Regardless of if he was drinking 6 hours before or 6 minutes before, they didn't give him a test, so he has it in the bag regardless, even though the evidence continues to prove his case.

Looks like the angry mokes are going to riot. Like KK said, that guy was a punk ass and now everyone trying to tarnish Deedy's image and reputation are eating their words, because the evidence continues to prove his innocence. I've lost a lot of friends over this and the Zimmerman case, but the fact remains that a punk got served a form of justice for trying to flex his ego, and all his punk ass friends and those like them will have to live with it and take it as a learning experience to not FCK with people.

Q in one of the links Deedy confirms Prosecutor questioning about drinking.  It was stated that the State Dept does not allow drinking withing 6 hours of being on duty.  If he's acting in a capacity as a State Dept/Federal LEO I'd argue that it was against regs be he drunk or not.  Proving he was impaired does not come into play, he would be violating rules.

Now as a private citizen allowed to carry under Fed LEO guidlines, he does not have such a requirement.

Much as we like to think we know a lot, we are not connected to this case.  I think Hart dropped this for a reason...........a very good reason.  Hart is a good attorney although probably not very well versed in firearms related subjects with Federal agents.

Q in one of the links Deedy confirms Prosecutor questioning about drinking.  It was stated that the State Dept does not allow drinking withing 6 hours of being on duty.  If he's acting in a capacity as a State Dept/Federal LEO I'd argue that it was against regs be he drunk or not.  Proving he was impaired does not come into play, he would be violating rules.

Now as a private citizen allowed to carry under Fed LEO guidlines, he does not have such a requirement.

Much as we like to think we know a lot, we are not connected to this case.  I think Hart dropped this for a reason...........a very good reason.  Hart is a good attorney although probably not very well versed in firearms related subjects with Federal agents.

Yeah but is it "duty" or duty? I mean, in the Navy, I couldn't drink six hours prior to duty -but we were still on duty when we were drinking? (I hope that makes sense).

Yeah but is it "duty" or duty? I mean, in the Navy, I couldn't drink six hours prior to duty -but we were still on duty when we were drinking? (I hope that makes sense).

"At 1:42pm, defense attorney asked Deedy to elaborate whether he was on-duty or off-duty.  He said he was on-call.  He was going to meet Adam at a pub under the Monarch hotel.  He left his Sig in the hotel safe and brought his Glock with him at around 8:30."

"On-call" to me always meant, "You have to be just as sober/available as on duty." 

Agree. On call = stand by ready for action. Whether LEO or doctor or flight attendant or whatever.

You can't be ready if you are not sober.

Agree. On call = stand by ready for action. Whether LEO or doctor or flight attendant or whatever.

You can't be ready if you are not sober.

Now you understand why he didn't submit to a sobriety test. 

Now you understand why he didn't submit to a sobriety test. 

Yup

"At 1:42pm, defense attorney asked Deedy to elaborate whether he was on-duty or off-duty.  He said he was on-call.  He was going to meet Adam at a pub under the Monarch hotel.  He left his Sig in the hotel safe and brought his Glock with him at around 8:30."

"On-call" to me always meant, "You have to be just as sober/available as on duty."

Yes. But SWAT teams are "On call" - and so are guys like the corpsman (i.e. can't get underway without him).  I'm not sure if that is in the same context, it may be though.  It could also be a jargon issue.

Does DOS refer to their watches and work days as "duty days"?  Does the standard DOS guy refer to it as on-call when they are just not at work?  (I don't know these answers, but it would help if I did).

Just to be sure, school me this: he could refuse to submit as part of 4th Amendment, correct? Secure in our persons?

(technically and constitutionally speaking)

Just to be sure, school me this: he could refuse to submit as part of 4th Amendment, correct? Secure in our persons?

(technically and constitutionally speaking)

First rule when you are the prime suspect or person of interest in an investigation:  NEVER volunteer information or provide evidence.   Ask for a lawyer, and wait quietly until he arrives.

Never ceases to amaze me how so many people fall for the lie: if you have nothing to hide, you should cooperate fully with an investigation.  & the reverse:  by not cooperating, you are admitting guilt.

Right to not incriminate yourself is there for a good reason.  Using it is not an admission of guilt in any form.

[First part of Deedy's 8/7/2013 afternoon testimony written up here: http://2ahawaii.com/index.php?topic=9629.msg98662#msg98662 The rest is continued below:]

Format is prosecution asks, Deedy answers.

