Were both of them drunk?  What if both of them were thugs and as some say punk asses?
After Elderts was finished playing with the customer, he went and sat down. 


The event ended.


Targeted customer might have knowingly perceived that Elderts was drunk.
Did he not testify that he did not see Elderts as a threat?  Thus the event ended.


The event ended, it was over, kaput.


Why then did Deedy proceed to confront Elderts who was considered as a
 
non-threat

to original targeted customer?

The savage beast had calmed down, why prude and poke and awaken his hostilities?


Did Deedy   also   have a chip on his shoulders? 

He did not have to confront Elderts at this point in time,

the threat level had ended and business was back to normal,


But I can fight dragons, and I have a gun, (and am I drunk?) and

MY

hostilities are elevated.



Do you want me to shoot you in the face?



And there you have it, an escalation of drunken illogic and stubborn machismo, humanity.

I am not saying that I am correct, just a different perspective; I am just saying that


business was back to normal,


 the threat that was previously there was now not, the threat level ended.

Based on what evidence?  The witness (targeted customer) was so drunk or disinterested, he testified not seeing the scuffle at all when it started.  He was then shown the McD security video where the scuffle started directly in front of his table in the direction he was facing!  No credibility.

No evidence Deedy was drunk.  He admitted to having 4 beers between 8-ish and 2-ish.  That's 6 hours ... plenty of time for anyone to detox and not be drunk.  Without a BAC test, where is your evidence to the contrary?

Chip on his shoulder?  Again, where is the evidence of that?  Deedy's demeanor and testimony in court was not that of a person with that attitude.  Even the cops, security person, and other people that interacted and treated him afterward said he seemed calm and in control, not amped up agitated like you want to describe.

Hind sight is 20/20.  Could every single person in that restaurant have done something different and maybe avoid the eventual outcome?  Maybe yes.  Maybe no. 

Eldert's was no angel, had an arrest record, hit a cop once, and was doing drugs and alcohol that night.  That is in evidence.

Maybe it's Eldert's parents fault for raising a punk.  Deedy just had the misfortune of winding up at that particular McD's at that particular time.  Deedy did nothing wrong.  He reacted to Elderts.  Elderts was the punk trying to mess with the people he encountered that night.  He had a chip on his shoulder against haoles.  He had no respect for law enforcement.

He won't do that again...

Just because Elderts had a bad record, is this death justice?



This is sort of "of topic" but hear me out,


Many years ago a few boys raped and killed a young female in Puna.



Investigators placed the blame mostly on the one boy who had a very bad record.
He was found guilty and is currently in jail.


DNA samples taken at the crime scene and on the victim


did not match any of the accused.


Did not match, but they were found guilty anyway.
People said, because of his record, justice is served.


I thought DNA was the ultimate in evidence.

His bad record blinded the jury and over came the DNA evidence.



As in Deedy's case, just because Elderts had a bad record, his death doesn't mean that justice is served. 


Evidence is insufficient.

Death may not have been the proper 'justice', for Elderts.   However, the evidence, as presented to the public,and thus far in court,  IMHO, makes for an acquittal for Deedy.

I agree.

I think it's funny that certain people take deedy word because he is 'leo' therefore wouldnt lie... BUT for some reason when some of hawaiis own leo give statements (looked drunk/intoxicated) they completely dismiss it. Wonder why the double standard. Hmmmm

please provide evidence to support the fact that Deedy was "intoxicated"

from your post"
"Moments later an intoxicated Deedy confronted Elderts,"

A question is why did Deedy confront Elderts without calling for police 1st?  Uh, he is law enforcement.

Was he intoxicated where his mental control was markedly diminished as by definition?
 How did you arrive at this conclusion? Because someone didn't do what YOU might have done they are intoxicated or diminished?

Did he think he could handle the situation all by himself knowing that it could turn violent, a sign that his mental capacity might be diminished?
I would say that 99% of the time when a LEO shows someone a badge and tells them to stop what they're doing, they comply.
Maybe Elderts was the one with a diminished mental capacity to not understand that punching a LEO might end badly for him.

He also was facing the possibility of more than one drunk individual yet he did not consider calling for police or back-up.
Yet again, he is a LEO, how do you think HPD would react to a mainland LEO calling them and asking for backup?

Was this also a sign of diminished mental capacity?
So basically anyone that doesn't follow your prescribed Monday morning quarterback plays must be diminished mentally?
He reacted/responded to an incident that transpired in a matter of a few short minutes.
Anytime anyone loses a life it is a sad day, but to make a blanket statement that Christopher Deedy was diminished because he didn't do what you think he should have done is not the correct way of thinking. It's easy for us to take sides and armchair quarterback every confrontation after the fact but when you're in the middle of it, you're forced to make decisions very quickly.


We will never know.



One thing we do know for certain is that LEO’s are human.
They drink alcohol.
They get drunk.
Some of them do get corrupted.



Was this the case here? We will never know.

Also for Darmok and Jalad


http://www.hawaiinewsnow.com/story/22933849/day-12-mcdonalds-workers-memory-questioned-in-deedy-murder-trial

Day 12: Shane Medeiros testifies in Deedy murder trial

Medeiros says Elderts didn't harass customer Michael Perrine at the food counter, despite many accounts of their exchange becoming racially charged.
"Perrine says 'I live in Hawaii too.' Kollin says 'That's cool.' He made it clear that he was joking. He made it clear," Medeiros said.




http://www.mauinews.com/page/content.detail/id/574445/Witness-didn-t-feel-threatened-before-shooting.html?nav=5031

Witness didn’t feel threatened before shooting

HONOLULU (AP) - A man who defense attorneys claim was the target of bullying that led to a deadly confrontation between a federal agent and another man testified that he didn't feel threatened during the incident at a Waikiki fast-food restaurant.
Perrine testified that he had been drinking before going to the restaurant in the early hours of Nov. 5, 2011. He said he doesn't remember much about the encounter but did recall hearing Elderts use the word "haole," which means white person, but just shrugged it off.

