Quantcast

Tuesday, July 29, 2014         

 Print   Email   Comment | View 294 Comments   Most Popular   Save   Post   Retweet

Deedy paints Elderts as aggressor in confrontation

By Ken Kobayashi & Craig Gima

POSTED:
LAST UPDATED: 06:51 p.m. HST, Aug 07, 2013


In frame-by-frame detail, State Department special agent Christopher Deedy described the moments leading to his fatal shooting of Kailua resident Kollin Elderts at the Waikiki McDonald’s in the early morning hours of Nov. 5, 2011.

Deedy took the stand in his murder trial for serveral hours Tuesday, but the trial adjourned for the day just before Deedy described fatally shooting Elderts.

Deedy testified extensively about the beginning of the fight that led to the shooting.

Under questioning by lead defense attorney Brook Hart, Deedy said he intervened when he noticed what he described as a “hostile incident” at the McDonald’s counter between Elderts, Elderts’ friend Shane Medeiros and customer Michel Perrine. Hart had Deedy use a pointer as he described in great detail what was happening in the McDonald’s surveillance video.

Deedy said when he asked Medeiros and Elderts what was going on, Elderts, who was behind him, said “Hey f---ing haole, You like beef?”

“I turned around and I said, ‘Nobody wants to fight.’ He (Elderts) said, ‘I’ll f--k you up.’”

At that point, Deedy said he pulled out his badge from his back pocket and identified himself as a law enforcement officer.

Deedy testified he told Elderts and Medeiros, “I’m a cop, if you assault me or anybody else here, you will be arrested”

Elderts’ response, according to Deedy, was: “You won’t arrest me; you got a gun?”

“It was not what I expected,” Deedy testified. “It was not what I anticipated.”

Deedy said the McDonald’s security guard said she had called police and that they were on their way.

“I thought, great, police were coming,” Deedy said.

Hart asked Deedy why he didn’t leave the scene at that point.

“For me at this point to simply run would be irresponsible,” Deedy answered. “I had already displayed my identification, told him he would be arrested. As a law enforcement officer to walk away from something I had taken responsibility for would be totally irresponsible.”

Deedy said he also believed that other law enforcement officers would be there very quickly.

But the situation escalated within seconds.

Deedy said he noticed Elderts acting aggressively, dropping his chin and changing his posture.

“This was an immediate behavior before an assault,” Deedy said.

When Elderts came at him, Deedy said he used a front kick to create space between himself and Elderts.

“He (Elderts) countered my kick,” Deedy said, catching Deedy’s heel as he kicked him and pulling his slipper off.

“This is an ‘oh no’ moment in our training,” Deedy said. “If somebody uses a counter maneuver against your defenses, it means they could very well know what they are doing ... When you’re assessing the facts of an assailant, that’s one of the things that’s a major contributor in assessing the amount of force to be used.”

At that point, Deedy said he also had his right hand on his gun, but had not pulled it out.

The trial recessed just after 4:30 p.m. and will resume Wednesday morning.

Earlier in the afternoon, Deedy testified that he had four beers — “maybe more, maybe less” — in the hours before going to the McDonald’s restaurant, where he shot and killed Elderts.

Deedy described a night of drinking and catching up with former college roommate Adam Gutowski, a Waikiki resident.

Deedy, Gutowski and Gutowski’s then-girlfriend Jessica West met in Waikiki and went to First Friday in Chinatown. At one bar, Deedy said he drank a club soda rather than a beer.

The three later went to Moose McGillicuddy’s on Lewers Street in Waikiki where Deedy said he had two beers.

He testified he had about four beers between 8:45 p.m. and 2:15 a.m.

"I make it a habit to keep track of what I’m drinking,” Deedy said. “I always try to drink responsibly."

Deedy said he tries to drink about one beer an hour so that he can drive and because he carries a gun.

His defense attorney Brook Hart asked him if he felt he was under the influence of alcohol before reaching the McDonald’s. Deedy said no and said he felt “normal” and “good.”

Deedy took the witness stand for the first time shortly before 11 a.m. and testified for about an hour before the court recessed for lunch. He resumed testifying about 1:15 p.m. before the Circuit Court jury.

Deedy, 29, who was here to provide security for the Asia-Pacific Economic Cooperation conference, is charged with murder for the fatal gunshot to the chest of Elderts, 23, of Kailua.

The agent’s testimony this morning included his employment background with the U.S. State Department, including his security clearance and training.

His defense attorney Brook Hart questioned Deedy about his training with firearms and dealing with a non-compliant person.

"We're told constantly to assess and reassess the situation. … The most fundamental thing is to ask questions," Deedy said, later adding: "We are taught to maintain a tactical advantage in an assault situation."

Deedy, who became an agent in 2009, said he was also trained on taking back or taking away a weapon.

"Your weapon is a deadly weapon. It's a great responsibility and we're given statistics every year on how many officers are killed with their own weapon. It's a very important topic, how to maintain control of our own weapon."

Deedy testified that federal law allows him to carry a weapon and the director of his agency issued an e-mail instituting a 24-hour-a-day carry policy.

Deedy said his job in the department’s diplomatic security service included working with then-Secretary of State Hillary Clinton as well as Sen. John McCain.

He said he was also assigned to the diplomatic mission in Benghazi, Libya, but returned to the U.S. before the Sept. 11, 2012, attack that left four dead, including U.S. Ambassador Christopher Stevens.

Today is the 18th day of Deedy's trial.

The prosecution maintains that Deedy, armed with his 9 mm Glock while bar hopping in Chinatown and Waikiki, kicked and shot the unarmed Elderts needlessly.

Deedy's defense is that he was acting as a law enforcement officer to quell a potentially dangerous situation that started with Elderts bullying a McDonald's customer.

