State Dept. Special Agent (Bureau of Diplomatic Security, or DS) Christopher Deedy shot and killed a local Hawaiian man, Kollin Elderts, on Nov. 5, 2011, during an argument at 3 a.m. in a Waikiki McDonald’s. Elderts was unarmed; Deedy carried his knife and gun. A videotape from inside the McDonald’s is being held as evidence and the judge has ordered it sealed from the public for fear it might taint the jury pool. Deedy was in Hawai’i in advance of the APEC conference which was held later that month. He was assigned to help provide diplomatic security for the APEC attendees. No diplomats were present in the McDonald’s that night, needless to say, and the State Dept. refuses to say whether or not Deedy was actually on duty at the time. Tests on the victim’s body showed that he was legally drunk and had some amount of trace drugs in his system at the time of his death. While it is known that Deedy had been drinking at a bar with friends prior to going to the McD’s and eyewitnesses say that he was clearly drunk, he was allowed to “decline” a blood-alcohol test at the time of his arrest. (No law enforcement officer is permitted to carry deadly weapons while intoxicated or under the influence of drugs, so the lack of a breathalyzer test may prove to be problematic.) Deedy actually fired three shots at Elderts – it was the third shot that hit Elderts in the chest and killed him. You may read background on this case here:
http://teri.nicedriving.org/2012/05/update-on-a-murder-in-hawaii/
Deedy has been charged with two crimes: 2nd degree murder and use of firearm in the commission of a felony.
Deedy’s attorney, Brook Hart, filed a motion to dismiss the charges based on the idea that Deedy was acting in the role of a federal law enforcement officer and thus should be immune to charges. The judge in this case, Karen Ahn, had scheduled a hearing to occur in July on the motion to dismiss; however, she has removed that hearing from her docket. Apparently the trial against Deedy will go forward. The murder trial is currently scheduled for September of this year – 10 months after the incident took place. In the meantime, Deedy was allowed to post bail and return to Virginia. He has been placed on a desk job at the State Dept., where he continues to draw his salary. He has successfully sued the insurance company that carries his tenant’s insurance on the house he rents in Virginia so that the insurance company will now have to cover his legal expenses in the separate civil case for wrongful death filed against him by the Elderts family.
June 15–State Circuit Judge Karen Ahn has removed from her calendar a hearing on a motion by the attorney for Christopher Deedy to dismiss a murder charge against the State Department special agent.
Ahn had scheduled July 13 to hear motions by Deedy’s attorney, Brook Hart, who wants the murder case dismissed. Deedy, 28, is scheduled to stand trial in Ahn’s court on Sept. 10 on charges of second-degree murder and use of a firearm.
Hart said Thursday he does not view Ahn’s action as a setback. No reason was given for the hearing’s removal from her calendar. He said there are other motions he is considering, as well as the possibility of moving Deedy’s case to federal court.
Earlier, Hart said Deedy was in Honolulu as a federal law enforcement officer on an official U.S. State Department assignment with the power of arrest and the right to carry a firearm when he shot and killed Kollin Elderts, 23, Nov. 5 at a Waikiki McDonald’s restaurant.
In legal papers filed in Circuit Court June 8 opposing Hart’s request for more materials, city Deputy Prosector Janice Futa said Deedy was “the first aggressor” in an early morning fight inside the fast-food restaurant.
Futa said “independent witnesses stated that Deedy acted as the first aggressor, escalating a verbal argument into a physical confrontation when he (Deedy) thrust kicked Elderts in the chest/stomach area and threw his slippers at Elderts, striking Elderts in the head.”
She said all police reports as well as relevant written or recorded witness statements have been provided to Hart. Futa said Hart is “conducting a fishing expedition” with his requests.
She also said Hart’s request for the criminal records of Elderts, his companion that night — Shane Medeiros — and potential witnesses, and for the birth dates and Social Security numbers of all potential witnesses, is not relevant to the case.
Earlier this month, Ahn, a former congressional aide and television journalist, granted a prosecution request to seal the restaurant’s surveillance videos.
The judge also kept private portions of the court document referring to events depicted on the surveillance videos of the shooting. Hart and the Honolulu Star-Advertiser, its television news partner Hawaii News Now and online news site Hawaii Reporter opposed the sealing.
