Judge hears motion in ATF agent's trial

Judge hears motion in ATF agent's trial

There are 733 comments on the Virgin Islands Daily News story from Apr 4, 2009, titled Judge hears motion in ATF agent's trial. In it, Virgin Islands Daily News reports that:

U.S. District Court Judge Curtis Gomez is considering a motion filed on behalf of a Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives agent William Clarke to have his murder trial moved from V.I. Superior Court to federal court.

Join the discussion below, or Read more at Virgin Islands Daily News.

First Prev
of 37
Next Last
Vicky Combs

Branson, MO

#1 Apr 17, 2009
I do not understand why a person has the right to shoot a person in cold blood and because they are a agent (ATF) this gives them special treatment. My cousin was not interfering in this man's life but he interfered in Marcus' life and has taken him from his daughter and his family. Why did this man not just drive off. He and Ms Duncan were both in the car and as a so called peace keeper you do what you have to to control the situation. The only one with a gun or a weapon was the man that shot and killed Marcus in cold blood. I also wonder why Ms Duncan did not try to stop him or ask him to drive off if she felt things were out of hand. I do not feel that she was ever afraid of Marcus. He would never have harmed her. She knew how he was. She should never have let this gone this far. I don't blame her but I expect her to make this right with Marcus and make sure this man pays for what he has done.
Priscilla Winegar Texas

Borger, TX

#2 Apr 27, 2009
I've just read a plea from a law enforcement officer on another website for money for the defense of ATF agent Clark - he stated that Mr. Clark has already spent $15,000 of his own money for his lawyers. Somehow, I can't feel sorry for Clark - at least he's alive. Unarmed Marcus Sukow (father to a 16 year old daughter and a son himself) would be alive today if he were not for Mr. Clark going too far in a situation that surely could have been handled differently... as was stated in the other comment the man was in a car - he could have driven away - not shot Marcus five times. This man has pay for what he's done. He can't get away with this.
Midsoutherner

Potomac, MD

#3 Jul 29, 2009
I'm sorry to both of you for your loss. It's terrible that Mr. Sukow had to lose his life but his actions are the cause. You both siad Mr. Sukow was unarmed but in reality he had a long flashlight. If you don't think a flashlight that size is a weapon then try letting someone whack you on the side of the head with it. Mr. Sukow and Ms. Duncan both knew Agent Clarke was a law enforcement officer. If Mr. Sukow had the opportunity to use that flashlight against Agent Clarke, then he could have easily taken Agent Clarke's firearm and used it against him and/or Ms. Duncan. Could Agent Clarke have driven away? Maybe or maybe not. We weren't there so there is no way of knowing. One thing I'm sure of is that Agent Clarke had no intention of killing anyone that day and Mr. Sukow's actions were the cause of everything.
crewse

Fordland, MO

#4 Jul 29, 2009
To the comment above you said (we werent there) so how do you know clarke had no intention of killing anyone that day? I knew marc for the better part of 10 years! I knew what kind of man he was and what he was like. No I wasnt there either but, I know that a flashlight no matter how long it was is no reason to have shot and killed my best friend!!!
Midsoutherner

Potomac, MD

#5 Aug 3, 2009
Again, I'm very sorry your friend had to lose his life. It only seems the most reasonable to me that a federal law enforcement officer with an established career had no intention of murdering a man in cold blood. It's plain that Mr. Sukow was drinking and was very angry due to the argument he had with his girlfriend. Why would he be carrying a large flashlight in the middle of the day except to exhibit it as a weapon.

Clarke had no idea what his intentions were with that weapon. Sukow knew Clarke was a law enforcement officer (they were neighbors) and Clarke would have expected the worst, that Sukow was going to use that weapon against him to incapacitate him and then take Clarke's gun.