By the time Jessica West came back into McDonalds, you could have left McDonalds without any danger to you or Jessica West, correct?  Defense objects.
By the time we see you and Jessica West here, rather than show your creds, you and Jessica West could have left McDonalds in complete safety correct?  That would only be speculation.  He just made a threatend to hurt me.  If I tried to walk to his right or his left, I would not know what he would have done?
He was seated at that time, right?  Yes, that's correct. 
And his hands were on the table?  Yes, the table that was a barrier in between us.
Would you characterize his positure at this time as aggressive?  No. 
What about his posture would you characterize as aggressive?  His tone.  His threatening language.
What about posture?  Posture is a term that refers to how someone is holding themselves.  Whether it's standing or seating, he was threatening me, his arms were on the table, and he was aggressively leaning towards me and had anger in his face.

You knew he was not carrying a weapon in his hands at that time?  I did not see a weapon in his hands.
Did you feel threatened at that time?  Yes I did.
Did you tell Jessica West that maybe it would be better if she left because you were feeling threatened?  No I didn't.
Did you feel that Elderts might harm other people at that point in time?  No, not at that moment in time.  No, I take that back.  Yes.  I believe there was a threat against Mr. Perrine.

So... you feel at this moment, Kollin Elderts was threatening you and Mr. Perrine?  At this moment, he was directly threatening me.  Because of me responding to his threats to Mr. Perrine.   There was nothing that indicated that Mr. Elderts aggression to Mr. Perrine had subsided.  It was now directed at me.  He never told me for instance, "no I'm no longer upset at Mr. Perrine."

It just seems though that he was directing his aggression at you, correct?  Yes, that's correct.

2:41:00: Where is Ms. West's attention at this point in time?  She is standing to my left, she is turning here towards myself and towards the security guard.
And at this time, Adam Gutawski has returned, correct? Yes, I can see him right there.
And you remember seeing him at that time?  No I don't recall.
Do you remember Adam telling you "what's going on?"  No I don't.
Do you remember him telling you "let's go?"  No, I don't.
Do you remember Jessica West telling you at this point "let's go?"  No I don't.

2:41:03 view 2 (cashier): Mr Gutawski to your left. Yes, I believe so.
Jessica West can be seen in this frame, right?  No I can't see her.
Do you remember her being immediately in front or on your right side?  I don't remember this exact point in time. I remember at one point that Jessica was standing to my left.  And at one point, I became alarmed and moved her to my right. I don't know where she is at this point.
You became alarmed?  About what?  Based on Mr. Elderts reaction to me.

(KITV feed lost sound due to technical issues occurring with the audio.  Increasing whirring sound then silence.  It became a silent movie at this point of the testimony until the end of the prosecution witness.  A good 20-30 minutes of video with no audio.  The rest of the afternoon session after the break had no audio either.)

-----------------------

Here are some news coverage about yesterday's (August 7) testimony.

KITV: Deedy shares his memory of the fatal shooting


KITV: Federal agent describes shooting in his own words.


KITV: Deedy talks about moment he learned he was being arrested


KITV: Prosecutors question Deedy


KITV: Deedy testifies in court


KITV: Day 19 of Christopher Deedy's trial


KITV: Last 30 minutes of Deedy's testimony on Wed.


KHON2: Nurse: Deedy did not appear drunk the morning of shooting


KHON2: Special agent accused of murder takes the stand

First rule when you are the prime suspect or person of interest in an investigation:  NEVER volunteer information or provide evidence.   Ask for a lawyer, and wait quietly until he arrives.

Never ceases to amaze me how so many people fall for the lie: if you have nothing to hide, you should cooperate fully with an investigation.  & the reverse:  by not cooperating, you are admitting guilt.

Right to not incriminate yourself is there for a good reason.  Using it is not an admission of guilt in any form.

Using it, without verbally stating you are using it, is an admission of guilt.

Using it, without verbally stating you are using it, is an admission of guilt.

How?

.

Live KITV feed of trial here:

http://www.kitv.com/news/hawaii/live-deedy-takes-the-stand/-/8905354/21354354/-/o2v6psz/-/index.html

Yeah but is it "duty" or duty? I mean, in the Navy, I couldn't drink six hours prior to duty -but we were still on duty when we were drinking? (I hope that makes sense).