Ahn ruled that the videos, if released, would essentially go viral on the Internet and provide images that could jeopardize a fair trial for the prosecution, defense or both.
Hart filed the dismissal motion and exhibits that included the surveillance videos on May 14, which as court filings normally would have been public. But the filings were kept private because of the prosecution’s pending request and the judge’s ruling.
Hart has said federal law empowers a federal officer to act within the scope of his duties to protect a person from a “crime of violence.”Deedy acted, Hart has said, in response to “attacks” on himself and a friend.
The State Department has said Deedy was in Hawaii as a member of its Bureau of Diplomatic Security to provide security for leaders attending the Asia-Pacific Economic Cooperation conference.
Deedy is free on $250,000 bail and has returned to his home in Virginia awaiting the Honolulu criminal trial.
(c)2012 The Honolulu Star-Advertiser
– from the print edition of the Honolulu Star-Advertiser
teri's random thoughts 
paxhonu
June 17, 2012 at 4:13 am
Aloha, Teri:
It does seem true that failure of the police to measure Deedy’s blood alcohol content (BAC), if that failure occurred, might prove problematic to this case, more particularly to the criminal case, less so to the civil case.
Such omission would startle the Court, as all indicators pointed to the drink/drug factor as being of material interest. Refusing a breathalyzer test, as Deedy reportedly did at the scene, is not a problem so long as the BAC test is run upon arrest, which (running a BAC) is, as others have pointed out, standard procedure when any LEO is involved in a shooting. It is possible, I guess, that a test was taken and then simply buried as a favor to State Dept., CIA, FBI, or Mercenaries ’R Us, whatever. But, despite there being no admission by anyone, neither police, court, nor attorneys, to date, I still think the most likely scenario is that a BAC test actually was taken and is simply not being released nor opened for discussion prior to trial.
If no BAC test was run, however, that could easily prove problematic for the Honolulu Police Department (HPD) as well. If a test was warranted but erroneously waived or omitted, that is, and the criminal case and/or the civil case against the defendant is harmed by its (BAC) absence, the HPD has opened itself to civil liability, and it (HPD) and specific officers may be sued directly by a “party with standing”, i.e., by the Elderts family.
That a test was warranted is irrefutable, as is clearly indicated by the immediate testimony of various eyewitnesses and interviews by police at the scene (at least three witnesses gave some version of “[Deedy] appeared very intoxicated” or reported “seeing [Deedy] drinking at another bar earlier”). More damning, HPD officers themselves noted for the arrest report that: “Deedy had red, glassy eyes and slurred speech” and “was involved in an earlier altercation at another bar”, etc.
So the HPD knew, irrefutably, that drinking by Deedy was a clearly indicated factor, making the running of a BAC on Deedy both warranted and maybe mandatory by HPD policy once an arrest was made. Any defense that Deedy was just doing his job will hinge probably to a large degree on the presumption of sobriety, a more than dubious presumption given the facts. We are quite sure that the Elderts family attorney is aware of this, and of HPD’s potential culpability.
Do you know, Teri, what really bothers me most about this whole case, though? It’s not just that the calling out and killing of an unarmed man is at best loathsome and craven and was no doubt avoidable, nor the needless ambiguity over whether the defendant was drunk or sober, nor the unconscionable delay in bringing it to trial while the defendant roams free.
It’s the larger picture that that this is not about Hawaii, or Deedy, or even this specific incident at all. It is about the mindset of an entire subspecies of the human race, the military, security forces, government agency personnel, contract mercenaries, and other thugs who carry guns for money and pride themselves on the use of deadly force. They truly feel they are above the rest and above the law, and that whatever they do must be interpreted from that perspective. They embrace the idea of pre-emptive war, first strike, occupation, and conducting murderous activities in countries with whom we are not at war. It is a fully non-empathetic and uncompromising sense of entitlement to voluntarily escalate any argument, take any position, make and enforce any order, and use firearms or other weapons to kill any person, armed or unarmed, man, woman, or child, militant or civilian whom they have decided, arbitrarily or not, to label “terrorist”, “unruly”, “disrespectful”, “suspicious”, “obstructive to our desires”, or “insurrectionist”. They do this everywhere in the world, in this country, that country, it doesn’t seem to matter.