Sukow left Clarke with no choice. If Sukow had kept his distance and acted rationally he would not have been shot.
sludgeman

Shawnee, OK

#6 Sep 10, 2009
So just because Marcus lived above a guy, or is a neighbor, he's supposed to know he's in law enforcement?? Thats BS.
The scumbag ATF jerkoff could have drove away, shot in the air, whatever - there are many options other than shooting a man with a flashlight five times. Yes, in close range a long flashlight could be a weapon, just ask the SOS.
Clark now should get what he has coming. He murdered a decent person who didnt need to die.
Midsoutherner wrote:
Again, I'm very sorry your friend had to lose his life. It only seems the most reasonable to me that a federal law enforcement officer with an established career had no intention of murdering a man in cold blood. It's plain that Mr. Sukow was drinking and was very angry due to the argument he had with his girlfriend. Why would he be carrying a large flashlight in the middle of the day except to exhibit it as a weapon.
Clarke had no idea what his intentions were with that weapon. Sukow knew Clarke was a law enforcement officer (they were neighbors) and Clarke would have expected the worst, that Sukow was going to use that weapon against him to incapacitate him and then take Clarke's gun.
Sukow left Clarke with no choice. If Sukow had kept his distance and acted rationally he would not have been shot.
sludgeman

Shawnee, OK

#7 Sep 10, 2009
I re-read your post and it made me even more angry - so you think "Sukow knew Clarke was a law enforcement officer (they were neighbors)" and "Clarke would have expected the worst, that Sukow was going to use that weapon against him to incapacitate him and then take Clarke's gun."
You state "Sukow left Clarke with no choice. If Sukow had kept his distance and acted rationally he would not have been shot."
Wow - you really are an A Hole. I hope you never argue with someone and "act irrationaly". Someone might think you want to "try to take their gun". What right does that give anyone to take someone elses life??
You need to watch your back, dude...
Midsoutherner wrote:
Again, I'm very sorry your friend had to lose his life. It only seems the most reasonable to me that a federal law enforcement officer with an established career had no intention of murdering a man in cold blood. It's plain that Mr. Sukow was drinking and was very angry due to the argument he had with his girlfriend. Why would he be carrying a large flashlight in the middle of the day except to exhibit it as a weapon.
Clarke had no idea what his intentions were with that weapon. Sukow knew Clarke was a law enforcement officer (they were neighbors) and Clarke would have expected the worst, that Sukow was going to use that weapon against him to incapacitate him and then take Clarke's gun.
Sukow left Clarke with no choice. If Sukow had kept his distance and acted rationally he would not have been shot.
Midsoutherner

Potomac, MD

#8 Sep 11, 2009
Marcus definitely knew Clarke was in law enforcement. That's a fact that even the girlfriend admitted.

Clarke could not have driven off because Marcus was standing in the way. Clarke wouldn't ever have shot in the air. You seem to have watched too many cowboy movies on television. There probably were a number of things Clarke could have done but he had a split second to react to Marcus approaching him with a deadly weapon and he made a decision to protect himself and the girlfriend. I still stand by my opinion that Sukow was responsible for what happend by being drunk, enraged, and threatening with a deadly weapon.
Midsoutherner

Potomac, MD

#9 Sep 11, 2009
Well, Sludgeman, If I ever become drunk, irate, and start brandinshing a deadly weapon in a threatening manner, and a person pulls a gun and shoots me after repeatedly telling me to go away and I continue to threaten them with that deadly weapon, then I only have myself to blame for that person protecting themself.

Tell me why I need to watch my back, dude?
Priscilla

Columbus, MS

#10 Sep 11, 2009
So Marc had a flashlight...why did Clark have to shoot him FIVE times. Wouldn't one shot to a knee have done it!
Midsoutherner

Potomac, MD

#11 Sep 14, 2009
Law enforcement officers aren't trained to shoot knees, hands, or any other place besides center mass. When confronted with a deadly force incident it is hoped the officer will allow their training to take over because any other way can/will get the officer killed.

