Charges: Man killed wife in Kent 'execution' in front of their 6-year-old son

[NewsVine_Mariyam]

Charges: Man killed wife in Kent 'execution' in front of their 6-year-old son

KENT, Wash. - Alla Chikh and Pritpal Samara were leaving a restaurant in Kent on July 10 when they spotted the vehicle of Chikh's husband, Ignacio Cisneros, in the parking lot.

Cisneros, driving a Toyota Camry, followed the pair and cut them off, forcing Chikh to come to a stop in her Cadillac Escalade.

Cisneros stepped out of his car and yelled at Chikh, then returned to his vehicle, grabbed a pistol and shot both Chikh and Samara in the car, police reports say.

Before Cisneros drove off, his son he shares with Chikh, a 6-year-old boy seated in the Camry, shouted, "You hurt her! You hurt her!"

King County prosecutors say what happened that night was an execution. Chikh died at the scene and Samara survived with a gunshot wound to his neck.

Prosecutors charged Cisneros Monday with first-degree murder and first-degree attempted murder.
​

 

[NewsVine_Mariyam]

This story was heartbreaking enough without having the read this:

Chikh petitioned for a protection order against Cisneros in 2014 before the couple reconciled and the petition was dismissed. Eight days after the dismissal, Cisneros punched Chikh in the face four times in front of Chikh's then-8-year-old daughter. The daughter later told police that her "tummy" hurt because she had "screamed louder than she ever had before," Yip wrote.

Cisneros was charged in Federal Way Municipal Court with fourth-degree assault and exposing children to domestic violence. He secured a continuance and was placed on probation, meaning he could avoid conviction if he followed a set of restrictions. The case was dismissed in April of this year because the defendant complied with the terms of the continuance.​

 

[Gracie]

Sharia law in all its glory, I guess.

 

[NewsVine_Mariyam]

Sharia law in all its glory, I guess.

What does Sharia law have to do with this crime?

 

[PK1]

Sharia law in all its glory, I guess.

What does Sharia law have to do with this crime?

I agree. More info on the perp’s culture & bkground personality development needs to be determined before any political assumptions are made.

Indeed, a tragic story. The kids are the biggest victims. Totally innocent.
On the other hand, did their mother not know how violent Cisnero was when she married him?

Anyway, i’m curious: why did you open a thread on this tragic story?
Seems to be a lot of these violent events with guns in the US.

 

[NewsVine_Mariyam]

I agree. More info on the perp’s culture & bkground personality development needs to be determined before any political assumptions are made.

Indeed, a tragic story. The kids are the biggest victims. Totally innocent.
On the other hand, did their mother not know how violent Cisnero was when she married him?

Anyway, i’m curious: why did you open a thread on this tragic story?
Seems to be a lot of these violent events with guns in the US.

According to a different news article, Cisnero's previous wife also filed a protection order against him.

One of the reasons I've been following this story is due to the domestic violence/stalking aspect of the crime prior to the murder. I'm tracking data on how frequently these individuals who get deferred sentences and then have their domestic violence/stalking "convictions" for all intents and purposes "erased" still go on to committ additional crimes of the same nature or worse.

Without having reviewed his entire criminal history, the problem is that in all likihood while he was under the supervision of the court serving out the terms of his deferment, that he would have been prohibited from owning or being in possession of a firearm because 4th degree domestic violence assault requires it (RCW 9.41.040). If the conviction had been allowed to stand, he still would likely have been prohibited from being in possession of a firearm.

When convicted persons are entitled to restoration of firearm possession rights | Washington State

1. RCW 9.41.040 lists several circumstances under which a person convicted of certain misdemeanors may not lawfully possess a firearm.

As noted above, RCW 9.41.040 sets forth a number of circumstances rendering it unlawful to possess a firearm. This section includes the following language relating to misdemeanor convictions:

A person, whether an adult or juvenile, is guilty of the crime of unlawful possession of a firearm in the second degree, if the person does not qualify under (a) of this subsection for the crime of unlawful possession of a firearm in the first degree and the person owns, has in his or her possession, or has in his or her control any firearm:

(i) After having previously been convicted in this state or elsewhere of any felony not specifically listed as prohibiting firearm possession under (a) of this subsection, or any of the following crimes when committed by one family or household member against another, committed on or after July 1, 1993: Assault in the fourth degree, coercion, stalking, reckless endangerment, criminal trespass in the first degree, or violation of the provisions of a protection order or no-contact order restraining the person or excluding the person from a residence.​

RCW 9.41.040(b)(i) (emphasis added). Each of the offenses underlined is defined elsewhere as a gross misdemeanor.[2]​

 

[PK1]

I agree. More info on the perp’s culture & bkground personality development needs to be determined before any political assumptions are made.