Of course, that they themselves are the global destroyers of peace, the terrorists, the producers of counter-terrorists, the security disrupters, the ones harming America, is completely lost on them. Denied without consideration of its obvious truth.
The world we live in today has many armed, ignorant thugs willing to excuse each other for any crime, anytime, operating in a global stew of American imperialism supported by financial, political, industrial, and military oligarchs.
So be careful of the flying monkeys. They are known to be neither reasonable nor cognitive, and can be especially dangerous when they are fearful or confused.
LikeLike
morning's minion
June 17, 2012 at 7:41 pm
Thanks to Teri and this commentator for such thoughtful coverage of a truly disturbing incident. Increasingly, in all venues, we see a two-tiered justice system. It is the accumulation of these incidents –one here, one there– that indicate that we are in a crisis. Justice and legal systems have no meaning if they are not applied with a scrupulous even-hand. In the absence of that fair-play, at least we have vigilant citizens, like Teri, who take the time and care to cover these stories so that they don’t get lost in the deafening silence that seems to be Imperialism’s way of swallowing people.
LikeLike
morning's minion
June 17, 2012 at 7:50 pm
paxhonu: my compliments to you on an incredibly thoughtful response. I couldn’t agree more, especially with your sense of the larger picture. So well said. It’s reassuring to know that there are people who understand how dire the stakes are, and who give such eloquent voice to the full magnitude of the crisis.
LikeLike
Teri
June 18, 2012 at 4:02 am
Morning’s Minion,
I greatly appreciate the insights paxhonu brings to this issue as well. He/she has contributed a lot, not only by sharing thoughts and feelings, but by knowing the details of the case so well and presenting them so clearly.
I know this is only one case, but it has certainly clarified the point that we seem to have two justice systems in this country. And based on the comments in the earlier articles I wrote about the case, it seems quite a number of Americans are okay with that.
-Teri
LikeLike
paxhonu
June 18, 2012 at 5:29 pm
To morning’s minion:
Thank you for the kind words, they are greatly appreciated. (And thank you, Teri, as well, for yours.) Candidly, my comments generally come together only with a bit of fussing over, and are rarely extemporized in first pass. Teri herself, as you have already noted, sets by her ahead of the curve research and excellent writing, a rather high bar for accuracy, logical thought, coherence, and conveyance. I am pleased have this excellent forum to participate in, for the vast amount I am able to learn and the little I am able to add; and just hope not to embarrass myself too badly in the process.
I’d also like to echo back to you, morning’s minion, the sentiment you express about how reassuring it is to find there are others (such as you, btw) who “understand [both] how dire the stakes are, and […] the full magnitude of the crisis”. Thank you very much. I look forward to seeing you around.
LikeLike
pitchfork
June 21, 2012 at 12:13 am
Thank god. I found your blog once more Teri. I looked and looked, and gave up. All of a sudden, there was a link on another blog called “We meant Well…”
http://www.wemeantwell.com/
Btw, maybe the term “PBY at Midway” will clue you to who I am Teri. Good to be here again. This time I’ll make sure I bookmark your blog.
I also notice morning’s minion is here. Cool. I read your excellent posts at Salons GG blog all the time. I’d love to comment there..but unfortunately..I was banned. After one post. Ha! I’ll take that as a badge of honor. Hehehehehe! Anyway, time to catch up on things here. I’ll be back.
LikeLike
teri
June 21, 2012 at 5:23 am
Okay, pitchfork,
Now you’ve got me really curious. I did see you had left a comment at UT (GG’s blog) at least once; all I remember is that I liked what you said, although I can’t remember what the topic was, nor what your comment said exactly. So I was pleased when you posted here. What got you banned? GG claims he only bans people after multiple warnings. I left the place after the comment and log-in system was changed, demanding one log in via a google account (I have never used facebook, so that log in procedure was not an option for me), which process leaves one’s gmail account open the whole time one is logged in to salon. After months and months of not posting, I ventured back recently using a new gmail account set up for the purpose, but the feel of the whole place has changed. And, it turns out (sniff, sniff) that no-one missed me. At this point, I figure the hell with it. Used to be a great community.