Keep in mind your audience.  The audience is not the person with firearms training and years of experience safely handling firearm meaning us.  The audience is the jury. 

Doesn't need to make sense, it just means that the jury has to vote your way (in this case for the Prosection).  Never mind that Hawaii police are expected to carry as well as such means that 100% of the police in the state should never ever drink any type of alcohol, take any other regulated pain medication, etc.

http://www.therepublic.com/view/story/43189d81709c418aadd5a31194744c3e/HI--HPD-Contract

How?

Thank your conservative justices.  You must verbally invoke your right to remain silent.   This is a recent case out of SCOTUS.

http://www.csmonitor.com/USA/2013/0617/Supreme-Court-For-right-to-remain-silent-a-suspect-must-speak

Right to not incriminate yourself is there for a good reason.  Using it is not an admission of guilt in any form.

Using it, without verbally stating you are using it, is an admission of guilt.

How?

If I'm not mistaken, that was a messed up Supreme Court decision this year.
You have the right to remain silent, but must state you are asserting you're 5th amendment right specifically for it not to used against you.

Edit:
Yeah, what Fun said. He just types faster.

First rule when you are the prime suspect or person of interest in an investigation:  NEVER volunteer information or provide evidence.   Ask for a lawyer, and wait quietly until he arrives.

Never ceases to amaze me how so many people fall for the lie: if you have nothing to hide, you should cooperate fully with an investigation.  & the reverse:  by not cooperating, you are admitting guilt.

Right to not incriminate yourself is there for a good reason.  Using it is not an admission of guilt in any form.

Yup.  Prosecutor's job is to get convictions and defense to get acquittals/dismissals.  The lawyers can care less if people are innocent or guilty.  It shouldn't be that way, but there are plenty of unscrupulous lawyers who don't care about the people they defend or are trying to convict.

At 9:15am, Deedy takes the stand.

[sorry, I missed a lot below because how fast they were talking.  I caught bits and pieces of the conversation below but it is not complete.]

Deedy is being question by prosecution about being disciplined for violating any laws.
Firearms policy - State Department policy for special agents.  #5c.  The following activities specifically prohibited while armed.  Consumption of any alcoholic beverages while armed.
#7, #8 carrying any firearm, ammunition not approved by department. 

Deedy's reply:
Deedy pointed out #7 and #8, he would not be allowed to go hunting or buy a shotgun by this policy. It is not possible to apply one without applying the others.

Deedy and prosecution discuss what it means to be "While on duty" and prohibitions against it. Defense objects "argumentative".

Special agent Goldust (?) was the person designated to talk about Department policy.   Goldust admits that while on duty, this policy applies.  Deedy says that he recalls Goldust say this policy does not apply while off duty.

Bureau of Diplomatic Security falls under DSS.  Prosecutor talks about Secret Service training, Deedy says he didn't receive Secret Service training.

Prosecutor talks about job of protection: "Goal is to get them out of a situation."  Deedy says there are many different situations, he doesn't believe that it is his primary objective.
Prosecutor says that the goal is to not engage in any conflict.  Deedy disagrees.  Deedy talks about "get off the X", and about different agents responsibilities.  Some agents would remove the dignitary, others would be assigned to remove the threat.

Deedy does not recall being in a protective detail where he is the sole agent in an operation.  Deedy differentiates being the sole agent with a dignitary but he says there is always backup available somewhere nearby, never by himself alone.

Prior to Elderts incident, he has been in deadly force situation but he has never fired his gun at anybody.  He says he was not on-duty that night.

Prosecution asks him if he had his cellphone, and asks why he didn't respond that way.  Deedy explains that he chose to respond immediately because of what he saw was happening.

Deedy explains that Elderts got angry when he showed his credentials and when he said he would get arrested. 

Prosecution and Deedy talk about Jessica West's testimony about him pulling out his credentials.  Deedy said she didn't see the front of his wallet but she testified that he pulled something out (wallet).  They discuss whether other witnesses testified seeing this or not.  Shane Medeiros, Jessica West, Kollin Elderts, Alexander Byrd. 

Prosecution said that Deedy did not observe any crime being committed.  "At the counter, no."   "I had not observed any federal crime."

When Mr. Elderts said that to Mr. Perrine, "I do not believe there was a crime being committed at that point."

