Deedy Trial - Injustice? (Read 340337 times)

Jl808

Re: Deedy Trial - Injustice?
« Reply #480 on: August 08, 2013, 10:30:57 AM »
At 10:30am testimony resumes.

They are recalling other people's testimonies. 

2:42:08 "Deedy got Elderts attention away from Medeiros and fired his gun."  Defense objected to the compounded nature of question.
Deedy said between this frame, Deedy said "stop I'll shoot."  And Elderts walked towards Deedy.  Slow and deliberate movement towards Deedy.  Deedy was in the process of drawing his gun. Close quarters draw.  He completed the draw. 

2:42:07 view 4 ("fine dining" angle.  Fine dining in McDonalds?).  Visible Deedy's gun drawing but not yet completed.  Gun has not yet been fired.   

2:42:08: shot has already been fired.

2:42:06:  "I did not see a weapon in his hands."    I had said "Freeze". I had said Freeze before I drew my gun.

2:42:08:  I was in fear for Adam's life.  I was in fear for my life.  As a law enforcement officer, this is the moment I dreaded in my career.  But I made an oath to serve and protect."

"You intended to kill Mr. Deedy, correct?"  "I intended to stop the threat." 
"You are trained to kill the threat?" "We are trained to shoot center mass to stop the threat."
"You are not taught to maim the threat?"  "We are taught to stop the threat, knowing that it may kill someone, we are not shooting to maim or injure."

"You were concerned for Adam's life at this point?"  "That was one of the reason why I escalated to use Deadly force." "Would you have been justified to shoot Mr Medeiros at this point?"  "I had said to stop.  I was focused at Elderts at this point."

"You would have been justified in shooting Mr. Medeiros at this point?"  Defense objects.

"Did it ever occur to you to go over and pull off one of the people that were on Mr. Gutawski?"  "That would not have been a safe option for me or Mr. Gutawski."  "Yes I did."

"Did it occur to you that Jessica West was involved?  Between the two of them (Jessica and Keene), they were able to pull Medeiros off Gutawski."

"Did West or Keene receive any injury from their involvement?"  "No."  "Did Mr Gutawski receive any serious injury?"  "My actions prevented him from receiving serious bodily injury or death."

"After you fired the first shot at Elderts, he moved close to you?"  "As I fired the shot, Mr. Elderts was moving to his left then came around as the same direction as the cashier counter."

2:42:09: We moved parallel to the cashier counter.  His left arm was on my wrist.  It's not the close quarter draw position anymore.  He drove me to the ground.

2:42:12: "I did not know he (Byrd) was behind the toy display"

2:42:18: Deedy says he doesn't recall how many punches Elderts was throwing at him.  He recalls Elderts punching him when he was on the ground.

After the 2 shots:

"In the midst of coming for a punch, it wasn't a complete punch, he came down on me.  I was trying to keep my head off the ground while he was punching me.  When I took the last shots, I was able to get myself upwards a bit.  Not really seated.  Trying to raise my head, shoulders and cheat off the ground.  Like trying to do a crunch except with my legs flat on the ground."

"I remember my head hitting what I thought was the ground.  It may have been the high chairs." "I can't be certain. I didn't see my head hit."

"You shot to kill Mr Elderts?"  "I meant to stop his assault on me. I knew those shots may kill him."

"One of those 2 other shots missed him, correct?"  Deedy explained that he was taught to look beyond the target and it was clear.

"Your third shot jammed correct?"  "The casing did not clear."
"The casing was not stove-piped, correct?"  "Yes, correct."

2:43:26:  Deedy talked about training to rendering aid to someone who has been shot.  Prosecution talked about him not rendering aid immediately.  In rendering this aid, you were not taught to immediately check for vital signs?  No I did not.  That was after I established that there was 1 gunshot wound. 

1:07 sec: Description of Officer Naki's description of suspect.  "I wasn't listening to the dispatch. I heard now.  "All I've got is a male running down Hawaiian Ave with a white t-shirt.""

1:14 sec: When Officer Naki was there with you and Elderts body, did you identify yourself as a police officer?  Yes I did.  I recalled the first thing he asked me was where the shot was.  When he came back, I reported to him my findings, that he was still breathing and that there was blood flows.  I told him that I was a cop.  Those were my exact words.  He did not respond.  Yes, I expected a response.  He was right next to me.  Did it cross your mind that he did not hear you.  No that did not cross my mind.

1:54 sec: This was after I identified I was a cop. 

Were you still in a daze?  Daze wasn't the right word.  I kicked into training mode.  I was focused on keeping mr elderts alive. 