Do I know you? Oh, hell, you can’t answer that on a public blog, can you? Your clue doesn’t help me with this puzzle; but then, I am not very swift on the uptake sometimes. Well, in any case, I am happy to have you back here and paxhonu mentioned that he/she hoped you would return. I always enjoy morning’s minion’s comments, too, of course…and Kitt comes around once in awhile.
Peter Van Buren is a heck of a nice guy, and I was tickled to see he gave a link to this blog when he wrote about the Deedy case. I’m glad you read him, too – support the good guys.
Hang around, pitchfork. Pull up a chair.
Best,
Teri
LikeLike
pitchfork
June 21, 2012 at 1:39 pm
Good morning Teri. Well, I’ll give you another clue. How bout..”I hope he squirms”. And if that doesn’t do it..how bout..oh hell with it. This is the guy that sent our certified Droner-in-Chief his dads old Navy uniform. Remember? Not that it matters. He couldn’t get Clue if he was drenched in Clue musk and paraded in a field of horny Clues doing a freaking Clue mating dance anyway. So I’ll just suck it up. What else is new? Oh, wait. I bet someone’s gonna be real happy today though.
I jus saw one of those great big computerized Billboards for that new Hmmmm, seems like a no brainer to me. Someone’s gonna make a killen(scuze the pun)on the NWO World Wide Collateral Damage Lottery. Better get your tickets now Teri. I hear today’s jackpot is $4bil and climbing fast. You can even choose the death toll via computer.
Oh, I also heard as an added benefit, all profitable proceeds will be donated to Obombardier’s election campaign so is fully Tax exempt too! And, you get an robotographed picture of our Droner-in Chief..even if you don’t win…which means..EVERYBODY wins something. How cool is that? I’ma gonna pin mine up next to my expanding collection of Drone Kill photographs. I’ve even started collecting the “Kill List” baseball cards too. Man, they’ll be worth a bundle in a few years. Might even make retirement possible now that SS has been sold off as CID’s. (note to self..check into SS Hedge Funds)Hey, I hear the White House marketing Dept has just added T-shirts, baseball caps, rings and lot’s of other collectable goodies with images ranging from torture renderings, civilian body piles, Drones, and various Murder Inc associates like Jose Rodriquiz to John Brennen.. and best of all, one with King Obliterator with his finger on the Kill button. WOW!! Now that’s a gotta have! As a bonus, you even get a piece of shrapnel from an exploded Drone too!!! It’s even been “de-nuclearized” for your personal safety.
Well Teri, I gotta get on down to my local 7/11 now and buy my Collateral Damage Lottery ticket. Wish me luck!!! Hope there’s still some Drone/Kill matching scratchoffs left too. I know em by heart now.(singing) “Happy days are here again” !! Now where did I put my iDrone alarm. Can’t be too careful these days ya know.
My neighbor was just Drone buzzed while havin a good ole family BBQ. Stopped over head for 5 minutes. You know, takin pictures, recordin conversations and stuff.
But what the hell. Ain’t none of them there “terrorists” round here. So, as long as you ain’t “up to no good”, guess there’s nothin to worry bout, right? Right. Ok, gotta head out Teri. Later.
LikeLike
Teri
June 21, 2012 at 2:24 pm
No, I get who you are here, and I remember what you said about your Dad and sending his medals, etc. back to POTUS, Pitchfork. It’s not like I have so many commenters that I can’t remember what they said. I was wondering if I knew you outside the internet or under a different user name on some other blog.
Be careful out there getting those lottery tickets. I hear sometimes the ticket buyers are targeted. Y’know, just for funsies and so they don’t have to pay out the winnings.
-Teri
LikeLike
Teri
June 22, 2012 at 8:01 am
Just a note to everyone here.
The Deedy thing reminded me from the get-go of the Ray Davis in Pakistan murders.
