Intimidation Involves a Lot of Wasted Public Resources: Sarah Knysz

[XLFD]

Today, Sarah Knysz, wife of alleged MSP Trooper shooter Eric Knysz, was at the Mason County Courthouse for a final conference before trial.  The 7 month pregnant 20-year-old has been charged with accessory to murder after the fact and unlawfully driving away a motor vehicle in connection to the Sept. 9, 2013 fatal shooting of MSP Trooper Paul Butterfield. 

Her husband, also housed at the Mason County Jail, has been charged in Mason County with murder of a police officer, and a host of other charges noted in this article.

 

At 3:30 PM, she was taken to the courthouse on East Ludington Avenue, and her hearing was big news, at least four TV stations at least 70 miles away came to view the proceedings, WZZM, WOOD, FOX 17, and the Upnorth Live mobile.  What struck me as odd, however, was the amount of police presence at the courthouse for this afternoon event.  Looking into the courtroom, the court was lined with somber uniformed officers behind Sarah Knysz's back.  Outside, the police presence was remarkable.  Even during the Baby Kate trial, I never saw this many police vehicles.  In the back parking lot of the court there were 5 vehicles (numbered and indicated below with arrows) from city, county, and state law enforcers. 

A Mason County Sheriffs' car, which was used to bring Mrs. Knysz to and from court, was parked within feet of the building across the inner sidewalk, effectively blocking the courthouses handicapped entrance and exit.   Fortunately, no bomb threats or fire alarms were active during the 75 minute proceeding.

 

Finally, a look to the western parking lot (the news dogs and others were entrenched in the east) finds three more police vehicles.  You will note then, that the nine police vehicles in the three pictures were evenly distributed.  That is three vehicles each from the state police, the county sheriff, and the Ludington police.  I even seen Chief Barnett of Ludington drive off in uniform, in a personally -owned vehicle.  So minimally there were ten law enforcement officers present at the final conference-- even though none of them appear to have been needed there to testify from the state police or LPD. 

Was the large presence really needed there, with the MSP vehicles having to travel at least the better part of an hour to get to the courthouse, and then go back later?  Why were at least three LPD active units at the courthouse for this, along with Chief Barnett, when they were not really involved at all?  I'm noting about a thousand dollars of salaries and transportation costs from these two agencies being there when they are on the clock and should have better things to do. 

For Sarah Knysz effectively was pressured into taking a plea deal, calling for her to serve 12 to 24 months on accessory after the fact and to serve 0-11 months for unlawful driving away of an automobile.  Furthermore, the deal stated her Manistee County charges would be dropped, and mandate that she would testify against her husband and any other defendants in the case, which may entail her mother-in-law, who is alleged to have also aided her son in trying to elude authorities. 

According to the City of Ludington Daily News:  She told the court the trooper came up to the truck she and Eric were in (Eric was driving) and Butterfield was in mid-sentence asking the couple how it was going when she said she heard a shot. She said Eric drove off and when she looked back, she saw the trooper lying in the road.

She said Eric brought the guns to Ludington that day so he could sell them. She said he sold some, but not all of them and there were still some in the truck behind the seat, plus a handgun in front when they were pulled over. Knysz said she didn't know why they were pulled over.

She told judge Richard I. Cooper that Eric had threatened to kill her in the past. She said she didn't run because she was afraid of him and was seven months pregnant.

The problem I find here is that she is likely to spend a couple of years in jail for doing nothing other than happening to be in the same car with her husband when he committed a serious crime.  If we take what she says as the truth, and it does seem plausible enough and the prosecution is taking it as such, the State is creating another victim here.  Is it a crime now for a woman being afraid for herself and her baby to obey some psychopath who has just shot a state trooper, who has threatened her in the past, when she can still smell the gun smoke, and is in shock from what she has just witnessed?

 

The intimidation worked.  Because Sarah Knysz was still with her husband a couple hours after the event, whether she was willing or not, seems to not matter to the local justice system as to her guilt on two counts which her sworn testimony debunks. 

 

When Sarah was led out of the courthouse, she had two deputies escort her to the Sheriff's Office's SUV that was blocking the handicapped entrance/exit.  Two.   Obviously, the Ludington and Michigan State Police were there because they figured that Sarah Knysz could easily be intimidated by men with guns, and be led innocently into a situation that is dangerous to her well-being.  

[FLudington]

Corruption and terror, the main tools of the officers.

[Johnny]

Tommy, can you explain how this was a "waste" of thousands of dollars?  I don't believe MSP has to drive over an hour from their hart post and couldn't city and county officers be there on their own time to represent one of their own who were killed?

FLudington, how is this corruption and terror by the officers??? Pretty bold and ballsy statement to make without and facts or any knowledge of the law.  Isn't it up to the judge to determine if what she did is a crime? Not the officers?  Wasn't it Sarah s duty to tell the trooper her husband had a gun? Or get out of the car?

[XLFD]

E Murph,

The vehicles of each respective department left after the Knysz hearing was over, and when I regularly pass by and through the courthouse area, I can't remember any other time (except during the Baby Kate trial) I have seen three vehicles from any police agency there at the same time, and it is very rare to see three in the parking lots total. 