5:43 sec: This was when Naki put his hand on me.
5:49 sec: This is when I told him that it was on my hip.  He said "what is?"  "My pistol."  "What do you mean "my pistol"?"
5:57 sec: Shocked / alarm reaction by Naki.  This was right after I said "I was the one who shot him."
At first he removed my pistol then he handcuffed me.

Did he tell you you were under arrest for murder. 

When Sgt Shreiner asked me that question, all my belonging has been pulled out and were on the countertop. 

We were trained to give information for the purposes of medical treatment but not to give any other information than necessary. 

For the data that you gave them, you did not give any inaccurate information correct?  When they were asking me about, I was feeling the effects of a traumatic injury.  I was fighting for my life, I believed I had just killed a man, There were a number of questions that I had said no to, even though I should have said yes if I had been paying attention.

I declined to take that test unless I had agency representative present, unless it was required.  So your refusal was not anything to do with you refusing to give your blood alcohol level?  No ma'am. 
No i didn't, I did not believe that there was a crime.

You realize that you have to comply with local law enforcement?

I wanted to make a statement with counsel present. 

In our training, we are taught that after a force of use situation, you may not remember everything completely and you need to gather yourself completely, so you can report the incident as completely as possible.

Many what witnesses say after a report may not be completely accurate.  The mind cannot remember everything that happens.  The mind will try to do if they see A and C, will try to fill in the blanks with B.  Very often, witness statements may not be completely valid.

(missed some things here about an agent's toolset.  about being objective and reasonable, and knowing what the officer knew at that time, it was the correct action at that time. you cannot judge the officer's action with information known later.)

You never considered leaving?  When I stood up and saw adam being kicked in the face, I could have run. I knew I could have ran but I could not do that and assure his safety.  Yes, I considered it as an option but I could not consider it feasible.  I was continuously assessing the situation.  I did not believe it would be safe even for me to leave.  I did not believe I could have gotten out safely without sustaining injury to myself.

"Whether or not you considered going to calling the police, going over to mr perrine and sitting with him?"  "This is not a yes-or-no answer."

From prosecution question:"That's true... If I did not have a gun, I could not have fired at Mr. Elderts."

At 11:30am, court takes recess.
« Last Edit: August 08, 2013, 11:32:58 AM by Jl808 »
I think, therefore I am armed.
NRA Life Patron member, HRA Life member, HiFiCo Life Member, HDF member

The United States Constitution © 1791. All Rights Reserved.

Jl808

Re: Deedy Trial - Injustice?
« Reply #481 on: August 08, 2013, 11:37:30 AM »
WTF is that about the prosecution suggesting why Deedy did not go over and sit with Mr. Gutawski while they wait for police?  :wacko:

Another thought... did it occur to anyone that perhaps no one was able to hear Deedy clearly say some of those things he said he said?  Loud music in McDonalds?  Possible slurring if intoxicated?  Low volume of voice?  Deafness?  Too many hyperfocused people?  Officer Naki didn't seem to hear what Deedy said.  Perhaps the other people did not either. ???
« Last Edit: August 08, 2013, 11:48:36 AM by Jl808 »
I think, therefore I am armed.
NRA Life Patron member, HRA Life member, HiFiCo Life Member, HDF member

The United States Constitution © 1791. All Rights Reserved.

Q

.
« Reply #482 on: August 08, 2013, 01:30:34 PM »
.
« Last Edit: September 14, 2016, 02:44:38 AM by Q »

Jl808

Re: Deedy Trial - Injustice?
« Reply #483 on: August 08, 2013, 01:42:45 PM »
At 1:30pm, testimony resumes.

"Elderts crime was an attack against a federal officer. His first physical attack was when I kicked him.  My foot reached him before his fist could reach me. It was the first federal felony that was committed."
"Before you made contact with Elderts, there was no crime being committed, correct?"  "I could not answer that in the affirmative or negative."
"You had no authority correct?" "I had authority per federal." "I do not need to witness a crime before I respond as a federal officer."
"No crime had been committed for which you had authority to act, is that correct?"  "I had authority."  "I do not know as far as Hawaii statutes, if any crime had been committed."

"What crime had been committed?" "Verbal threats against myself and Mr. Perrine."
"You don't know, do you?" "No I do not know Hawaii law."

At 1:35pm, attorneys approach the bench  LONG PAUSE.

Wayne Fernandez takes the stand.  Retired Police LT at HPD.

On May 9, 2008, did you have interaction with Elderts?  Yes.  Was there a large crowd yelling at each other in the parking lot?  Yes.  When arrested, Elderts struck?  Yes.  When taken to the police station, he was calm.
He was convicted of disorderly conduct.