And what has ole Ray Davis been up to since his return from Pakistan, you ask? Well, after blood money was paid to the widows of the murdered Pakistanis, he came back to the US. Supposedly, the US was going to “investigate” the incident and report back to Pakistan, but Pakistan has heard nary a word about any “investigative” results. Although Hillary we-came-we-saw-he-died swears one is taking place and she is renowned worldwide for her honesty and integrity, so there’s that. Obama referred to Davis as “our diplomat” and asked that he get diplomatic immunity in the Pakistan case, which was denied because Davis was no freaking diplomat, but a CIA/Xe contractor on “security assignment”.
So in Oct. last year, back in the US, with an “investigation” into the Pakistan murders either happening or not happening as the case may be, Davis punched a guy out over a parking space and broke a vertebrae in the man’s back, among other injuries. He pleaded not guilty. The trial is set for Sept. this year. Maybe he and Deedy can exchange notes on how much fun each has had using their special agent secret powers to take down the locals. Maybe they can get together for a few drinks and introduce their lawyers to each other. What a chuckle-fest that would be. A real hoot. Ah, good times, good times.
Davis has been working as a firearms instructor since his return to the US. The judge at his plea hearing is allowing Davis to continue carrying his firearm so he can “work at his job”.
http://www.reuters.com/article/email/idUSBRE84000020120501
As well as the Reuters article, see this:
http://www.boston.com/news/nation/articles/2011/10/04/cia_contractor_accused_of_causing_spine_fracture/
Background on Pakistan incident:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Raymond_Allen_Davis_incident
Just thought it was interesting in a “the twisted psychology and continued sociopathy of the mercenary killer mind” sort of way. Flying monkeys.
LikeLike
Teri
June 22, 2012 at 8:06 am
This comment was left the other day on the Jan. article about the Deedy case. (“A Follow-up to a Murder in Hawai’i”) I felt it was so interesting and informative that it should also be placed here. It comes from someone named Robert, who is a law enforcement officer, and thus offers some insights from the law enforcement standpoint.
His comment:
Robert:
Interesting opinions on here. I was not there, I did not see it. I don’t know what happened. But I am a law enforcement officer. I carry a concealed weapon on me almost every day. I would offer this:
I’m not sure what jurisdiction state department federal agents have to enforce local laws. Some do, some don’t…it depends on the agency you work for. Most people assume that just because a person is a federal agent, they possess sworn arrest authority. Not true. There are many GS series 1811 federal agents who do not possess arrest authority. But for arguments sake, let’s assume Mr. Deedy is a sworn LEO with powers of arrest.
One of the fundemental requirements of being a law enforcement officer is good judgement. Federal, state, local…it does not matter, if you you cannot make good calls under pressure and you possess a weapon, your a danger to yourself and others.
I never worked for the state department but I’d bet you a dollar they have a written policy that says something like: “You cannot carry your government issued firearm if your intoxicated or have been consiming alcohol within X amount of hours”. Almost all departments have a written policy that restricts the carrying of firearms when consuming alcohol.
All this said: IF Mr. Deedy was partying it up at the club while carrying a gun, he was wrong. And IF Mr. Deedy got into a PERSONAL confrontation and then decided to use his federal agent status to solve it, then he was wrong. IF Mr. Deedy went out of his way to follow the victim outside of the club, he was wrong. Lots of “IF’s” and again, I don’t know what went down but bottom line, drinking and guns are a bad combination, law enforcement agent or not. I look forward to seeing the McDonald’s Video. I suspect it will anwser the most important IF question: Was the use of deadly force reasonable in this situation? Just because you have the authority to enforce law does not mean you should enforce the law when you find yourself in circumstances that would unreasonably escalate the situtation that would likely require you to use force when you could have just been a good witness and called uniformed, sober police officers.
One last comment, somewhere in the above blog comments I saw someone write that police officers can use deadly force to apprehend or stop crimes. Not his exact words but something like that. Law Enforcement Officers in this country are REQUIRED to use deadly force only as a last resort when all other lesser meands have failed or cannot reasonable be employed; AND only in situations when it is reasonable to conclude that the actions of the suspect pose imminent threat of death or serious bodily harm to the officer or others. There are other exceptions too but the point I’m making is deadly force would normally not be warranted if two drunks got into an arugument/fist fight in a McDonald’s. Cop or no cop.