[XLFD]

E Murph,

From your previous postings I am sadly aware of the misuse of all those taxpayer dollars involved in educating you in the public school system.  When someone uses the phrase "the better half of (an hour)", they mean more than half of.  So I am making no claim that it takes more than an hour to get from here to the MSP Hart post, just more than a half hour, which can be disputable.  MapQuest says it will take 27-32 minutes on the road between the courthouse and the MSP Hart post. 

Wherefore I have no problem with these folks coming up on their own to view the proceedings as an interested member of the public, I do have big problems with them coming up on "company time" in "company vehicles" using "company gas" in "company uniforms" to sit in a court room as an observer.  That's when it becomes a waste of public resources, and reasonably viewed as a tactic of intimidation.

[XLFD]

Security-wise, I guess I just have a hard time believing that a petite young woman coming directly from the jail with her own guard or two and nearly nine months pregnant is going to pose much of a threat herself.  Particularly when one would think a bunch of city, county and state police on their own time would also be in the audience.  But uniformed officers driving their official cars and some definitely on the clock were the primary observers.

[XLFD]

E Murph said in reply to FLudington:  "Wasn't it Sarah s duty to tell the trooper her husband had a gun? Or get out of the car?"

 

As someone who proclaims themselves as pro law enforcement (if not a member of the profession herself/himself), this is a rather silly notion you have of civic duties.  If we believe her sworn testimony, even if she told the trooper he had a gun, it would have been too late to warn him before he was shot.  If, however, she was able to yell this out before he got to the window, then it would have only made her husband more likely to use the gun on the trooper at that time, and put her own life in danger. 

A duty to get out of the car?  Are you serious?  She has a duty to her unborn child and herself to try to preserve their life, and getting out of the car would likely have given her husband a good reason to believe he had been betrayed, and so (knowing the guy) he would be quite likely to shoot her so as to leave no witnesses.

[Willy]

I agree with X. The officers not involved with the case should have attended on their own time not on the tax payers dime and not in official vehicles. E. Murph stop being so condescending. Unless someone wants to be called by their slang  name, please refrain from doing so. Unless of course you want others to treat you the same way.

[AQUAMAN]

I thought Sarah was only 19 or 20 years of age, really, just a baby in real life experiences yet. So, how can anyone assume what she felt, did, or how she reacted without being there, or at least, putting themselves in her traumatic shoes, and in her pregnant condition? Anyhow, blood in the water attracts sharks, and so it was.

[XLFD]

E Murph,

If anyone deserves accessory charges from the events we've heard from the police and from Sarah Knysz, it's his mom.  

I also believe if I was with someone who said they were going to shoot the cop that just pulled us over, and I believed they would, I would not run, I would try to prevent him from doing so.  Wouldn't you, E Murph?  I thought you liked police and, in your limited view thought I hated them?

Running away at that point may get me shot from either party, and is beyond foolish.  From what was used in her arraignment, Sarah did nothing other than assure her own (and her baby's) survival.  Please, convince me otherwise.

[Johnny]

Right, I would run out of the car yelling to the cop that the crazy has a gun.  That is what I meant by running away to prevent it.  But I agree, I hope his mom goes down to because she seems extremely guilty as well.

[XLFD]

That scenario would get both you and the cop killed most of the time, E Murph.  Consider that your crazy buddy has his gun ready to shoot the cop, and so he will be 'forced' to get some nice point blank shots at the trooper, before they know what hits him, and then you would go down under a hail of bullets for being such a narc.  The place where the traffic stop happened didn't have a lot of cover, and your seven-month pregnant self would be easy game.  I hate to say this, but your tactic is pretty dumb.

Doing nothing will likely end up with you surviving the encounter, but leave behind a dead trooper, as it did here.  Struggling to get the gun from him, then immediately warning the trooper of the danger would be the smart course and lead to a happier result in most situations, where both you and the trooper survive.  By your answer, I bet you are a LEO who believes in strict gun control for Americans.

[AQUAMAN]

Here we go again with "Murphy's Law" in the mix. Haven't heard from him since the last cop-type thread, guess this is what get's his adrenaline going?  I am NOT, in any shape, way, or form, making serious criminal exemption excuses for Sarah because of her age in this entire caper. You have too much anger and vengeance in your heart now to make a cogent observation, imho. She is, and has, "pleaded guilty", so, she assumes responsibility for her immaturity and lack of quick responses. So, "Murph the Surf", please don't put any inuendo/twisted slant into my prior post, just cause you like to push and bully some members here for kicks pal! I very much doubt Eric told or led her to believe anything, except he was a scared punk, and desperate. Do you actually think with all your Police training that he would not shoot her, if she dared peep a warning? Really? Then methinks you need to go back to the academy and re-learn some newer police tactics/psychology. The "officers in question, making looks to kill", are not principled nor disciplined public servants. They serve to make a statement: that of gestapo-type mentalities, that of, "show of force". Does that really serve a positive purpose, or just that of more bullying, and that of ignorance? If this "judge Coop" even gave the least LPD/MCSD/MSP warnings about it in the court, then what more can any of us outsiders think? Thinking is not reacting to situations beyond and unknown by any of us, it's relating to facts, and testimony, that's it. If you can't keep your emotions intact on or off duty LEO's, then please, retire. It's been a very trying and exasperating experience for ALL MASON COUNTY RESIDENTS, not just LEO's! We are ALL ASHAMED, period!