Because I'm backing the agent on this incident does not mean I am not sad for Mr. Sukow's family and friends. I'm very sorry that Mr. Sukow's actions had to take it to this level. Charging the agent with Murder, meaning he had the premeditated intention of taking Sukow's life, is ludicrous.
Wayne Groover

Waterford, MI

#12 Sep 15, 2009
Wow.....It is amazing how people who have no concept of the law or deadly force will get on a forum and make a**es of themselves. I am now dumber for reading this forum.

"Why didn't he shoot him in the knee?" Wow.....
whistler

Fredonia, NY

#13 Jan 29, 2010
Priscilla wrote:
So Marc had a flashlight...why did Clark have to shoot him FIVE times. Wouldn't one shot to a knee have done it!
This was not JUST a flashlight. It was one of those BIG jobs you see some law folks carry. I think they're now illegal for the cops in some cities. Big and HEAVY.Folks have been killed by those and smaller.
Heck, you can make a weapon from a toothpick if you were so inclined. You can't blame a cop for protecting himself and another citizen.
Island Expatriot

Fort Lauderdale, FL

#14 Jan 31, 2010
Midsoutherner, I see you've been arguing with some idiots. Sludgman you don't seem to have the requisite sense to own and operate a computer. Mommy must have turned it on for you. I will not speak bad of the dead, but Sukalaw brought about his own demise. I am amazed at how stupid some of these comments are "shoot him in the knee" "shoot in the air" "so what if he had a flashlight"!? Its tough to know where to start. I'll just say this, to try and correct you imbeciles would be like wrestling a pig in mud: you should do it because YOU get muddy and the pig[s] have fun. Suffice it to say: if you 'stay tuned' you'll see how far off base you are.
Island Expatriot

Fort Lauderdale, FL

#15 Jan 31, 2010
"shouldn't" wrestle the pig, that is
Midsoutherner

Culpeper, VA

#16 Jan 31, 2010
Island Expatriot, any idea as to the status of the case?
anthony f

Webster, NY

#17 Feb 19, 2010
I have known Will Clark for a number of years. He is a person that is caring and compassionate and has always helped others when in need. He is guilty only of helping someone that isn't smart enough to know that her boyfriend is a danger to her and anyone that might try to help her. If her boyfriend wasn't a danger than why did she ask Will for assistance?

Island Expatriot

Boca Raton, FL

#18 Mar 19, 2010
Midsoutherner, I don't know anything current, but last I heard Will was still having to defend against these BS charges. Anthony F, I concur. Will is a very decent, gentle man. This whole thing stinks.
whistler

Fredonia, NY

#19 Mar 19, 2010
Count me in, too. Will is the best there is. He wouldn't pass by an injured dog lying in the road without stopping to help it. It's who he is. I'm certain that any action that could have been avoided would have been - if it were even remotely possible. He is highly skilled in what he does and would not have jeopardized his career and future without necessity, i.e., saving his own life and that of his "passenger".
LEO

Paterson, NJ

#20 Mar 25, 2010
Sukow would be alive today if he wasn't an abuser of women.

Tell me when this thread is updated:

Subscribe Now Add to my Tracker
First Prev
of 37
Next Last

Add your comments below

Characters left: 4000

Please note by submitting this form you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite. Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.

ATF Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
News Outlaws Motorcycle Gang Indicted: 27 members of... (Jun '10) 11 hr Little girl 60
News The Latest: Official: Refrigerator potential so... 11 hr Go Blue Forever 1
News Mannequin challenge video leads to arrests 11 hr Go Blue Forever 1
News Officers cleared - Nov 28 no one 3
News Vagos motorcycle club targeted in Southern Cali... (Mar '06) Nov 17 Battle Tested 4,837
News Chicago Police Partner with Feds to Crack Down ... Nov 14 TRUMP WINNERS 3
News FBI probing 'Vote Trump' tag, fire at black church Nov '16 Le Jimbo 44
More from around the web