Edmonds police arrest alleged shoplifter accused of pulling gun on Burlington Coat Factory employee

The female suspect, left, and the recovered BB gun. (Photos courtesy Edmonds Police Department)

Edmonds police arrested a 40-year-old Shoreline woman on armed robbery and drug charges after she allegedly pulled a gun on a Burlington Coat Factory employee Wednesday morning during a “shoplift gone bad,” Edmonds police spokesperson Sgt. Josh McClure said.

Officers responded to a 911 call just after 10 a.m. Wednesday at the Highway 99 store, where a male  employee said the woman — who was allegedly shoplifting at the store —  threatened him with a gun

The suspect was walking along Highway 99 when she was located by a student Edmonds Police officer and EPD trainer. She was taken safely into custody and the weapon — which police determined to be a BB gun — was recovered, McClure said.

 

 

12 Replies to “Edmonds police arrest alleged shoplifter accused of pulling gun on Burlington Coat Factory employee”

  1. I am curious why the hate crime suspect was not named, per policy, but posting a photograph of a suspect is?

    Ignored

    1. Sorry, hit send too soon. I’m wondering why posting a photograph of a suspect being arrested is not against policy?

      Ignored

      1. Not identifiable — we run those photos often to illustrate arrests but they are always from the back so you can’t see faces.

        Ignored

    2. I must be missing something about the incident at the Burlington Coat Factory. The story does not mention anything about a hate crime.

      Ignored

    1. Some just love to get that term, “Hate Crime” out there, one more time, even if there is no charge, no crime. It makes them feel all smug and superior.

      Ignored

      1. Remember, Heather was behind the ‘safe storage’ gun law that got the city (rightfully) sued. Knowing the law isn’t her strong point.

        Ignored

    2. This woman hasn’t been charged yet either. Or hadn’t been at the time of publishing. It says ‘suspect’ throughout the article.
      I think it is a legitimate question, that the media fell all over themselves to protect a racist old white guy, but the second there’s a black suspect, without hesitation it’s published.
      It’s simply an observation.

      Ignored

      1. I was curious about other photos we’ve run in the past of police apprehensions of suspects and so found the following links — just one in 2019 and one in 2015. (There may be others that didn’t come up in a search too.) From this cursory search, it appears there have been very few photos police have sent us of arrests of suspects.

        https://myedmondsnews.com/2019/09/suspected-car-thief-in-custody-after-olympic-view-drive-area-drone-and-k9-pursuit/

        https://myedmondsnews.com/2015/10/edmonds-police-assisted-by-lynnwood-k-9-arrest-burglary-suspect/

        Teresa

        Ignored

      2. It’s pretty standard to not identify a suspect until the decision to charge them has been made. If the arrest was in the public, then anyone has the right to record it. Reporters can publicly identify someone arrested but police typically don’t. Formal charges require identification and that is public record. Not all people arrested are publicly identified, especially if charges aren’t made. You feel as though her race is her identity and your question’s purpose seems to be that her racial identity should be protected until she is convicted. Let’s agree for different reasons. The justice and penal systems are obviously sexists, because there are so many men incarcerated disproportionately. Let’s change the whole world and make it so that a suspect’s gender is no longer characterized because of the systemic sexism of the criminal justice system. Men are 50% of the population but represent more than 90% of those incarcerated. When I heard of a women being arrested for this I breathed a sigh of relief that it weren’t a man due to our systemic oppression. #IamNotAStatistic

        Ignored

  2. Racism can be in the eye of the beholder.

    One case had a suspect interviewed, the other had someone arrested.

    One had the use of spray paint the other had the use of a gun.

    Maybe simply one there was a picture available and the other not.

    I don’t see where the media made an effort to protect the white guy, they do name him in the original article since they include a link to the papers deciding to not charge him with a hate crime. In no place does this article name the woman in question.

    What I saw was an armed person of color arrested without injury by the police, just like happens the VAST majority of the time. I think good job EPD.

    That all you seem to see in the two cases is the color of the suspects skin and that the difference has to prove something says something, not exactly sure what.

    Ignored

  3. Legal Definition of hate speech: Speech that is intended to insult, offend, or intimidate a person or group on the basis of national origin, ethnicity, color, religion, gender, gender identity, sexual orientation, or disability. So:

    “a racist old white guy” is hate speech

    Ignored

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *