When councilmen go bad...
There was a disturbing report tonight on the local news. Former democratic councilman Steve Satinsky, 59, of Fayetteville, NC shot a 23 year old marine in the head at point blank range leaving him in a coma and four months later, no charges have been filed.
Described as an all around good guy, Satinsky has more than this incident as evidence to the contrary. In 1995 his wallet and other valuables were stolen by a 19 year old girl in a downtown hotel room at two in the morning. No comment from his wife on that one.
And most recently, he sat in is car across from a young marine in front of a local bar, pulled a gun and with a single shot effectively ended the 23 year old's life.
An internet search on Satinsky portrays him as something of a saint - working for the Fayetteville Urban Ministry and leading the local chapter of B'nai B'rith International. Most recently, Satisky was appointed to manage the local Alcoholic Beverage Control Board, a position he resigned after shooting Marine Cpl. John Lake III AT CLOSE RANGE IN THE HEAD LEAVING HIM IN A COMA.
The few news articles about Satisky were more like hagiographies than actual reports. Instead of addressing the violent act he committed on October 16th, they spout sympathetic descriptions like "David Smith, a manager at It’z Sports Bar & Grill on Legend Avenue, said Satisky is a likeable guy. 'Everyone likes talking to him,' he said. 'He is just friendly.'”
Well ain't that quaint. Meanwhile, John Lake II wonders when there will be any justice for his comatose son.
And I'm wondering just why it sees like we need a young black stripper to get an indictment in this state.
Resources:
Sandspur: Satisky walks on water
Comment(s) »
» Leave a comment
- Your E-mail address is never displayed. If you enter it, it will only be visible to the blog author
- Since there already are comments to this post, your eventual comment might trigger a notification e-mail to the persons that commented before you.
- The line and paragraph breaks automatically
Comment by Verity— 2007/02/25 @ 06:27 PM — (Reply)
I see that you know all the facts of the case. It's encouraging to see people give such strong opinions stating things as facts without really knowing all the facts. How do you know that he was in the car during the shooting? Were you there? How do you know that it wasn't in self defense? Oh wait, you seem to already know everything about this case. I think that atleast the DA is showing judgment by not rushing to conclusions and gathering all the information, which is the way it should be.
Comment by Jump to conclusions— 2007/02/26 @ 12:40 PM — (Reply)
Fact is. We don't know squat... that's the problem. Care to enlighten us?
Comment by Cate— 2007/02/26 @ 05:51 PM — (Reply)
Well you proved my point, didn't you. We don't know squat which is why it is so interesting that you already seem to be able to make judgements about a case you that you know very little about. The article actually give very few facts, which is why the local newspaper tried to get the actual 911 tapes. I think that is the reason for waiting for law enforcement to sort through the facts and actually try not to make a circus out of this. Because as we all know a media circus benefits no one, re: Duke lacrosse accusations (which you refer to). What you fail to mention, which is mentioned in the articles is that there was an intial arguement. And actually, the articles really do not paint such a favorable light of Satisky. But I guess that it's much more fun to be indignant than to be right. And if you actually read the other articles then you would know that this case is likely to go to the grand jury. Oh wait, once again that would actually mean that rational people would have to examine the evidence. But once again, it's just so much more fun to be indignant, isn't it.
Comment by jump to conclusions— 2007/02/26 @ 07:07 PM — (Reply)
What conclusion do I make? Where is it? Is it tone that bothers you? Because, the only conclusion I've drawn here is that the media is virtually absent on this case. And when they do pen an article, it seems like an ad for the Steve Satinsky show rather than a crime report. And that justice, whatever that is, has been slow coming. A conclusion the Fayetteville Observer made in it's Dec. 8th edition - that's 2 and a half months ago.
So while you may not like the sarcasm, perhaps you should consider Lake's family - they've got a son in a coma and no answers.