"I don't feel like it was that threatening of a situation," Perrine said, according to KHON-TV.




http://www.hawaiinewsnow.com/story/22845173/day-5-officer-says-deedy-looked-drunk-on-night-of-shooting

Day 5: Officer says Deedy looked drunk on night of shooting




http://www.hawaiinewsnow.com/story/22856249/day-6-eyewitness-says-deedys-friends-inflamed-situation

Day 6: Eyewitness says Deedy threatened to shoot Elderts in the face

He said
 

Christopher Deedy appeared intoxicated


and was addressing Kollin Elderts with "drunken ramblings."




http://www.hawaiinewsnow.com/story/22878314/day-8-supervising-police-officer-testifies-at-deedy-trial

Day 8: Supervising police officer explains why Deedy not checked for alcohol

"I could smell a strong odor of what appeared to be alcoholic beverages on his breath. He was semi-unsteady on his feet," he said.


Comment: What’s this?
"I describe it as an 'Oh, no!' moment because it was a law enforcement officer," Schreiner said.




http://www.hawaiinewsnow.com/story/23060337/day-18-christopher-deedy-expected-to-testify

Day 18: Deedy takes stand; says Elderts was the aggressor

While on the stand, Deedy also disputed the prosecutor's argument that he was drunk that night.  He said he did party with friends, and he drank four beers over a number of hours, which is the limit he always sets for himself.


Comment: His friend said he had 5.




http://www.hawaiinewsnow.com/story/22890272/could-cops-have-tested-deedys-sobriety

Could cops have tested Deedy's sobriety?

Police who arrested Deedy and the evidence specialist who photographed him have testified that


he smelled of alcohol, had glassy eyes and slurred his words.


"The natural question is, 'Well, how do we know if he was truly intoxicated?' And if he was drinking, at what level was he at?" Tonaki said.


"Just by smelling somebody's breath you can't tell if they had one drink or ten drinks," Bakke said.


State public defender Jack Tonaki said police could have and maybe should have gotten that warrant.
"It's not a real complicated process. They just have to apprise the judge of the circumstances and why they feel they have probable cause to seek out the warrant," he said.






http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/intoxicate
in•tox•i•cat•edin•tox•i•cat•ing
Definition of INTOXICATE
1
: poison
2
a : to excite or stupefy by alcohol or a drug especially to the point where physical and mental control is markedly diminished
b : to excite or elate to the point of enthusiasm or frenzy





We will never know if Deedy was legally by definition intoxicated because a BAC and blood test was never taken.



A question is why did Deedy confront Elderts without calling for police 1st?  Was he intoxicated where his mental control was markedly diminished as by definition? 

Did he think he could handle the situation all by himself knowing that it could turn violent, a sign that his mental capacity might be diminished?

He also was facing the possibility of more than one drunk individual yet he did not consider calling for police or back-up. Was this also a sign of diminished mental capacity?



We will never know.



One thing we do know for certain is that LEO’s are human.
They drink alcohol.
They get drunk.
Some of them do get corrupted.



Was this the case here? We will never know.

I think it's funny that certain people take deedy word because he is 'leo' therefore wouldnt lie... BUT for some reason when some of hawaiis own leo give statements (looked drunk/intoxicated) they completely dismiss it. Wonder why the double standard. Hmmmm

I haven't looked at it, and I wonder if the FBI or anyone has any studies on the rate of misconduct for Federal vs. large state agencies. It might be interesting to look at.  I will say, and I know for a fact, that the entrance standards for Federal LEO's far exceed any municipality or state agency that I have seen. That could lead to many people taking the word or at least finding the federal agency / agents slightly more credible.  It's not to say they don't do stupid things, or lie, but it might seem like they get caught less or covered up better?

exactly

"We will never know if Deedy was legally by definition intoxicated because a BAC and blood test was never taken."

which is different from your previous statement
"Moments later an intoxicated Deedy confronted Elderts,"

exactly

"We will never know if Deedy was legally by definition intoxicated because a BAC and blood test was never taken."

which is different from your previous statement
"Moments later an intoxicated Deedy confronted Elderts,"

After reading the excellent transcripts supplied here by Jl808, I am truly astounded no one has remarked at Deedy's total recall of everything.  I call BS, and months of careful coaching on just what to say.  Out of curiosity, were those security tapes available to the defense team?

This is a guy out getting blasted with his friends, and after butting into something none of his business (and possibly having a chip on his shoulder after his buddy clued him in on the locals' attitude) and has it go south on him.  From reading the testimony, Deedy started the incident.  From other cases I have read years ago, the self defense killing justification does not extend to because you were losing a fight you started.  I still think the badge waving and Federal this, Federal that crap is just that.  This clown was out on the town, not on a protective detail. 

What next, one of these off duty clowns cuts in front of you, you object, touch him, and he claims justification in wasting you?  I get that impression from a few posters here.

next
this statement is also not true

"No one really knows how much Deedy drank except him and his friends and they are not talking."

deedy and his friends testified under oath how much they drank