Indeed, a tragic story. The kids are the biggest victims. Totally innocent.
On the other hand, did their mother not know how violent Cisnero was when she married him?

Anyway, i’m curious: why did you open a thread on this tragic story?
Seems to be a lot of these violent events with guns in the US.

According to a different news article, Cisnero's previous wife also filed a protection order against him.

One of the reasons I've been following this story is due to the domestic violence/stalking aspect of the crime prior to the murder. I'm tracking data on how frequently these individuals who get deferred sentences and then have their domestic violence/stalking "convictions" for all intents and purposes "erased" still go on to committ additional crimes of the same nature or worse.

Without having reviewed his entire criminal history, the problem is that in all likihood while he was under the supervision of the court serving out the terms of his deferment, that he would have been prohibited from owning or being in possession of a firearm because 4th degree domestic violence assault requires it (RCW 9.41.040). If the conviction had been allowed to stand, he still would likely have been prohibited from being in possession of a firearm.

When convicted persons are entitled to restoration of firearm possession rights | Washington State

1. RCW 9.41.040 lists several circumstances under which a person convicted of certain misdemeanors may not lawfully possess a firearm.

As noted above, RCW 9.41.040 sets forth a number of circumstances rendering it unlawful to possess a firearm. This section includes the following language relating to misdemeanor convictions:

A person, whether an adult or juvenile, is guilty of the crime of unlawful possession of a firearm in the second degree, if the person does not qualify under (a) of this subsection for the crime of unlawful possession of a firearm in the first degree and the person owns, has in his or her possession, or has in his or her control any firearm:

(i) After having previously been convicted in this state or elsewhere of any felony not specifically listed as prohibiting firearm possession under (a) of this subsection, or any of the following crimes when committed by one family or household member against another, committed on or after July 1, 1993: Assault in the fourth degree, coercion, stalking, reckless endangerment, criminal trespass in the first degree, or violation of the provisions of a protection order or no-contact order restraining the person or excluding the person from a residence.​

RCW 9.41.040(b)(i) (emphasis added). Each of the offenses underlined is defined elsewhere as a gross misdemeanor.[2]​

My eyes often glaze w/ legal mumbo jumbo, but i think your reference indicates that Cisnero did not qualify legally to possess a gun.
In my mind, Cisnero was a violent asshole criminal, and criminals don’t follow laws anyway.
Cisnero should be executed. His unfortunate kids won’t miss him anyway.

 

[Carl in Michigan]

Charges: Man killed wife in Kent 'execution' in front of their 6-year-old son

KENT, Wash. - Alla Chikh and Pritpal Samara were leaving a restaurant in Kent on July 10 when they spotted the vehicle of Chikh's husband, Ignacio Cisneros, in the parking lot.

Cisneros, driving a Toyota Camry, followed the pair and cut them off, forcing Chikh to come to a stop in her Cadillac Escalade.

Cisneros stepped out of his car and yelled at Chikh, then returned to his vehicle, grabbed a pistol and shot both Chikh and Samara in the car, police reports say.

Before Cisneros drove off, his son he shares with Chikh, a 6-year-old boy seated in the Camry, shouted, "You hurt her! You hurt her!"

King County prosecutors say what happened that night was an execution. Chikh died at the scene and Samara survived with a gunshot wound to his neck.

Prosecutors charged Cisneros Monday with first-degree murder and first-degree attempted murder.
​

Indian names? The killers name is Spanish...so many minorities shooting each other in my country but they just keep flooding in.

 

[August West]

I agree. More info on the perp’s culture & bkground personality development needs to be determined before any political assumptions are made.

Indeed, a tragic story. The kids are the biggest victims. Totally innocent.
On the other hand, did their mother not know how violent Cisnero was when she married him?

Anyway, i’m curious: why did you open a thread on this tragic story?
Seems to be a lot of these violent events with guns in the US.

According to a different news article, Cisnero's previous wife also filed a protection order against him.

One of the reasons I've been following this story is due to the domestic violence/stalking aspect of the crime prior to the murder. I'm tracking data on how frequently these individuals who get deferred sentences and then have their domestic violence/stalking "convictions" for all intents and purposes "erased" still go on to committ additional crimes of the same nature or worse.

Without having reviewed his entire criminal history, the problem is that in all likihood while he was under the supervision of the court serving out the terms of his deferment, that he would have been prohibited from owning or being in possession of a firearm because 4th degree domestic violence assault requires it (RCW 9.41.040). If the conviction had been allowed to stand, he still would likely have been prohibited from being in possession of a firearm.

When convicted persons are entitled to restoration of firearm possession rights | Washington State

1. RCW 9.41.040 lists several circumstances under which a person convicted of certain misdemeanors may not lawfully possess a firearm.