Deedy identified himself, which enraged the drunken Elderts, who grabbed at the agent's gun when the third and final shot was fired, according to the defense.

Deedy’s testimony may also clear the way for the defense tell the jury about Elderts’ 2008 disorderly conduct conviction. In that case, Elderts resisted arrest at the parking lot of a Kailua bar and swearing at police officers before he was physically subdued, according to the defense.

The defense contends the conviction shows Elderts' aggressive and violent character in support of the agent's self-defense claims.






 Print   Email   Comment | View 294 Comments   Most Popular   Save   Post   Retweet

COMMENTS
(294)
You must be subscribed to participate in discussions
By participating in online discussions you acknowledge that you have agreed to the TERMS OF SERVICE. An insightful discussion of ideas and viewpoints is encouraged, but comments must be civil and in good taste, with no personal attacks. Because only subscribers are allowed to comment, we have your personal information and are able to contact you. If your comments are inappropriate, you may receive a warning, and if you persist with such comments you may be banned from posting. To report comments that you believe do not follow our guidelines, email commentfeedback@staradvertiser.com.
Leave a comment

Please login to leave a comment.
tasod wrote:
Don't do it ! Cross - exam will be (or should be) very strong
on August 6,2013 | 10:32AM
Hapa_Haole_Boy wrote:
only limited to scope of what came up in direct.
on August 6,2013 | 12:35PM
Mypualani wrote:
IRT Hapa_boy LOL do you even know what you are talking about? The Prosecution is not limited to what came up in direct of what the defense is aking, and besides that there are a few things that Deedy is going to have to explain, well okay alot of things.
on August 6,2013 | 06:21PM
NanakuliBoss wrote:
"I always drink responsibly. When I'm driving". Lol. Like watching a 48 hr.Mystery where the cool frat brothers get off for murder.
on August 6,2013 | 09:35PM
HawaiiCheeseBall wrote:
I think t his dude is thoroughly prepared for the cross examination. This dude is as cool as they come. Acquittal.
on August 6,2013 | 02:59PM
Kailuaraised wrote:
On one hand you have some drunks and Eldert's friend giving one story. Then you have Deedy who willingly took the stand to explain his side. He's very well spoken, educated, and trained. He comes across as genuine to people and someone who was trying to do the right thing. He'll be acquitted easily in my opinion.
on August 6,2013 | 03:59PM
Kalaheo1 wrote:
Kailuaraised wrote: "On one hand you have some drunks and Eldert's friend giving one story. Then you have Deedy who willingly took the stand to explain his side."

Well, to fair, I'm sure Elderts would have willingly took the stand too... If Deedy hadn't killed him.