Interesting opinions on here. I was not there, I did not see it. I don’t know what happened. But I am a law enforcement officer. I carry a concealed weapon on me almost every day. I would offer this: I’m not sure what jurisdiction state department federal agents have to enforce local laws. Some do, some don’t…it depends on the agency you work for. Most people assume that just because a person is a federal agent, they possess sworn arrest authority. Not true. There are many GS series 1811 federal agents who do not possess arrest authority. But for arguments sake, let’s assume Mr. Deedy is a sworn LEO with powers of arrest. One of the fundemental requirements of being a law enforcement officer is good judgement. Federal, state, local…it does not matter, if you you cannot make good calls under pressure and you possess a weapon, your a danger to yourself and others. I never worked for the state department but I’d bet you a dollar they have a written policy that says something like: “You cannot carry your government issued firearm if your intoxicated or have been consiming alcohol within X amount of hours”. Almost all departments have a written policy that restricts the carrying of firearms when consuming alcohol. All this said: IF Mr. Deedy was partying it up at the club while carrying a gun, he was wrong. And IF Mr. Deedy got into a PERSONAL confrontation and then decided to use his federal agent status to solve it, then he was wrong. IF Mr. Deedy went out of his way to follow the victim outside of the club, he was wrong. Lots of “IF’s” and again, I don’t know what went down but bottom line, drinking and guns are a bad combination, law enforcement agent or not. I look forward to seeing the McDonald’s Video. I suspect it will anwser the most important IF question: Was the use of deadly force reasonable in this situation? Just because you have the authority to enforce law does not mean you should enforce the law when you find yourself in circumstances that would unreasonably escalate the situtation that would likely require you to use force when you could have just been a good witness and called uniformed, sober police officers. One last comment, somewhere in the above blog comments I saw someone write that police officers can use deadly force to apprehend or stop crimes. Not his exact words but something like that. Law Enforcement Officers in this country are REQUIRED to use deadly force only as a last resort when all other lesser meands have failed or cannot reasonable be employed; AND only in situations when it is reasonable to conclude that the actions of the suspect pose imminent threat of death or serious bodily harm to the officer or others. There are other exceptions too but the point I’m making is deadly force would normally not be warranted if two drunks got into an arugument/fist fight in a McDonald’s. Cop or no cop.
Robert
LikeLike
pitchfork
June 22, 2012 at 12:52 pm
quote “And IF Mr. Deedy got into a PERSONAL confrontation and then decided to use his federal agent status to solve it, then he was wrong. IF Mr. Deedy went out of his way to follow the victim outside of the club, he was wrong” unquote
Far out. I’ll let the victim know he’s been posthumously vindicated. I’m pretty sure he’ll appreciate it.
note to self..file under choice A, B, or C
A. nominations for the terminally don’t get it
B…the plum bob of incredulous
C. hind sights of the galactic dumb
LikeLike
Coffee Guy
July 3, 2012 at 8:55 am
No bias at all in this blog lol
LikeLike
Coffee Guy
July 3, 2012 at 9:02 am
“While it is known that Deedy had been drinking at a bar with friends prior to going to the McD’s.”
Really? Where is your proof of this? It’s only known that he bought drinks with his credit card. There has 0 proof shown that he was drinking them. Why is it so hard for you to be truthful on Deedy’s side? All we know is that Elderts is dead, was drunk twice the legal limit and had cocaine/marijuana in his system and that Deedy shot him. If you have agenda that’s fine. Just admit and don’t to pass yourself off as someone that is fairly reporting this story. You refuse to look at the possibility that Deedy may have justifiably been defending himself.
LikeLike
paxhonu
July 5, 2012 at 5:52 pm
The author’s lack of bias, her fair reporting on this case, is clearly demonstrated by reading the articles in toto, and by quoting her completely and fully from the articles, rather than reading or comprehending only snippets:
e.g., “No diplomats were present in the McDonald’s that night, needless to say, and the State Dept. refuses to say whether or not Deedy was actually on duty at the time. Tests on the victim’s body showed that he was legally drunk and had some amount of trace drugs in his system at the time of his death. While it is known that Deedy had been drinking at a bar with friends prior to going to the McD’s and eyewitnesses say that he was clearly drunk, he was allowed to “decline” a blood-alcohol test at the time of his arrest. (No law enforcement officer is permitted to carry deadly weapons while intoxicated or under the influence of drugs, so the lack of a breathalyzer test may prove to be problematic.) ”
Fair, unbiased, and accurate.