"You continued to engage the unarmed Mr. Elderts."  "I did not know he was unarmed."

"Did your actions seem to aggravate the situation?"  "My actions seemed to aggravate Mr. Elderts.  No I did not escalate the situation." 

"Did you hear Jessica West tell you "let's just go"?"  Deedy vividly recalls Jessica saying "do something" when something was happening and later said something to him like "let's just go."

"When Jessica West said "do something.", did you interpret that to mean, "do something to Mr. Elderts"?  To shoot Mr Elderts?   "No I didn't, I interpretted that to mean, do something to stop the situation."

Prosecution asks Deedy whether he determined that Elderts was intoxicated at the counter.  Did you escalate the situation?

"I did not escalate the situation, I escalated my response."   "No, my response did not de-escalate the situation."

Prosecutor and Deedy talk about "danger".   Deedy's action did nothing to de-escalate the situation. "That is correct."

video timelapse:
2:41:36: Deedy kicking Elderts.  First physical contact between Deedy and Elderts.  Prosecution talks about Deedy's training. Prosecution talks about Mr. Ariano testimony about the type of kick.  Keep it low so whoever is kicking cannot grab your kick.  "He was in very quickly so he caught it high."  "So you missed your mark with this kick."  "He came in really quick so it did not miss the mark."  "We are trained that a counter to a kick is to grab the leg."  "The fact that Collin was able to grab your misplaced kick, indicated to you that he had training?"  "I did not conclude that he had training, but I considered that he may."

2:41:50: Jessica West directly in front of Deedy.  What is she saying to you?  "I don't know exactly what she was saying, but it was around this time that she said "do something."  I don't recall Jessica West ever pushing me."

2:41:51 "Yes I stepped back.  Jessica is turned toward the direction of the ADA door"

2:41:53: Collin Elderts arms raised towards Gutawski. 

After the attack where I had defended with the kick, he had not touched me.

2:41:54: Elderts punched Gutawski.  Other people testified that Elderts did not punch him but pushed him to the door.  Defense objects.
Mr. Byrd and Mr. Joe standing by machine.

What is Jessica West doing?  I don't know what she is doing but I remember in this timeframe, she is saying "do something."

2:41:56: Shane Medeiros has already made contact with Gutawski.  Saw Medeiros rush at Gutawski.

Prosecution and Deedy were discussing their interpretation of what was happening here between Gutawski, Medeiros and Elderts.
"I don't know what Jessica was trying to do.  I was focused on Medeiros and Gutawski."

2:42:00: This is the frame I was going to the ground when Elderts tackled me.  Spear tackle.  I don't know exactly what he did, he was very fast.  I don't know if he punched me.  I remember him making contact with me and me hitting the floor.  Deedy describes a spear tackle.

"I am bound to the law."  "Are you obligated to follow the law of the state you are in?"  "There are State laws that do not apply to me. For instance, carrying of firearms."
"When I am acting as a law enforcement officer, I am obligated to follow my training and federal laws."

"Do you currently know the Hawaii laws of self defense?"  "At the time of xxx, I know the federal laws, I do not know what Hawaii statutes are."

2:42:03: "Elderts did not attack you while you were on the ground correct?"  "I don't believe so."

You have been trained to use intermediate as well as deadly force correct?

He gathered himself, move into position, clench his fist, and move into striking me.  We were trained that you don't allow someone to strike you.  First physical assault.

As I was on the ground trying to raise my feet, I saw they kicking Adam Gutawski.  Adam Gutawski was raising his hands and the kicks were getting through and hitting his head.  I saw them both kick Adam Gutawski.  I saw a flurry of kicks and I saw the kicks hitting the face.

At 10:13am, court takes a recess.

Regardless of if he was drinking 6 hours before or 6 minutes before, they didn't give him a test, so he has it in the bag regardless, even though the evidence continues to prove his case.

Looks like the angry mokes are going to riot. Like KK said, that guy was a punk ass and now everyone trying to tarnish Deedy's image and reputation are eating their words, because the evidence continues to prove his innocence. I've lost a lot of friends over this and the Zimmerman case, but the fact remains that a punk got served a form of justice for trying to flex his ego, and all his punk ass friends and those like them will have to live with it and take it as a learning experience to not FCK with people.

Agreed.  All these punks,  thats what happens when keeping it real goes wrong........