on August 6,2013 | 04:13PM
hanabatadayz wrote:
too bad..so sad..if elderts wasn't acting up he wouldn't be dead either
on August 6,2013 | 05:15PM
Anonymous wrote:
Do you really want to live in the kind of world where you can be shot dead for "acting up"?
on August 6,2013 | 07:32PM
2NDC wrote:
Imagine Elderts testifying. "Eh brah, we nevah like no problems wit da haole. He wen come at me so I wen call him out. Dat fakka like beef, so I wen fak him up." Deedy OTOH, very well spoken, no criminal record, and no illicit substances in his system. I foresee Deedy getting acquitted. Totally justified shooting.
on August 6,2013 | 10:08PM
hapaguy wrote:
There was testimony that the unbiased witnesses, Bryd and Salzbrenner, were drunk or friends of either Elderts or Medeiros. And they both testified that Deedy shot first. Bryd also testified that Deedy was threatening to shoot Elderts in the face previous to any physical altercation....
on August 6,2013 | 06:10PM
Mypualani wrote:
You forgot the security lady, she wasn't drunk the cahier wasn't drunk, Ms Au wasn't drunk, the other marine the muslim one he wasn't drunk, so your point is? willingly took the stand? yeah right! his defense has not proven that he was justified in killing an un armed man, he did not rise to the level of self defense and Hart knows it, been watching this trial closely, there is no question of doubt that Deedy killed elderts, the question here is, did deedy commit a felony prior to shooting elderts, did he commit a simple assault that went straight to murder, now those are the elements that the jury will have to find on. Hawaii's selfdefense laws are very strict, and must be met with in the elements set forth, was deedy at home? did he have reason to fear for his life? if he did why didn't he leave and call the police, Hawaii has this thing where if you can run away you are not justified in taking a human life, if you start the fight you cannot say self defense, his lawyer knows this so right now this is plan b lie lie and lie, no matter the witnesse and no matter the video tape. Deedy's team did not impeach any of the un-biased witnesses, if anything deedy's friends just made things worse because they were shady just like Medieros, The expert the jury knows it's just his expert opinion and by the way the state shut him down when asked if he examined the body, he said no he didn't so his expertiese is gone and not so expert, is it reasonable that deedy approached elderts, is it reasonable that he threatened elderts with getting shot, how reasonable is it to believe that if you showed someone you badge that they would suddendly get nuts? Deedy left things out tomorrow it's the states turn.
on August 6,2013 | 09:56PM
Kailuaraised wrote:
"how reasonable is it to believe that if you showed someone you badge that they would suddendly get nuts" Are you being serious? Elderts was already arrested once for resisting arrest!
on August 7,2013 | 01:45AM
junia wrote:
Of course thats your imperialist up bringing bias. Now if you were honest with yourself and put your bud down and actually watch the video and make note of his demeaner and body language, you can tell he's trying to make stuff up as he goes along. Its pretty bad since they had almost 2 yrs to coach this witness and hes saying stuff like his memory is 'blurry', what? Blurry and he wasnt drunk? ...Was Mr Elderts saying anything to you as he approached you? answer: long pause...choke, (I need water)...my memory from the event???? I thjink I would remember what someone said to me prior to me shooting him dead! But he'll walk, because the bigger the 'LIE' the easier it is to believe.(Hitler)
on August 7,2013 | 12:23AM
lee1957 wrote:
I just read the HRS on second degree murder; I think the DA must have been smoking something to file those charges. I'm with you acquittal.
on August 6,2013 | 07:16PM
droid wrote:
Clearly, you need glasses. Chris Deedy committed the offense of murder in the second degree by intentionally or knowingly causing the death of Kollin Elderts. This is the statute in its entirety. Nothing more, nothing less. Easy conviction based solely on the one piece of evidence that doesn’t lie — the surveillance video. But Deedy sealed his own fate by admitting he initiated the confrontation by kicking Elderts. While the video is a little fuzzy on that part, Deedy removed all doubt by confirming it under oath. The prosecution must be laughing at his sheer stupidity.
on August 7,2013 | 01:33AM
NanakuliBoss wrote:
Jury will see through this cucumber.
on August 6,2013 | 09:27PM
allie wrote:
He may not have been drunk but why pull that gun? Elderts is no hero and has been a problem for years. Madieros was also egging him on just for the entertainment value. That said, I still think it is manslaughter.
on August 6,2013 | 03:12PM
Mythman wrote:
The charge is murder, allie - man is not on the table. not guilty of murder. case closed. no civil law suit cause of action. life goes on.
on August 6,2013 | 04:33PM
Mypualani wrote:
yeah right Mythman, keep preading lies. The civil uit will happen no matter what! the propnderance of the evedence is a bit different in civil.
on August 6,2013 | 06:23PM
Grimbold wrote:
If Elderts attacks Deedy and Deedy pulls his gun telling him to back off and Elderts did not, and instead tried to grab his gun, it is clearly self defense. Deedy in that moment knows that Elderts would kill him if he gets the gun. This scenario can be nothing but self defense. No matter if Deedy identified himself as law enforcement or not. At the most Deedy could be charged with unruly behavior.
on August 6,2013 | 05:37PM
NanakuliBoss wrote:
Law enforcement alibi when shooting an unarmed person is, he was going for my gun.
on August 6,2013 | 09:29PM
MexMe wrote:
The way I read it, Deedy stated Elderts grabbed for the gun after the first two shots missed. The third shot killed him. If this is true, Elderts was actually the person who was in fear for his life and was acting in self-defense as Deedy had already shot and missed twice. I would have gone for the gun at that point as well. Deedy has had lots of time to polish his testimony and get it straight. I am not impressed. As for a civil suit, I hope the family goes after the government for issuing the order for federal agents to carry a weapon 24 hours a day (or so says Deedy of the order from his supervisor). In a state where citizens cannot carry weapons, why should this federal agent carry one when he is off duty... AND DRINKING!! He might not have stepped in to "help" the harassed patron if he didn't feel the power of the gun in his back pocket. No matter how bad Elderts was, he didn't deserve to die. And those errant two bullets could have killed a bystander. Deedy was either drunk or a terrible shot: two reasons why he shouldn't have had a weapon while out "catching up with an old roommate" at First Friday.
on August 6,2013 | 11:00PM
junia wrote:
Well said, points made well observed. At the 20:55 point of the testimony the DA objects to the point of what a reasonable 'Officer' would do. Point about carrying a firearm - There a many HPD off duty officers around town at any given time and people act up, they dont go around shooting them in the face, at least not in the aloha state.
on August 7,2013 | 12:36AM
umanasibo wrote:
There's no need for Deedy to testify unless he and his lawyers feel they're losing the case. I suppose desperate times call for desperate measures.
on August 6,2013 | 10:40AM
hanalei395 wrote:
The defense feels that they have nothing else to lose.
on August 6,2013 | 10:51AM
Fred01 wrote:
You are clueless.
on August 6,2013 | 12:07PM
Mypualani wrote:
As you.
on August 6,2013 | 06:17PM
kiragirl wrote:
Agree.
on August 6,2013 | 12:01PM
false wrote:
Too much TV
on August 6,2013 | 12:20PM
Mypualani wrote:
too much illing.
on August 6,2013 | 07:25PM
51butterflies wrote:
umanasibo,-agreed. Also, Deedy escaped having a blood- alcohol test. Deedy needs to take responsibility for his" deadly force" actions that brought about a needless death. Not fair justice if he gets off.
on August 6,2013 | 04:32PM
hanabatadayz wrote:
needless bullying..you aren't the juror so you don't have a say what is fair
on August 6,2013 | 05:17PM
MexMe wrote:
If Deedy is such an upstanding guy/agent, why didn't he go forward and volunteer for a blood alcohol test? He knew, better than most people, that he would have to go to trail for the shooting and it would have cleared his name. The police screwed up but Deedy also didn't step forward. Was it because he knew he was drunk?
on August 6,2013 | 11:02PM
8082062424 wrote:
does not matter what Deedy says. It what the video showed. if his statement do not match he will look like a liar
on August 6,2013 | 10:44AM
umanasibo wrote:
It does matter what he says. So much can go wrong under cross examination. This is why most lawyers won't allow their clients to take the stand — unless, of course, they believe the jury will convict without such testimony.
on August 6,2013 | 10:55AM
Mypualani wrote:
He is a liar, the prosecution can rebut with the witnesses that has already tetified, those who saw and heard what he said prior to killing Elderts, all is not lost.
on August 6,2013 | 06:25PM
HawaiiCheeseBall wrote:
This will be good.
on August 6,2013 | 10:56AM
Kailuaraised wrote:
For those saying don't do it, I'm guessing you don't know very much about trials. There is no way Hart (the best defense lawyer in the state) would allow Deedy to take the stand if there wasn't a very good reason for it. This is going to get interesting. Deedy is very intelligent and can probably handle a prosecutor like Ahn on cross.
on August 6,2013 | 11:06AM
Kuihao wrote:
1. Brook Hart is not "the best defense lawyer in the state." 2. It is Deedy's choice whether to testify, not Hart's.. 3. Being "very intelligent" does not necessarily make for a good witness on cross examination. 3. Ahn is the judge, not the prosecutor. 4. I'm guessing you don't know very much about trials.
on August 6,2013 | 12:19PM
false wrote:
1.You're right too. Hart not the best, but is good. 2.Yes, its Deedy choice but attorney would give him his best advice. Hart's responsibility not to throw him under the bus. 3.RIght Ahn is judge. 4. Who cares.
on August 6,2013 | 12:40PM
Kailuaraised wrote:
Meant Futa. Being intelligent makes a difference. You're less likely to walk yourself into a trap. Hart is one of the best imo.
on August 6,2013 | 01:24PM
junia wrote:
1) Kailuaraised got 2) trying his best 3) not a clue He still walks, cause hes so believable, with his mother-loved face.
on August 7,2013 | 12:43AM
false wrote:
You may be right. Prosecutor Futa .
on August 6,2013 | 12:36PM
hapaguy wrote:
YOU clearly have no idea what you are talking about. The accused murderer almost NEVER testifies because the cross can be and will be extremely brutal and one mistake by the defendant can be fatal for the defense.
on August 6,2013 | 01:46PM
Kailuaraised wrote:
Well, from the looks of it, Hart and Deedy are having a field day right now. I highly doubt the prosecutor is going to come up with many holes in the story.
on August 6,2013 | 03:56PM
hapaguy wrote:
Well your comments are going from dishonest to comical now....
on August 6,2013 | 03:59PM
Kailuaraised wrote:
Dishonest? Because you're too lazy to go look up things for yourself?
on August 6,2013 | 04:04PM
droid wrote:
Kailuaraised -— so far Brook Hart and his client, Chris Deedy have provided absolutely ZERO (0) to refute the surveillance video which shows as plain as day that Deedy was the aggressor. But Deedy convicted himself today, by admitting he initiated the confrontation by kicking Kollin Elderts! From that point on, Elderts was DEFENDING HIMSELF from Deedy.