At 1:47pm, coverage is lost / switches back to traffic cam.
« Last Edit: August 08, 2013, 02:06:36 PM by Jl808 »
I think, therefore I am armed.
NRA Life Patron member, HRA Life member, HiFiCo Life Member, HDF member

The United States Constitution © 1791. All Rights Reserved.

Darmok and Jalad @Tanagra

Re: Deedy Trial - Injustice?
« Reply #484 on: August 08, 2013, 02:31:11 PM »
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

This makes no sense! 

(1) the 5th A protects you against self-incrimination (right not to testify against oneself),  Once Mirandized, you have the RIGHT to remain silent.  Nothing about "You have the right to remain silent ONLY IF you invoke the 5th.  Otherwise you're guilty for being silent."

(2) You can't invoke the 5th unless you can be charged with a crime (plea deals for immunity are intended for this very purpose).   Unless you see yourself being interrogated or investigated, you have no grounds to plea the 5th (no charges being filed against you as far as you can see). 

(3) Since "Anything you say can & WILL be used against you in court", and now we find out "the 5th won't protect you if you choose not to speak to interrogators unless you say 'I PLEA THE 5th'", this creates a situation where every person, innocent or guilty MUST ALWAYS invoke their right to counsel BEFORE SAYING A WORD.

"Officer, I intend to cooperate fully with your investigation.  However, I feel it is in my best interest that I call my lawyer before answering any questions."

I'm having reminder cards printed for all my friends and family .....
"... the right to be let alone -- the most comprehensive of rights and the right most valued by civilized men."
--Justice Louis D. Brandeis

Funtimes

Re: Deedy Trial - Injustice?
« Reply #485 on: August 08, 2013, 03:14:06 PM »
This makes no sense! 

(1) the 5th A protects you against self-incrimination (right not to testify against oneself),  Once Mirandized, you have the RIGHT to remain silent.  Nothing about "You have the right to remain silent ONLY IF you invoke the 5th.  Otherwise you're guilty for being silent."

(2) You can't invoke the 5th unless you can be charged with a crime (plea deals for immunity are intended for this very purpose).   Unless you see yourself being interrogated or investigated, you have no grounds to plea the 5th (no charges being filed against you as far as you can see). 

(3) Since "Anything you say can & WILL be used against you in court", and now we find out "the 5th won't protect you if you choose not to speak to interrogators unless you say 'I PLEA THE 5th'", this creates a situation where every person, innocent or guilty MUST ALWAYS invoke their right to counsel BEFORE SAYING A WORD.

"Officer, I intend to cooperate fully with your investigation.  However, I feel it is in my best interest that I call my lawyer before answering any questions."

I'm having reminder cards printed for all my friends and family .....

Miranda is another case that most people don't understand either.  Just because you are arrested doesn't mean you get Miranda rights.  If I have enough evidence against you, I can let you talk all day.   Also, just because I can't use it as evidence, doesn't mean I can't use it to counter your statements later.
Check out the Hawaii Defense Foundation.
HDF on Facebook
Defender of the Accused in Arkansas Courts
Posts are not legal advice & are my own, unless said so.

Funtimes

Re: Deedy Trial - Injustice?
« Reply #486 on: August 08, 2013, 03:31:15 PM »
The Defense has rested their case.  Now it will be up to the jury.   I hope the right decision is made based on whatever the jury feels the evidence shows them.
Check out the Hawaii Defense Foundation.
HDF on Facebook
Defender of the Accused in Arkansas Courts
Posts are not legal advice & are my own, unless said so.

macsak

Re: Deedy Trial - Injustice?
« Reply #487 on: August 08, 2013, 03:47:39 PM »
so should we start a separate thread for predictions on the outcome?

The Defense has rested their case.  Now it will be up to the jury.   I hope the right decision is made based on whatever the jury feels the evidence shows them.

Funtimes

Re: Deedy Trial - Injustice?
« Reply #488 on: August 08, 2013, 04:28:28 PM »
Keep it here imo! 
Check out the Hawaii Defense Foundation.
HDF on Facebook
Defender of the Accused in Arkansas Courts
Posts are not legal advice & are my own, unless said so.

macsak

Re: Deedy Trial - Injustice?
« Reply #489 on: August 08, 2013, 05:35:39 PM »
ok
my prediction
innocent
bleeding hearts hold an illegal march through downtown and waikiki shouting "justice for kollin" and "justice for trayvon"
minor scuffles between local marchers and tourists in waikiki, but no outright rioting or vandalism

Keep it here imo!

passivekinetic

Re: Deedy Trial - Injustice?
« Reply #490 on: August 08, 2013, 05:43:20 PM »
Would it be really illegal? Are we allowed to march to express 1A? I honestly do not know.
"The sheep fear sheepdogs, because they fail to see the wolves."
- Anonymous

Funtimes

Re: Deedy Trial - Injustice?
« Reply #491 on: August 08, 2013, 05:58:01 PM »
Would it be really illegal? Are we allowed to march to express 1A? I honestly do not know.