As noted above, RCW 9.41.040 sets forth a number of circumstances rendering it unlawful to possess a firearm. This section includes the following language relating to misdemeanor convictions:

A person, whether an adult or juvenile, is guilty of the crime of unlawful possession of a firearm in the second degree, if the person does not qualify under (a) of this subsection for the crime of unlawful possession of a firearm in the first degree and the person owns, has in his or her possession, or has in his or her control any firearm:

(i) After having previously been convicted in this state or elsewhere of any felony not specifically listed as prohibiting firearm possession under (a) of this subsection, or any of the following crimes when committed by one family or household member against another, committed on or after July 1, 1993: Assault in the fourth degree, coercion, stalking, reckless endangerment, criminal trespass in the first degree, or violation of the provisions of a protection order or no-contact order restraining the person or excluding the person from a residence.​

RCW 9.41.040(b)(i) (emphasis added). Each of the offenses underlined is defined elsewhere as a gross misdemeanor.[2]​

My eyes often glaze w/ legal mumbo jumbo, but i think your reference indicates that Cisnero did not qualify legally to possess a gun.
In my mind, Cisnero was a violent asshole criminal, and criminals don’t follow laws anyway.
Cisnero should be executed. His unfortunate kids won’t miss him anyway.

The gun laws are designed to be unenforceable and we know who designed them.

 

[Snouter]

What does Sharia law have to do with this crime?

Quit pretending. The filthy 4th world savages are essentially douchebags and clumsy murderers by nature, which is one reason The West took over the Third World in the good old days.

 

[NewsVine_Mariyam]

I agree. More info on the perp’s culture & bkground personality development needs to be determined before any political assumptions are made.

Indeed, a tragic story. The kids are the biggest victims. Totally innocent.
On the other hand, did their mother not know how violent Cisnero was when she married him?

Anyway, i’m curious: why did you open a thread on this tragic story?
Seems to be a lot of these violent events with guns in the US.

According to a different news article, Cisnero's previous wife also filed a protection order against him.

One of the reasons I've been following this story is due to the domestic violence/stalking aspect of the crime prior to the murder. I'm tracking data on how frequently these individuals who get deferred sentences and then have their domestic violence/stalking "convictions" for all intents and purposes "erased" still go on to committ additional crimes of the same nature or worse.

Without having reviewed his entire criminal history, the problem is that in all likihood while he was under the supervision of the court serving out the terms of his deferment, that he would have been prohibited from owning or being in possession of a firearm because 4th degree domestic violence assault requires it (RCW 9.41.040). If the conviction had been allowed to stand, he still would likely have been prohibited from being in possession of a firearm.

When convicted persons are entitled to restoration of firearm possession rights | Washington State

1. RCW 9.41.040 lists several circumstances under which a person convicted of certain misdemeanors may not lawfully possess a firearm.

As noted above, RCW 9.41.040 sets forth a number of circumstances rendering it unlawful to possess a firearm. This section includes the following language relating to misdemeanor convictions:

A person, whether an adult or juvenile, is guilty of the crime of unlawful possession of a firearm in the second degree, if the person does not qualify under (a) of this subsection for the crime of unlawful possession of a firearm in the first degree and the person owns, has in his or her possession, or has in his or her control any firearm:

(i) After having previously been convicted in this state or elsewhere of any felony not specifically listed as prohibiting firearm possession under (a) of this subsection, or any of the following crimes when committed by one family or household member against another, committed on or after July 1, 1993: Assault in the fourth degree, coercion, stalking, reckless endangerment, criminal trespass in the first degree, or violation of the provisions of a protection order or no-contact order restraining the person or excluding the person from a residence.​

RCW 9.41.040(b)(i) (emphasis added). Each of the offenses underlined is defined elsewhere as a gross misdemeanor.[2]​

My eyes often glaze w/ legal mumbo jumbo, but i think your reference indicates that Cisnero did not qualify legally to possess a gun.
In my mind, Cisnero was a violent asshole criminal, and criminals don’t follow laws anyway.
Cisnero should be executed. His unfortunate kids won’t miss him anyway.

I hear you about the legalease but unfortunately the opposite is true. In spite of the fact that he had an established history of domestic violence with more than one partner our laws allowed a no harm no foul policy simply because he complied with the terms of his deferred sentence. He was lawfully in possession of the firearm he murdered his wife with.

 

[NewsVine_Mariyam]

murderers

I'm putting you on notice, your presence is unwanted on my threads.

 

[Snouter]

I'm putting you on notice, your presence is unwanted on my threads.

 

[JOSweetHeart]

The daughter later told police that her "tummy" hurt because she had "screamed louder than she ever had before," Yip wrote.

I hope that someone held that little girl in their arms and told her to remember the most important thing, that she herself is still here. That is what I would have done and said to her.

God bless you and her always!!!

Holly