisis. The problem is a direct result of decades of policy failure, housing disinvestment, and growing inequality. Thousands of our neighbors are pushed into homelessness. Rather than addressing root causes, cities are doubling down on punishment. Local governments often respond to visible homelessness by enacting and enforcing laws that criminalize the basic act of existing in public — sleeping, sitting or trying to stay warm.

THE LEGAL LANDSCAPE

In 2024’s City of Grants Pass v. Johnson,  the Supreme Court of the United States addressed the legality of an Oregon city ordinance that issued tickets to people sleeping in public when there were not enough available shelter beds. The court ruled that cities may punish people for sleeping in public, even when no shelter is available. The decision opened the door to further criminalization of people experiencing homelessness for unavoidable behavior tied directly to their life circumstances— signaling that survival itself can be punished. The case is criticized as undermining human dignity.

MAPPING THE CRISIS

Since this ruling, cities have become further emboldened in criminalizing people experiencing homelessness.

The issue of homelessness is incredibly complex, and the data we collected cannot fully represent the lived experience of those forced to live outside. While numbers are at times reductive and don’t show the whole story, they are a powerful visual tool to help build shared understanding of the pervasiveness of these laws and the crisis we are facing.

DATA GATHERING

The ACLU gathered three main data points:

  1. The Number of Anti-Homeless Ordinances In Each County.
  2. The Number of Unhoused Individuals In Each County.
  3. The Number of Low-Barrier Shelter Beds In Each County.

FINDINGS

Based on its data, the ACLU made the following conclusions:

  1. Access to Shelter And Other Services Varies Widely.
  2. Urban and Rural Counties Experience Similar Rates of Homelesness.
  3. Deep Funding Gaps In The State’s Housing Systems.
  4. Shelter Bed Availability Varies Darmatically By County.
  5. Counties Continue to Pass Anti-Homelessness Laws

CONCLUSION

The ACLU’s findings illustrate how uneven and disconnected Washington state’s homeless response has become. Whether someone can find a shelter bed, or simply exist outside without the threat of punishment, often depends entirely on where they live. Across the state, a clear pattern emerges. Instead of a coordinated, statewide response, Washington has developed a confusing patchwork of local laws that criminalize homelessness and punish people for being poor.

My opinion? Excellent work by the ACLU. Public safety concerns aside, we must remain committed to building a future where all Washingtonians – regardless of their housing status – are treated with dignity, fairness, and humanity. To this end, the ACLU is advocating for a bill which would set a clear and consistent statewide standards for criminal charges levied against houseless population.

The legislation is based on the premise that local governments should not be allowed to adopt or enforce laws that punish people for basic, life-sustaining activities on public property, such as sleeping or resting, unless adequate alternative shelter space is actually available. People should not face punishment simply because they have nowhere else to go. To learn more about the bill and ways to get involved, follow this link.

And please contact my office if you, a friend or family member are charged with a crime. Hiring an effective and competent defense attorney is the first and best step toward justice.