Time, manner, place regulations limit parading; that said, you can walk around the sidewalks all day long.  To impede traffic though, you need a parade permit or face arrest. (That said, there are exemptions too for "spontaneous speech and protests)
Check out the Hawaii Defense Foundation.
HDF on Facebook
Defender of the Accused in Arkansas Courts
Posts are not legal advice & are my own, unless said so.

Q

.
« Reply #492 on: August 08, 2013, 06:03:59 PM »
.
« Last Edit: September 14, 2016, 02:47:09 AM by Q »

GZire

Re: Deedy Trial - Injustice?
« Reply #493 on: August 08, 2013, 06:28:10 PM »
I'd like to see if all the dumb asses threatening to riot and beat up 'non-hawaiians' will actually do so.

I'm still flying my American flag up high, so they can suck a fat one.


It's Hawaii..........it's all talk.  The mokes gonna false crack just as many/little people as before, this case won't make a lick of difference.

Kevin

Re: Deedy Trial - Injustice?
« Reply #494 on: August 08, 2013, 07:42:07 PM »

At 1:30pm, testimony resumes.

"Elderts crime was an attack against a federal officer. His first physical attack was when I kicked him.  My foot reached him before his fist could reach me. It was the first federal felony that was committed."
"Before you made contact with Elderts, there was no crime being committed, correct?"  "I could not answer that in the affirmative or negative."


[color=black]"What crime had been committed?" "Verbal threats against myself and Mr. Perrine." [/color]
"You don't know, do you?" "No I do not know Hawaii law.".

So Deedy threw the first blow and he was not blind sided by a punch from Elderts??  Also, if it is crime for a person to be kicked by a Federal Officer then that is a good law to know... That is crazy!!!

Was Deedy trying to arrests Elderts for the Federal crime of verbal threats???

Lastly, did members of Deedy's department testify on his behalf especially to corroborate his training and that he was warranted to intervene.

Sorry haven't been keeping up with the trial but instead reading the notes. Don't think he 'intended' to murder thus will probably be found innocent but I don't think he followed the policy of his department either thus if no one came to testify on his behalf from the department that would be a big negative for his future career IMO.

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

Also, was Elderts being a punk. In the videos I saw Deedy was hovering over him when he was seated and Deedy female friend appeared to be trying to hold Deedy back. Takes two to tango. And the one who throws the first blow is usually the one who actually instigates physical violence. Local mentality, u punch first brah... Most times no blows thrown and go separate ways. Once a blow is thrown then game on. If he wasn't LEO but instead this was a conceal carry state I don't think his actions would go in his favor.

Even as an LEO he may have been acting beyond the scope of his duty.

But like I said, if I was on the jury I don't think Deedy is guilty of murder. Bad choices, yes... Shouldn't be in LEO anymore. Probably

pj_benn

Re: Deedy Trial - Injustice?
« Reply #495 on: August 08, 2013, 08:27:35 PM »
Usually when someone goes from trying to stop their friend from fighting to trying to stop the other guy from fighting their friend, it's because their friend is drunk and/or belligerent. Jus imho

pj_benn

Re: Deedy Trial - Injustice?
« Reply #496 on: August 08, 2013, 08:38:27 PM »
Much as we like to think we know a lot, we are not connected to this case
Qft I try my best to look at this from a neutral ground since day 1. Silly how some people jus jump in 100% biased not knowing much about the case mostly basing their opinion on their personal feelings. Sad. Alot of true colors coming out here imho.  members from both 'sides' gained and lost alot of respect from me

pastordennis

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 349
  • Total likes: 0
  • Isaiah 55:11
  • Referrals: 1
    • View Profile
Re: Deedy Trial - Injustice?
« Reply #497 on: August 08, 2013, 10:13:45 PM »
I hope Deedy walks. Elderts was just another bully with a chip on his shoulder. I have had contact with sooooo many like Elderts. Facts seem to prove Deedy "justified".Just my 2 cents.

Q

.
« Reply #498 on: August 08, 2013, 10:36:38 PM »
.
« Last Edit: September 14, 2016, 02:47:41 AM by Q »

pastordennis

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 349
  • Total likes: 0
  • Isaiah 55:11
  • Referrals: 1
    • View Profile
Re: Deedy Trial - Injustice?
« Reply #499 on: August 10, 2013, 07:15:30 AM »
You Da man Q.