In case you still don’t get it, watch the surveillance video posted on this page. Clearly, Elderts is sitting at the table, minding his own business, while he and Medeiros wait for the food order they just paid for to be ready. Deedy walks over to the table where Elderts is sitting and begins picking a fight. I think we all know what happens next.
on August 7,2013 | 01:45AM
Mypualani wrote:
Hapaguy it's getting worse...as the trial goes on.
on August 6,2013 | 05:53PM
WarriorMojo wrote:
Well, they should be having a field day. This is the easy part. They've had months to write this script and rehearse their parts. But if you think things have gone perfectly, you really don't understand trials. There have been several significant openings for the prosecution to exploit.
on August 6,2013 | 05:07PM
Kailuaraised wrote:
We'll see. I don't think there were much openings that leave anything for the prosecution.
on August 6,2013 | 05:48PM
NanakuliBoss wrote:
Doesn't make a difference. Deedy will be fired from the Feds, Michael Green, the best lawyer IMO will sue him for everything including that State lapel pin he wears.
on August 6,2013 | 09:40PM
Kailuaraised wrote:
Doubt that. I work for the feds. You cannot just be fired. He also has his insurance covering the civil case.
on August 7,2013 | 01:47AM
Mypualani wrote:
Deedy with nothing to lose takes the stand.
on August 6,2013 | 05:55PM
hapaguy wrote:
In desperation Deedy takes the stand to testify. If this is all the witnesses that the defense can provide from all those people that were there that evening, I would say the defense is pathetically weak....
on August 6,2013 | 06:12PM
Mypualani wrote:
IRT hapaguy: the defense is pathetic and sad. Kraied is under the assumption that the jurors are lame.
on August 6,2013 | 06:31PM
umanasibo wrote:
That's my feeling as well. You don't put your client on the stand unless you're looking at a sure-fire conviction.
on August 6,2013 | 06:43PM
Mypualani wrote:
from the looks of things, Hart and Deedy messed up big time.
on August 6,2013 | 06:28PM
Mypualani wrote:
@ Hapa it's already fatal.
on August 6,2013 | 10:00PM
Mahalo wrote:
Whats his defense he forgot how to call 911 when he seen trouble
on August 6,2013 | 11:07AM
Fred01 wrote:
"when he seen trouble"?
on August 6,2013 | 12:09PM
Denominator wrote:
He "was" 911.
on August 6,2013 | 02:57PM
Kapaho wrote:
The security guard called 911
on August 6,2013 | 07:05PM
junia wrote:
The security guard has to protect the interest of her client, so her false testimony will keep mcdonalds or her firm from a lawsuit if Deedy walks. So sad people have no integrity to stand on their laurels. I wonder how that person can sleep at night.
on August 7,2013 | 12:50AM
2NDC wrote:
Deedy is gonna walk. They're winning so far. Once his testimony is done, he's gonna have more than enough reasonable doubt where the jury has to acquit. He's gonna clarify how many beers he consumed verses the number he simply purchased, he will testify under oath that he wasn't drunk. He already has two medical professionals and several other observers that back his story. More than enough to counter previous HPD statements. Big question is that if HPD believed that he was so drunk, then why didn't they press the issue and test Deedy while he was in custody. Get a warrant and get it done. If he was as bad as portrayed by HPD, then certainly the medical professionals would have made note when Deedy was being examined. Bottom line is Deedy is gonna walk. Hope Medeiros learns from Eldert's mistake. Don't go picking on tourists. Being a bully doesn't pay.
on August 6,2013 | 11:13AM
raygreiner wrote:
A later comment said what I think is entirely possible if Eldert and Madieros weren't just drunk. "Madieros was also egging him on just for the entertainment value." Let's hope this teaches anyone so inclined that bullying isn't entertainment.
on August 6,2013 | 03:54PM
Kalaheo1 wrote:
What made you think they were picking on tourists?
on August 6,2013 | 04:39PM
Mypualani wrote:
Reading other peoples lame postings, like Allies and fred.
on August 6,2013 | 06:33PM
Mypualani wrote:
Tourist? Perrine was not a tourist he lived here, not that it matters but....
on August 6,2013 | 06:32PM
sjean wrote:
all haoles are tourists
on August 6,2013 | 08:33PM
NanakuliBoss wrote:
Lol. Sjean.
on August 6,2013 | 09:41PM
Mypualani wrote:
Not!
on August 6,2013 | 10:02PM
Shh wrote:
Deedy's defense is that he was acting as a law enforcement officer to quell a potentially dangerous situation that started with Elderts bullying a McDonald's customer. OMG! Who said they needed him to act as a law enforcement officer that night in McDonalds? If they needed him there to do so then they would have assigned him to that location to do that job. However, he was off the job and took it upon himself to take his gun bar hoping while drinking and ended up killing someone at the end of the early morning.
on August 6,2013 | 11:16AM
SueH wrote:
Shh, if you had been there and Elderts was assaulting either you or your friend that night, you might be singing a different tune as to the appropriateness of Deedy's purpose or actions. It's easy to be an armchair quarterback and conjure up the "what ifs" after the whistle has blown.
on August 6,2013 | 11:28AM
lookup wrote:
Hello...Elderts was not ever assaulting anyone that night, he was responding to Deedy's assault on him. In my experience the best was to handle a drunk smart a@# is to laugh it off and get away from them so as not to make a situation worse which is exactly what Perrine did.
on August 6,2013 | 11:49AM
Denominator wrote:
Then why was there a guy on the ground getting kicked?
on August 6,2013 | 02:58PM
Mypualani wrote:
HUH? there wasno guy on the ground getting kicked!
on August 6,2013 | 06:34PM
junia wrote:
The guy who wasnt drunk, slipped and fell?
on August 7,2013 | 12:57AM
allie wrote:
Elderts was being egged on in his verbal assault by the cowardly Madieros
on August 6,2013 | 03:13PM
john_zee wrote:
dumb
on August 6,2013 | 06:36PM
NanakuliBoss wrote:
A competent law enforcement checks to see if the "victim" needs help before taking action. Perrine said he didn't need help. If fact Deedy did not even talk to Perrine who was 3 feet away from him when he delivered his "defensive" kick.
on August 6,2013 | 09:45PM
droid wrote:
This is the rediculously obvious point that Kailuaraised doesn’t seem to understand. The idea that Deedy was defending Perrine is a fantasy that exists only in Deedy’s mind (and maybe Brook Hart’s playbook). Perrine took the stand and under oath professed that he did not feel threatened, nor did he feel in need of any assistance. Deedy should have read the fact that Perrine was able to sit down in a relaxed fashion and patiently wait for his food following his conversation with Elderts as a sign that everything was A-okay. But the surveillance video shows Deedy never got close enough to Perrine to say two words to him, so Deedy’s shaky alibi is not supported by any tangible evidence.
