Full Forecaste

Past Month's Most Commented Stories

Home > Area News

Arrest made in connection with Castle Rock body; victim identified

Monday, June 23, 2008 11:30 PM PDT

By Leslie Slape

Font Size:
 
 

Cowlitz County Sheriff’s Office detectives, who have been working with Pierce County detectives, arrested a man Monday afternoon in Pierce County in connection to the homicide case where a body was found on Powell Road near Castle Rock last Tuesday.

They also identified the victim, Jerry M. Shirk, 19, of Pierce County.

The suspect, whose name has not been released yet, was booked in the Pierce County Jail on suspicion of murder.

Meanwhile, the human remains found last week near Dupont Road, Kalama, are those of an adult male, but his identity remains unknown, the Cowlitz County Sheriff’s Office announced Monday.

Chief Criminal Deputy Charlie Rosenzweig said detectives are checking dental records as they try to establish the man’s identity.

He said detectives and Search and Rescue volunteers went back to the area Saturday for a final search. They “found additional evidence we believe is related to the case,” he said.

The cause and manner of death still is undetermined, but “it clearly is a very suspicious death,” he said.

Detectives continue to work closely with County Coroner Tim Davidson, anthropologists and other medical professionals on the case.

Authorities released the 911 tape related to this case on Thursday.

Click here to download the 911 recording.

No connection

Both bodies were found June 17, but Rosenzweig said there is no evidence of a connection between the two deaths. He said there is also no known connection with any local cases. Detectives believe there’s a strong possibility the men may have died elsewhere.

Detectives have received numerous phone tips on both investigations, Rosenzweig said.

Anyone with information on either case is encouraged to call the sheriff’s office at 577-3092 or Crime Stoppers at 577-1206. Calls to Crime Stoppers may be anonymous, and tipsters could receive up to $1,000 reward.

Previous

Gondolapete wrote on Jun 23, 2008 7:25 PM:

" This surprises me. According to most of the experts regarding the cops around here, the police are just a bunch of bumbling doofs who dont do anything to stop crime. "

just a mom wrote on Jun 23, 2008 7:33 PM:

" Yes! I hope they caught the right guy. Sad that a young life was cut so short. "

concerned citizen wrote on Jun 23, 2008 9:43 PM:

" Good police work! "

Zucchini wrote on Jun 23, 2008 10:27 PM:

" If you just can't wait, and enjoy jumping to conclusions that may or may not lead to falsely accusing a man of a murder he didn't commit... one could go to the Pierce County Jail Roster and search for those that have been recently incarcerated for murder. "

LVALUMNI wrote on Jun 24, 2008 9:07 AM:

" Zucchini: You stated (Quote) "enjoy jumping to conclusions that may or may not lead to falsely accusing a man of a murder he didn't commit..." Does the term "probable cause" have ANY meaning for you? The police don't make arrests "just because." They have to have probable cause. This means they have a BASIS upon which they have relied to "accuse" and arrest the person to answer to the charge of murder. This does not mean he has yet been convicted. The guy arrested is obviously a suspect for a REASON. Now it is the prosecutor's job to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that he committed the crime, or conversley, the defense attorney's job to establish his or her client's innocence. Your comment indicates that you have already acquitted the person. That is the job of a jury after carefully weighing all evidence against him. "

mikadax wrote on Jun 24, 2008 10:29 AM:

" Please tell me our county isn't beoming a dumping ground for murdered folks. "

Hauskapoika wrote on Jun 24, 2008 11:00 AM:

" LVALUMNI makes some very good, and accurate points - except for one thing: There is a common misnomer that claims that the prosecutor must prove beyond a reasonable doubt - the prosecutor does not judge the suspect, the jury does. Second, there is NO requirement that says a member of the jury must make a decision BEYOND a reasonable doubt. A juror need only make a decision based on ABSENCE of reasonable doubt - in other words, the juror is certain, or sure, their decision is correct; they do not have to go BEYOND that. "

LVALUMNI wrote on Jun 24, 2008 1:23 PM:

" Hauskapoika, are you sure you aren't confusing this with the civil standard? The reason I ask this question is that I spent 16 years of my life preparing proposed jury instructions for criminal AND civil cases in Cowlitz County. The standard in Washington State Criminal cases is now and has always been "beyond a resonable doubt." In civil cases, the standard is lower, based upon a "preponderance of the evidence." In other words, the evidence merely has to indicate more likely than not. Criminal cases are tried at a harsher standard. My comment in no way implied that the Prosecutor was to "judge" the defendant. It is the Prosecutor's role to meet the burden of proof... (beyond a reasonable doubt) in order to gain the conviction by the jury. Whether or not the defendant is guilty is up to the jury to decide based upon the evidence "beyond a reasonable doubt."

RCW 10.25.020 states "RCW 10.58.020
Presumption of innocence Conviction of lowest degree, when.

Every person charged with the commission of a crime shall be presumed innocent until the contrary is proved by competent evidence beyond a reasonable doubt; and when an offense has been proved against him, and there exists a reasonable doubt as to which of two or more degrees he is guilty, he shall be convicted only of the lowest." "

LVALUMNI wrote on Jun 24, 2008 2:26 PM:

" mikadax, unfortunately, that seems to be the case. Cowlitz County is gaining a great deal of notoriety in the larger metro areas because we can't even turn on our news radio or TV stations without hearing or seeing some kind of report about Cowlitz County. Between the infant homocides, the murder trial a few weeks ago and now the two bodies discovered, you guys have the spotlight. "

Zucchini wrote on Jun 24, 2008 5:12 PM:

" Allow me to clarify to avoid the "jumping to conclusions" that seem to have already occured. Say our suspect (let's name him "BOB") has been arrested and booked for any number of reasons (one of which may be murder), then we do this Pierce County incarceration search and find a "FRANK" that has been booked on murder charges. Granted, Frank likely committed murder (somewhere), but who is to say that he killed the young man we are referring to here? Wouldn't that constitute "accusing somebody of a murder they didn't commit"? Things aren't always as they seem... huh? "

IMHO wrote on Jun 24, 2008 5:17 PM:

" Gondolapete -- which "experts" are you talking about? I've never heard an "expert" speak ill of local police. Please cite your sources. "

LVALUMNI wrote on Jun 25, 2008 8:23 AM:

" I agree, Zucchini. Innocent BEFORE proven guilty. But in order to file charges, the prosecutor must "accuse" whoever it is that has been arrested on the murder indictment. I also think that running a search for incarcerated defendants in Pierce County Jail is inviting those conclusions you refer to. My comments were not specific to any and everyone in Pierce County who has been arrested. My comments were generalized as to the defendant in the case at issue. At some point, we WILL know who was arrested in connection with this murder, and under the law, the guy is STILL innocent until proven guilty (or at least that is what our Constitution says...) "

Hauskapoika wrote on Jun 25, 2008 12:10 PM:

" No confusion and no doubts. I have been a juror, and I made my decision based on the facts in the cases. Reasonable doubt only occurs if you are not sure of the facts and you are not ready to vote to acquit or convict. Once you are certain of the facts, and you have made up your mind as to which way you will vote, this is ABSENCE OF DOUBT - not "beyond reasonable doubt." Also, as I experienced, the word "reasonable" is subject to interpretation as to what is "reasonable" in jury deliberations.
This is just another reason why
"absence of doubt" is more suitable and accurate. Further, when you have no doubt, how can you go BEYOND that? "

chuck wrote on Jun 26, 2008 4:37 AM:

" for all of the above... they have the right guy who may plead guilty tied in with a little "life hurts" and "my dad..." and "I'm insane" a little later on. Just watch. He'll get off light too. Just like Sunny, the guy who thought Paul Michael Nolan was a bag of trash when he hit him. Just a thought!!! "

Top Jobs
More Top Jobs
Top Garage Sales
More Top Garage Sales
Top Rentals
More Top Rentals