Comment by Cate— 2007/02/27 @ 05:20 AM — (Reply)
It would appear to me that you have already determined that Satisky is guilty of crime without knowing all the evidence. It is clearly evident by your tone. Answers and justice are 2 different things. You ask for justice and then later ask for answers. Maybe the answer is that it was self defense? We just don't know. And as for making Satisky a saint, I don't see how relevant the issue with the 19 yo girl is to this case other than it is meant to embarrass him. I guess the newspapers write stories to sell papers and keep interest in stories to sell papers. I don't think anyone has denied the tragic event that happened to Mr. Lake. I also don't see how sorting through the facts to get a better understanding of the issue harms the Lake family. It serves both parties well when rational people/authorities examine the evidence throughly.
Comment by Jump— 2007/02/27 @ 01:15 PM — (Reply)
I can see you aptly chose your psuedonym, Jump to conclusions. What is evident by my tone is that I find it unbelievable that the Lake family has a comatose son and the papers and local pols are worried about the hard time Satisky is having waiting for a possible indictment.
If you can't see beyond your defensiveness how absolutely ludicrous that is, then your emotions have severely clouded your judgement.
Comment by Cate— 2007/02/27 @ 03:00 PM — (Reply)
It's not rushing to judgement to want to find out the facts, but one begs the answer to, why aren't there any facts available? And oh to refer back to the Duke LaCross case, that is because of an over zealous DA who thought that this would be a case to put his name on the map and keep his butt in the job. Please, he withheld evidence from everyone. The difference is, that there is an active investigation going on this case and yet Mr. Satisky is being hailed as this wonderful man. Never mind that he just happened to have a loaded gun with him in his car. Who is he and why is he carrying a loaded gun in the first place?
Comment by Verity— 2007/02/28 @ 02:11 PM — (Reply)
Facts huh, Im a good freind of John and the Lake family. The facts are that everyone was told to shut up, the case was sealed. The police didnt drug/alchohol test satisky, they let him go shortly after he got there. John had powder burns on his left hand and the side of his head. There are pictures, also pictures of his hands that might prove he did't strike satisky. the paramedics report that in his right hand he was still holding a bag of taco bell. He had just had surgury on his left shoulder and was about to go through physical therapy. The 911 call was not by him but the young woman who was in his car at 1130 pm next to a bar on a sunday night( it wasnt his wife). So far she has escape notice of the media. This is just the beggining, im glad his father is a detective. If your wondering, hes doing better now for a guy shot through the head( the multiple surguries where the doctors said he wouldnt make it be damned) for the families sake i wont mention more about his condition. He was shot in the side of his head and part of the bullet exited at an angle out the other.Also Mr. Satisky claimed to have been struck, but he hid out in his house for days ( enough to explain he had marks and bruises, but they healed now) and spoke through his lawyer. Hopefully IF they charge him, they move the case to a nuetral city.You can take me as being bias, but wait till the facts officially come out. However late it may be. Unfortanatly Mr. Satisky has friends in high places. Above is what i know,this though, is JUST a theory of mine, the police commisioner resigned shortly after this happened over paperwork issues. Now, who could tell the police department that the standard operating procedure was out the window for this shooting? Who could say, not to hold him like NORMAL shootings, not to do a drug or alchohol test? Thats takes someone in a high place to do. if you dont think these are standard, even in a self-defense case, ask a member of the law enforcement community.ANYWHERE. We hope the best for John, and for the consience of anyone who might be helping this former city councilman. Why seal the 911 tape and seal all of the facts in the case.
Comment by jrb— 2007/03/27 @ 10:47 AM — (Reply)
Also, Mr. Satisky did have a conceal carry permit. But was also a reserve sherrif, before he lost his badge when he called police because a prostitute stole it . Im getting at his training. IF it was self defense, he was more than aptly trained to deal with it. He knew what escalation of force was when he did it. Im sorry he felt threatened by johns bag of taco bell. I forgot those bags look so much like a gun, its white and bright colors fooling people very close (so close they leave powder burns on the side of your head when they shoot you) that the darkness of night, makes it look threatening. I wish they did a drug test on him, so that, if this what out of character, maybe there was a reason. Which he would still be liable for.
