Sunday, November 08, 2009

Pastor Paul Stoot Sr. arrested

paulstoot I was going to pass on this story, but then it got weird. Pastor Paul Stoot Sr. was arrested for Obstruction of Justice, although after reading the news reports, I think his arrest my be for the convenient, “annoying a police officer”.

A police officer may arrest someone if the officer believes he or she is being prevented from doing his or her job, Urquhart said.  “A lot of obstruction charges don’t get filed,” he said.

Obstruction is similar to disorderly conduct, the charge Harvard professor Henry Louis Gates Jr. faced after his controversial July arrest in Cambridge, Mass. That case spurred a national debate about racial profiling and drew the attention of President Barack Obama. The charges were dropped.

I would have let this pass, but Stoot presented his case to the press as if it were a civil rights violation. But not because he is African American, but because he is a pastor. Jesse Jackson and the National Action Network, which is associated with the despicable Al Sharpton are involved.

“If these allegations are true, we are very disturbed by the manner in which a member of the Clergy may have been mistreated,” the Rev. Jesse Jackson wrote in an Oct. 16 letter to Sheriff John Lovick.

Once I saw the Jackson’s assertion that a “member of the clergy” should receive special treatment, I looked deeper. Nobody deserves special treatment under the law, especially pastors.

Pastor Stoot made a public written statement about his arrest. Apparently he is completely without fault and may even be able to walk on water.

As I moved toward [my church member’s] apartment, a Snohomish County Sheriff Deputy told to me to move the truck. I informed him that it was being moved and that I was going to check on a member of my church. He then yelled again that I was going to have to move my truck. I again informed him that it was being moved as we spoke. By this time, [church member #2] was in the driver’s seat and preparing to move the truck. The officer again yelled that he had told me to move the truck and to go back and do it. I again told him that the truck was already being moved and that I needed to go and see about [my church member] because I had received a 911 call for his aid as I am his emergency contact. As we finished this exchange, [church member #2] was moving my truck.

At no time in this initial exchange did I raise my voice, lose my temper at all, or act in a confrontational or disrespectful manner toward this officer.

Pastor Stoot’s account seems reasonable. And the arresting officer confirmed that the truck was moved.  But later, Stoot confronts the officer rather than fulfilling his self stated duty to seek care for the victim of the fire.

I went out to inform the fire commander that I had found him and ask if someone could take a look at him to make sure he was okay….

…I wanted to get a card from the officer that I had had the initial encounter with, so I approached the two officers that had been behind [church member #2]. The officer was very confrontational and informed me that I had been yelling at him when I’d first arrived and he had told me to move my truck. I told the other officer, again in a very calm voice, that I hadn’t raised my voice or yelled at him at all, nor was I trying to be at all confrontational

Stoot goes on to describe his arrest and eventually makes the charge that the officers caused him to bump his head upon entering the car, and that somebody stool $200 dollars from his wallet, which seems odd.

Stoot claims the arrest was retaliation for a civil lawsuit, which was dismissed in 2007, but apparently is still under appeal. Unfortunately, the lawsuit is against a different law enforcement agency, so I don’t really see the link. The suit itself is interesting, Paul Stoot Jr., then 13, was questioned for two hours without his parents being notified. He eventually confessed to molesting a young girl. Thankfully, a judge threw out the confession.

Stoot said Everett police "coerced" his son to admit guilt, a confession the judge threw out. He said his son and many other children aren't mature enough to understand what police are asking them and can't be legally required to behave as adults.

I happen to agree with Stoot here. Children should never be question about a crime without parental consent.

I am not in a position to know what happened hin this case. I can say that reacting to an obstruction arrest  by claiming a civil rights violation seems way out of proportion to the actual event. I can also say that to me,  Stoot’s story does not ring true. Also, asserting that a pastor should receive special treatment is simply wrong.

Something tells me that no charges will be filed in this case and that a fresh lawsuits will start rolling it’s ways through our legal system, after all Stoot missed his first shot at a five million dollar payday, I’m sure a second attempt looks appealing. It’s a shame really, all Stoot has to do was park his truck legally and nobody would have even noticed he was there. I guess that feeling of a “pastor on a mission” got the better of him.

Stoot is the pastor for Greater Trinity Missionary Baptist Church.

Comments (8)

Loading... Logging you in...
  • Logged in as
Wow there are some twist and turns here but as I understand most states have a law in which you are required to obey an officer when at a possible crime scene. I wouldn't be surprised if the charges are prosecuted now that there has been such a claim made. If he had just done as he was asked all would have been okay but he seemed to think he was above what most are expected to be.
Pastor Stoots was grandstanding. He was belligerent and expects to intimidate the police because he is black and a pastor - an apparent double protected class. What he really succeeded in doing is making himself look like an ass.
Police officers feel that they have a point to prove in Washington given all of the recent officer slayings and assaults. They don't want the people to lose faith or respect for them so they have to be tougher. The pastor may have been grandstanding, but so was the officer, as it's part of their job. After the fiasco on broadway crashing cars and running over WSP officers, I think they are the ones that look like asses. LOL
1 reply · active less than 1 minute ago
I love it we people make stuff up to justify the behavior of others.
It is such bullshit.
Tell it like it is's avatar

Tell it like it is · 765 weeks ago

If the issue was where the truck was parked, there should have been no problem after it was moved. It should not matter who moved the truck. Officers in Everett have a history of these kinds of actions. We have a right to ask for badge numbers and names, if we feel that we are mistreated. I feel that some officers need a yearly customer service and empathy refresh!

Ministers are on the same side as officers; they should be able to work collobratively with each other.
1 reply · active 754 weeks ago
Officers may deserve the respect of the public seeing how their job is to serve and protect and Pastor should receive respect because they SUPPOSE to be people of God. However, in this perticular situation, I truly believe Pastor Stoot was grand standing, the officer got excited not only because of the event at the apartments, but because the Everett police/Sheriffs department are extremely familar with Stoot. If you know him, then you would understand!

Not taking sides, just know mess when I see it!!
Nancy Goforth's avatar

Nancy Goforth · 752 weeks ago

Pastor Paul A Stoot is one of THEE finest people in our community, and I am so grateful and proud to be a member of The Greater Trinity Baptist Church In Everett! He and his family are so kind and talented...they are all truly a blessing to our community!
Nancy Lee Goforth
David Thompson's avatar

David Thompson · 308 weeks ago

It matters that he's clergy visiting a member in distress because the law grants special status to vehicles in emergency use by doctors and clergy in their role as caretakers of the community. The purpose of the law is precisely to avoid situations like this one, where a priest is going to administer last rites, or a doctor is going to deliver a baby, and cannot find parking in a lawful space. In these circumstances (but not when doctors or clergy are going about their personal business), it is legal for doctors or clergy to park in a no-parking area. If this law enforcement officer was supposedly enforcing a law designating the truck's parking space as "no parking" (I haven't read the complaint, just the summary above), then the officer was ignorant of the rest of the applicable law, and the officer was wrong. Lawmakers wanted the two laws to be read together -- remember, the law regarding doctor and clergy vehilces was meant to stop cops like this one from doing what this cop allegedly did. So it's not a lawsuit saying clergy can do whatever they want -- it's a lawsuit saying that a law enforcement officer should know the law and enforce it, not make up what he thinks the law is and arrest innocent people. Because the law only protects clergy/doctor vehicles, and only does so when in professional AND emergency use, it's not a "clergy can do what they want" law. It's a law that says that the emergency needs of the person a doctor or priest going to help are more important than a law about parking.

Also, it is NOT uncommon for a person who is taken into police custody to have money stolen from them while both they and their possessions are under police control. A certain percentage of officers take the job not to serve the community, but because they like wielding authority over others. Theft is only one kind of mischief such officers get up to, as I know from personal experience. And unfortunately, other officers and the law enforcement agencies shield such officers from any consequences, waving it aside as "a few bad apples.” The result is that most of these "bad apples" get to spend an entire career victimizing members of the public. Now THAT's a special status: to be a thief who can never be arrested, because your accomplice is the police department.

A civil rights lawsuit is no way to get wealthy, and even if this lawsuit went perfectly for the plaintiff, he could probably expect no more than about $30,000 in compensation. If this plaintiff has been well advised, as he probably has been (given that he has a civil rights group backing him), then he knows not only that the potential benefit to himself from a win is low, but that a win is unlikely, and that, on the other hand, he's certain to suffer loss of time and aggravation from the case, win or lose. He'll also probably suffer damage to his reputation, because a certain percentage of the community will call him a liar because he's going against a cop. I don't know the pastor, but unless getting $30,000 would be life-changing for him (it wouldn't be for all but the poorest of plaintiffs), he would be crazy to bring this suit for personal gain. If he's not crazy, the reason he is doing it is probably either to gain what he sees as justice, or to protect the civil rights of the community.

So it's sad to see this author doing his part to inflict reputational harm on this pastor by calling him a liar, while admitting that he has no idea what really happened. Since police forces do NOT police their own, lawsuits like this are one of the few ways for citizens to try to keep the bad officers under control.

Post a new comment

Comments by