Of course, pretty much the entire actual fact set of this case is troubling to and cripples any robust defense of Deedy. We know, for instance, that Deedy was drinking that night because: a) his lawyer has admitted same; b) there are several eyewitness testimonies from various locations that have Deedy drinking and/or drunk; and c) the police report itself strongly suggests that Deedy appeared drunk at the time of arrest and that he was involved in another altercation at a bar earlier that same night.
(Note: I initially included: “d) missing a reportedly drunk, unarmed, and physically smaller man twice from point blank range”, but decided against including it here because that would be unfair.)
We know that Deedy was not on duty because: a) neither Deedy, his lawyer, nor State has suggested that he was on duty; and b) because the very formulation of his legal defense so far is based (according to the lengthy ramblings Deedy’s lawyer has indulged in “for the press”, which the press has then fatuously transcribed with neither critical questioning nor with any clarification that the expressed position is totally the sole source opinion of Deedy’s own lawyer), contention that Deedy was an off duty LEO who was authorized to voluntarily don the mantle of responsibility and act in an immediate capacity of LEO should and when he deem it appropriate and necessary.
The conceit of that defense is that even a grave mistake made by said acting LEO is to be forgiven and free from state prosecution if the suspect believed he was acting correctly at the time. And the insurmountable hurdle of that defense to this case is that it falls apart if the LEO at the time was in contravention of the very laws, regulations, or policies that gave him LEO authority in the first place.
As I noted above, we must presume for now that a BAC was run on Deedy and will eventually be produced for the court. Failure to run the test or to produce the results of that test becomes potentially a very big problem for HPD. And given the irrefutable indications that alcohol consumption by Deedy was a factor and the ample testimony regarding same, it is highly unlikely that such a dubious defense will hold water with any court that hears it.
The more interesting question for now is: Why is this defendant, charged with murder two and use of a firearm during commission of a felony, being granted so much more pre-trial freedom, freedom to work outside the state and to travel at will, at such minimal bail, and with so much lengthier a delay to his case being brought before court, than any other similarly charged defendant has enjoyed, apparently in the entire history of the State?
I would suggest that the State Department is toying with the State of Hawaii, as it toys with sovereign nations like Pakistan and Palestine and Cuba and Haiti and Yemen and, hell, the entire spectrum of states and nations, by making it difficult to apprehend, more difficult to hold, and as onerous as possible to actually try, any one of its flying monkeys, no matter how vicious, cowardly, or egregiously brazen their questionable acts may be. State Dept. has become, as both the CIA and the U.S. Military have long been, nothing more than the advance men for the Corporatocracy and Financial Oligarchy they serve.
LikeLike
paxhonu
July 5, 2012 at 8:00 pm
Following one’s own comment, which seems a regular occurrence on this thread …
It really was unfair of me to have written in the aforesaid prior written:
What I shoiuld have written was:
And for all that fact acknowledges, it and the set of known evidence remains not dispositive yet as to Deedy’s drunkenness.
For instance, he (Deedy) may perhaps have dimly perceived other threat(s) about the room, that starkly lit McDonald’s, and fired and missed from much more respectable distance(s).
And that’s worth the waiting for the Video!
LikeLike
Gerry
September 20, 2012 at 6:49 pm
Thank you Teri for your accurate reporting! I’ve been following this story since the early morning of Nov. 5th and waiting to see the outcome as well.
LikeLike
Hot
October 19, 2012 at 2:46 pm
Teasing a guy at MC D get shoot by A – Hole ,,,, A-Hole confronted Elderts while he Eat his meal A-Hole could have walk away No One was in danger ,, Everyone was in Danger when the A-Hole gun was Pull Out , A-Hole Got irate cause moment before A-Hole got into a Confrontation outside MC D ,, A-Hole drunk with a gun Kill an Shot Elderts ,,, A-Hole said You’re going get shot ! ,,,,, being a drunk A-Hole trying to act Like a Big man Cause his friend saw him weak out side MC D He Took His Gun and Kill Elderts
LikeLike