Comment by jrb— 2007/03/27 @ 11:06 AM — (Reply)
Thanks for the information. This is one Fayetteville native who feels great sympathy for the Lake family. I am certain that more people would be concerned if they had an idea what was going on. The lack of public outcry is in direct proportion to the lack of disclosure by local officials and the lack of reporting by the media.
Don't think that the locals don't care - they just don't know.
Comment by Cate— 2007/03/27 @ 12:28 PM — (Reply)
You have to understand what Mr Satisky's Reserve Deputy status really meant. Before there was a Concealed Carry law, if you knew the sheriff and you wanted to carry a weapon for whatever reason (local businessman for example) the Sheriff made you a Reserve Deputy. You got a badge and ID card and that was it. No Training, no nothing! If you got stopped you flashed your badge and nobody said anything. When the little lady (not his wife) stole his stuff at the Prince Charles he was removed from his Reserve Deputy status within a month. This whole mess stinks of "good ole boy" politics. Mr Satisky had a CCW permit, but he violated several parts of training he had to complete to get the permit. Was he at Coaches drinking? The law specifically states you cannot carry into a place where Alcohol is sold and consumed, and you cannot have a gun in your possession if you have any impairing substance in your system. You cannot use deadly force for violent language or for simple assault. Mr Satisky was in his car with another woman (not his wife) and committed an assault just by pointing his gun at the Marine who may have gotten in the back seat of his car by mistake. There was mention that Satisky's car did look similar to the cab the marine had just exited. I believe the marine was simply trying to react to what he considered a deadly threat. The marine still had a Taco Bell bag in his hand as he lay on the ground. I teach Concealed Carry and I think Satisky needs to burn. In 2005 a girl was sentenced to 10 years for shooting a man who was fighting with her husband at a bar. She had a CCH permit, but the judge made a specific note at sentencing that she violated the CCH statutes in two instances. She had the gun where she shouldn't have and she was consuming alcohol. How is Mr Satisky any different?
Comment by Glockmutt— 2007/05/03 @ 01:03 AM — (Reply)
At least Satinsky was finally indicted - that's a step in the right direction.
Comment by Cate— 2007/05/03 @ 07:09 AM — (Reply)
Forgot to add that the girl did kill the man that was fighting with her husband. They wouldn't dare put me on that jury. I was a deputy here for 14 yrs.
Comment by Glockmutt— 2007/05/03 @ 08:08 AM — (Reply)
As a friend of Johns I can say unfortunately all we do know is it must of been real hard for him to defend himself by other means against a 22 year old man in a sling that had just had shoulder surgery a couple of days prior. oh yeah and since the hooker he was with is missing and john cant speak for himself no one may ever know except a forensic scientist who will look at the entrance wounds and will say that he obviously tried to execute him. A one armed marine in a army town.Makes you wonder if he would shoot every drunk paratrooper that acted like a jerk outside a bar instead of just calling the police.... Whether he hangs or not it isn't the first time he has pulled the self defense card so hopefully someone is smart enough to catch it.
Comment by just a friend— 2007/06/20 @ 09:08 PM — (Reply)
has any news come out on this recently? I dont understand how this has not come to trial yet?
Comment by justwondering— 2007/11/29 @ 01:05 PM — (Reply)
As A friend of John's I thank those in support of any attemt to be open mided about this whole situation and offering any information. To answer you question, no from what I understand it is just in Limbo, as you can seen on the news everyday some action is and or has be taken in such cases. I guess being a bussiness man and politically connected has its advantages against a legal system that is supposed to serve justly and quickly. The missing link is the un named women who was there when this situation occured. Welcome to the Great State of NC and the fine the fine City of fayettville. JRB You are the man
Comment by Hondo— 2007/12/19 @ 01:20 PM — (Reply)
It is very simple to get rid of him: just do not vote for him anymore and you could even create a little pressure by speaking to the local press.
Comment by Merchant Reviews— 2008/05/30 @ 03:41 AM — (Reply)
I am a Fayetteville native and worked the bar scene before getting myself together. I knew Steve all too well. Yes, a pleasant fellow. However, his intelligent and gorgeous wife Virginia stayed at their Devane St. home while he was out womanizing. He could always be found at Sharkey's, Secrets, Victoria's, and all the other topless dives. He would take these strippers out to It'z, Coaches, and other places and buy them drinks -- clearly hoping to lure them to a hotel. While this may have been self-defense, he is a disgusting, dishonest, two-faced loser. And a pervert to boot.
Comment by native— 2008/10/11 @ 12:42 PM — (Reply)
Holy Cow people. What any person thinks about Satisky or Lake personally is purely personal and has nothing to do with what actually happened or with the dissemination of information through the media. Here are some highly relevant things to consider that no one has mentioned. First, police investigations do not work like they do on CSI. There is no way to find out what happened except to get witness statements. Lake can't talk, Satisky's attorney should not allow him to talk, and it sounds like the woman has disappeared. None of those things are the fault of the media or the police. All we have then is the 911 call.
What we know about the 911 call - it started before Lake was shot. So, the woman was not calling to report that Lake was the victim of a crime, she was calling to report Lake as a person commiting a crime. If Lake was trained in hand to hand combat by the military, his hand or hands were legally deadly weapons - the same as a gun. It seems likely that a Marine Corporal was so trained. At the moment Lake got into someone else's car, while the driver was in the driver seat, and instructed the driver to take him somewhere (which is what the 911 call apparently indicates), and did so while armed with a deadly weapon (his hands), he committed a carjacking. At the very least he was committing criminal trespass. In either case, Satisky was a crime victim and the law gave him the right to brandish a gun to protect himself and/or his property. As far as we know, there is not evidence that Satisky was ever in the bar with his gun or that he was intoxicated. Unless Satisky exhibited some sign of intoxication, it would be illegal for the police to force him to submit to a tox screen or breath test. And no, the law does not count sitting in a parked car outside a bar, or even shooting someone, as evidence of intoxication.
So, when Satisky is pointing a gun at Lake and demanding him to get out of the car, ALL the evidence suggests he is perfectly within his rights to do so.
None of us knows what happened next, and it doesn't appear that there will ever be any way to know. Even if Cpl. Lake regains consciousness and testifies, he has tremendous motive to lie (for a tort lawsuit against Satisky). Maybe Satisky gunned Lake down. Maybe Satisky's finger slipped on the trigger when Lake hit him. Either are consistent with powder burns on Lake. It would be irresposible for the media to speculate or to make up evidence that just isn't there. However, Satisky's character and history is relevant and nesworthy and should be reported. It appears that Satisky is an older, overweight, white, Jewish businessman with no history of violence, depression, anger or misanthropism. All of those things rule out a ton of possible common motives for shooting someone like Cpl. Lake. (and therefore relevant). The more other motives are ruled out, the more likely self-defense becomes.
The important points are these: life and what happens it it are complicated. We all might want to consider that before we rush to judge or blame. In this case, there are plenty of possible good reasons that the media, the police, Satisky and Lake all did what they did. Not a single one of them had to have a bad motive, so why start imagining bad motives? If anything, it seems clear that none of this would have happened if Cpl. Lake had not been drunk. Drinking makes you stupid. Being stupid really can be dangerous. Nothing you get from drinking can possibly be worth the tradgedy that has now befallen Cpl. Lake and his family.
Comment by Unbiased Attorney— 2009/04/15 @ 08:24 AM — (Reply)
Comment by Ed— 2008/10/11 @ 01:55 PM — (Reply)
Comment by sex movies— 2009/09/15 @ 05:07 AM — (Reply)
In precedenza, ho pensato diversamente, grazie per le informazioni.
Comment by drug test saliva swab faq— 2009/09/25 @ 02:38 PM — (Reply)