on August 7,2013 | 01:56AM
hapaguy wrote:
Elderts did not assault anyone that night. The video evidence and witness testimony do not back up your claim that Elderts assaulted anyone that night. What are you talking about?
on August 6,2013 | 11:52AM
Mei mei wrote:
Elderts was only assaulting with him mouth -
on August 6,2013 | 12:06PM
MKN wrote:
@hapaguy: That is incorrect. While Elderts may not have initially assaulted Deedy, he did knock Deedy down twice and punched him multiple times. That is technically assault.
on August 6,2013 | 12:08PM
hapaguy wrote:
"While Elderts may not have initially assaulted Deedy..."? When someone assaults you first and you fight back, isn't that usually referred to as "self defense"?
on August 6,2013 | 12:30PM
MKN wrote:
@hapaguy: Do you even know what assault means? In Hawaii, an assault occurs when a person physically injures another person, without legal justification. Elderts technically had no legal justification to tackle and punch Deedy. Note that Deedy should probably be found guilty of this as well, but he was not charged with this (I think the prosecutor messed up in this regard). Point is both their actions are technically considered assault.
on August 6,2013 | 01:46PM
hapaguy wrote:
If I came up to you and kicked you and you defended yourself and then later when HPD asked you to describe what happened would you say "Hapaguy assaulted me so I assaulted him back"? Would say that? Or would you say "Hapaguy assaulted me so I exercised my legal right of self -defense"?
on August 6,2013 | 01:55PM
MKN wrote:
@hapaguy: I wouldn't have said either of those statements. LOL! I sure as hell wouldn't have stood up and tackled Deedy that's for sure. I would have called the cops. There was no reason for Elderts to retaliate if he didn't want to. He could have asked the guard to call the police, but he chose to retaliate which is considered assault. That is the legal term for his actions. With that said, Deedy shouldn't have kicked Elderts either which is also considered assault.
on August 6,2013 | 03:19PM
hapaguy wrote:
Well MKN I give you credit for not answering the question. I would argue that most intelligent people would say that the guy getting assaulted was defending himself and not assaulting the assaulter!...lol....
on August 6,2013 | 03:25PM
MKN wrote:
@hapaguy: So you're questioning my intelligence now? LOL!!! Is that all you got dude? How sad. You can think I am dumb all you want, but all I can say is had I been in Elderts shoes, I would't be dead like he is because I would have been smart enough not to have taken cocaine and alcohol, acted like a bully to the other patrons in that McDonalds, and hung around with convicted drug dealers like Medeiros. LOL!!!
on August 6,2013 | 04:02PM
hapaguy wrote:
MKN dance around the issue all you want. You said that "In Hawaii, an assault occurs when a person physically injures another person, without legal justification" and I agree with you there. Deedy assaulted Elderts without legal justification. Where we differ and where most intellectually honest people would agree with is that the person that gets assaulted is the victim and is defending themselves and not assaulting the assaulter!...lol
on August 6,2013 | 04:13PM
Mypualani wrote:
MKN please stop lying, you don't have to be physically injured to be assulted, you are writting about the different levels of assault, not cool man. Deedy did assult Elderts, and his simple assult misdemeanor went straight to Murder 2 when he shot and killed Elderts
on August 6,2013 | 06:40PM
Mypualani wrote:
MKN wrote: @hapaguy: Do you even know what assault means? In Hawaii, an assault occurs when a person physically injures another person, without legal justification. Elderts technically had no legal justification to tackle and punch Deedy. Note that Deedy should probably be found guilty of this as well, but he was not charged with this (I think the prosecutor messed up in this regard). Point is both their actions are technically considered assault. Mean Da Dope, you say Elderts "Technically had no legal justification to tackle and punch Deedy" sorry MKN yes he does if he is FIGHTING FOR HIS LIFE!. What kind of person are you? and where are you getting your information? Deedy cannot be charged with assault because after the kick, Deedy pulled out his gun and fired 3 times, what bullet hit I could careless, one of the bullets hit and killed Elderts. The prosecutor did not mess up, if you know anything about hawaii's statutes and laws, they wish they could do a simple manslaughter but cannot because Deedy was heard to threaten to kill the victim before he died. The elements to this case is simple: Threats, class c felony Simple Assault, misdimeanor that went staright to Murder Elements my dear is what this case comes down to and these will be part of the insructions to the jurors, have these elements been proven and or met in this trial?
on August 6,2013 | 07:51PM
Mypualani wrote:
no that is not self defense hapaguy (sarcasm) only when you threaten/ terrorize, kick and then shoot and kill someone now that's self defense right there.
on August 6,2013 | 06:37PM
lee1957 wrote:
Not when the guy you are "defending" yourself against is a law enforcement officer.
on August 6,2013 | 07:24PM
Mypualani wrote:
so Lee1957, you see the problem with your post is Deedy did not identifiy himself to those around him, the security and as for identifiying himself to the victim wel that remains to be proven, his lady friend did not see him present a badge and couldn't remember what deddy was saying, she said she saw him flip what looked like a wallet. she didn't hear him say hey I am an officer of the law. once I saw an accident and a man came over to me cause I witnessed what happened, guess what that man showed me? he showed me his badge and identified himself as a off duty police officer. Deedy boy has no one to verify this, now why is that?
on August 6,2013 | 10:13PM
Mypualani wrote:
No hapa that is not "self defense" in the world of Deedy supporters he did the right thing and was justified in killing a young man who 34 seconds before was sitting down smiling (irritatingly) waiting for his food. Yeah Deedy was Justified alright, NOT!!! this is not florida folks, you cannot go around and commit crimes and claim I killed him in self defense. Deedy does Not rise to that level when it comes to that law, reading on here makes me wonder what kind of people would say that someone deserved to have his life taken, because he's a local and a low life, lot of baggage here. lot of baggage one poster knew Elderts and seems glad that he is dead.
on August 6,2013 | 07:37PM
Tahitigirl55 wrote:
MKN - didn't you watch the video - Deely pushed Elderts down and then Elderts used his weapon - DA SLIPPER. Elderts did not at any time assault Deely. Watch the video.
on August 6,2013 | 01:11PM
MKN wrote:
@Tahitigirl55: I watched the video dozens of times. You apparently didn't watch the video. At no time did Deedy push Elderts down. It was the other way around. The local guy (Elderts) pushed down the federal agent guy (Deedy).
on August 6,2013 | 01:50PM
Mypualani wrote:
actually it was a slap to the face that sent the SOBER agent to the floor. Elderts turned away to help his friend who was being mobbed by gutless and West, turns around as Deedy is screaming I am going to shoot your face.
on August 6,2013 | 06:44PM
hanabatadayz wrote:
looks like elderts was about to attack deedy so deedy used a defense kick to keep him back
on August 6,2013 | 05:23PM
Mypualani wrote:
hanabatadayz wrote: looks like elderts was about to attack deedy so deedy used a defense kick to keep him back Looks like you don't know what the he!! you are talking about.
on August 6,2013 | 07:55PM
lee1957 wrote:
Elderts was a punk, pure and simple.
on August 6,2013 | 07:23PM
Mypualani wrote:
@ lee1957 : And so what? he deserved to die? and you think you perfect pure and simple.
on August 6,2013 | 10:16PM
Mypualani wrote:
SueH who was Elderts Assulting when he was sitting down? before Agent Deedy went over and said "you wanna get shot?" shows wallet. starts argument kicks victim and stated in front of witnesses that he is going to shoot the victim in the face. and pulls a gun and shoots said victim? Hello Nailz !This agent needs to be held accountable for his actions and for the taking of a life. I don't care what elderts was he's dead Deedy made sure of that.
on August 6,2013 | 07:30PM
junia wrote:
Elderts was sitting at his table when Deedy approached him, whos acting up than? And if the deceased was your son, you'd be whistling the other tune. Should we let Deedy off to play another game before we blow the whistle.
on August 7,2013 | 12:56AM
MKN wrote:
Yay! He's testifying.
on August 6,2013 | 11:17AM
kennysmith wrote:
the video i am here is not working at my end.
on August 6,2013 | 11:22AM
Leinanij wrote:
I think you need quicktime. If you don't, you have to wait until tonight's newscast.
on August 6,2013 | 12:20PM
8082062424 wrote:
KHON is streaming his testimony on it website
on August 6,2013 | 11:23AM
hapaguy wrote:
I was sooo wrong! Shocked and amazed that the defense would put him on the stand! This can only get worse for Deedy....
on August 6,2013 | 11:23AM
HawaiiCheeseBall wrote:
You don't know that for sure. There are a lot of factors. The guy could come across as sincere and intelligent and the jury could simply buy his story. Brook Hart is a smart guy, he will lead him through his direct examination in a way that will address some of the prosecutions contentions, essentially heading off the prosecutor's cross. My guess is Deedy is a smart guy who has been preparing for this day for a long time. The prosecutor will try to shake him, but I suspect this guy is too smart and too cool to let hat happen. His testimony could very well seal his acquittal and head off any civil case as I am willing to bet his composed testimony will paint Elders as the aggressor.
on August 6,2013 | 01:46PM
Mypualani wrote:
and deedy could come across as lying and covering up his crimes, oh wait there's witnesses and a video ! ! ! his expert didn't do to well, when asked if he examined the body, the expert said no. He came with his opinion and theory but, said the ME was wrong, but he lacked something, the actual body. so poof! Right now this looks likeCuster's Last stand.
on August 6,2013 | 10:22PM
Shh wrote:
Wouldn't Deedy's kick be a pre-assult indicator to Elderts? I don't know...Deedy seems to be grasping for straws and sounds ridiculous! A tactical advantage was Deedy having a GUN!
on August 6,2013 | 11:26AM
Kailuaraised wrote:
He claims it was self defense because Elderts was coming towards him. An HPD Officer testified to the same thing.
on August 6,2013 | 11:35AM
8082062424 wrote:
Thing with that is that is before he kept threatening to shoot Elderts in the face. that far from self defence
on August 6,2013 | 11:44AM
aomohoa wrote:
I think what he was taught went out the window when alcohol was involved.
on August 6,2013 | 11:51AM
Mypualani wrote:
Yeah 808 lets Conveniently leave out some crucial things in this case, but then according to Kraised all that didn't matter it was only at the point when elderts defends himself, that these people claim he was attacking, on't let the facts get in the way yeah?
on August 6,2013 | 08:04PM
hapaguy wrote:
"He claims it was self defense because Elderts was coming towards him. An HPD Officer testified to the same thing"....I must have missed that testimony. Can you provide a link?
on August 6,2013 | 11:49AM
Kailuaraised wrote:
It was on channel 4. He said it was a standard reaction for an Officer if they felt threatened.
on August 6,2013 | 11:58AM
hapaguy wrote:
Can you provide a link please?
on August 6,2013 | 12:32PM
hapaguy wrote:
I'm still waiting for you to post the link. I suspect you pulled that out of Uranus....
on August 6,2013 | 01:36PM
Kailuaraised wrote:
You have arms and a computer. Go look for yourself. There's other news sources besides this one.
on August 6,2013 | 01:46PM
Kalaheo1 wrote:
Usually when you make a claim, it is incumbant on you to back that claim up. Some people like to make claims and then try to send other people off to back up their claims. It's lazy and makes you look dishonest.
on August 6,2013 | 02:00PM
hapaguy wrote:
That's what I thought....you made it up.......
on August 6,2013 | 02:02PM
Kailuaraised wrote:
I don't really care if you believe me. Someone else said the same thing in the last article so obviously I'm not making it up. You're not on the jury so what does it matter?
on August 6,2013 | 02:12PM
hapaguy wrote:
Well Kraised you really are showing your true colors. I don't think you understand how dishonest you look right now....
on August 6,2013 | 02:28PM
Kailuaraised wrote:
@hapaguy, I don't really care what two anonymous people on the internet think.
on August 6,2013 | 02:45PM
Mypualani wrote:
yup standard reaction. not standard to not identfy yourself to those around you. there was a crowd there, did he say I am LEO? no one testified to that not even his friends. not even the security. Deedy's actions were not all standard, if it was there would be alot more dead punks don't ya think?
on August 6,2013 | 10:33PM
lookup wrote:
So did Elderts not have the right to try to defend himself against the person who assaulted him by kicking his leg and then threatening several times to shoot him, and then pull out a gun and fired in his direction? It is the jurys job to see the situation from Elderts point of view since he is not here to testify for himself.
on August 6,2013 | 11:55AM
Fred01 wrote:
The kick was in self defense, and no, Elderts had no rights to act the way he did, and probably deserved what he got. Obviously, he was raised to think it was okay to act like a coward bully. Too many locals are raised to think like Elderts.
on August 6,2013 | 12:13PM
Leinanij wrote:
Do we have a stand your ground law here in Hawai'i? No. Deedy should have walked away. You are not allowed to murder someone for harassment. If that were true, we'd be allowed to shoot at will on the freeway every time someone cuts in front of us, gives you the finger, or doesn't pick up their dog's kukae.
on August 6,2013 | 12:26PM
Tony91 wrote:
By the same token, Elderts should have backed down when presented with a gun. When HPD pulls a gun on a suspect and says "freeze" and the suspect not only doesn't freeze but comes after the officer, what do you think will happen next? Also, if a lunatic on the freeway is waving a gun around after you cut him off, would you pick a fight with the guy? No one deserved to die that night but if Deedy did provide warning and ID himself, advised of his weapon and Elderts still choose to pursue then Deedy is not guilty.
on August 6,2013 | 12:43PM
hapaguy wrote:
Elderts really didn't have time to back down as Deedy pulled his gun on Elderts at point blank range during the melee. Keep in mind that Deedy had threatened Elderts earlier that he was going to shoot Elderts in the face so at point blank range it only makes sense that Elderts would try to protect himself. If he stood there Deedy might have shot him in the face and if Elderts turned to run he might have gotten shot in the back.
on August 6,2013 | 01:33PM
MKN wrote:
@hapaguy: Dude, you're speculating as to what might have happened had Elderts did the right thing which was not to attack Deedy when Deedy motioned for Elderts to stop as Deedy was pulling out his gun. You can't say whether or not Deedy would have still shot Elderts if Elderts ran away or put his hands up and surrendered. Only Deedy could answer that question. Had Deedy shot Elderts in either of those situations, that would definitely be Murder. I still need to hear all of the evidence to make a decision on this, so this case could go either way at this point.
on August 6,2013 | 02:01PM
hapaguy wrote:
MKN you clearly are lacking in any common sense. If a guy threatens to shoot you in the face, then a few seconds later he assaults you and pulls a gun on you at point blank range are you just going to stand there and get shot? Are you going to try to turn and run away and possibly get shot in the back? Or are you going to try to defend yourself?
on August 6,2013 | 02:08PM
MKN wrote:
@hapaguy: If Elderts didn't approach Deedy the second time, Deedy wouldn't have had to pull his gun. No matter what you or I say, at this point we should just agree to disagree. This case could still go either way.
on August 6,2013 | 03:34PM
hapaguy wrote:
OK. Agree to disagree.....
on August 6,2013 | 04:01PM
Mypualani wrote:
He didn't say freeze, he said he was going to shoot Elderts in the face in front of witnesses, two by the way who were not drinking at all, unlike Deedy. Deedy stated that he got an email to do a 24 hr carry, did that email also say he could drink alcohol and what ever you do don't get drunk with your gun.
on August 6,2013 | 06:58PM
hanabatadayz wrote:
i would've murdered alot of people already..too many ainokea's roaming free
on August 6,2013 | 05:27PM
Mypualani wrote:
you one of the bigest AINOKEA's on here with your pilau posting.
on August 6,2013 | 07:00PM
Mypualani wrote:
Deedy's explaination is he couldn't leave all those poor helples people there, Elderts was a raging lunatic.and endagering all the lives in that McDonalds, while he was sitting down waiting, oh yeah with an irritating smile on his face. Deedy went over and made verbal threats, that of which in this state is a class c felony, he then commited a misdemeanor Assualt that turned into a murder 2, when he drew his gun and fired killing elderts. The cross will be interesting as the prosecution ask this degenerate agent, why he commited 2 crimes to defuse a situation. and ended up killing a man. The defense is all BUST! because Hawaiis gun laws and selfdense laws have strict standards. Deedy failed to rise to the level of self defense. But then ultamately this will be up to the jury.
on August 6,2013 | 06:55PM
Kailuaraised wrote:
You're forgetting he's a cop. Stop with your prejudice towards Deedy and you'll see that Elderts brought it all upon himself. I doubt the jury will deliberate for more than 5 minutes before acquittal.
on August 7,2013 | 01:41AM
lee1957 wrote:
Law enforcement officers should not be required to walk away when the perp wants to get physical. Don't be so obtuse.
on August 6,2013 | 07:30PM
Mypualani wrote:
@ Lee1957 what perp? what law or laws was elderts breaking when he was sitting down, he did not assault anyone, he was sitting down waiting until deedy came over and when niele, so until you can tell me what criminal laws elderts was breaking at the time, try REST! This thing to me is not about Elderts and his monkey friend, this is about being accountable for your actions when you take a life. You have kids? grand kids? how bout people you love, family or friends? I know I know they not punks or low lifes like elderts who deserved to die yeah? but what if....
on August 6,2013 | 10:46PM
dsl wrote:
TOO MANY? Fred is an ignorant clown...go away!
on August 6,2013 | 12:26PM
lookup wrote:
@MKN... Elderts is not the one on trial, so speculation about Elderts is improper at this point. If Deedy was trained properly and his objective was to stop trouble he should not have had a gun in his right had but, should have put a shoulder hold od elderts and twisted his arm back to subdue him and handcuf him. That seems to me what a proper officer of the law would do. The only weapon that Elderts had was his hands so that is the only weapon the trained agent should have used. How come a trained agent is not capable of hand to hand defense?
on August 6,2013 | 02:29PM
Cheyenne wrote:
Exactly!!! If Deedy was correct in his reaction to Eldert's behavior, then Eldert should have been shot back in 2008 by HPD when he was being arrested for disorderly conduct and had to be physically subdued. Yes, someone can kill a man or inflict serious bodily injury with his bare hands, but the situation wasn't even near that level. Deedy's mug shot didn't even look like he had been in a fight. I'm pretty sure there are certain steps to be taken before you use lethal force.
on August 6,2013 | 05:25PM
hanabatadayz wrote:
you watch too many movies
on August 6,2013 | 05:29PM
lookup wrote:
Go away Fred01 ....how can the kick be in self defense when Elderts was sitting and waiting for his burgers, he had not had any involvment with Deedy prior to that .
on August 6,2013 | 02:18PM
Mypualani wrote:
@ hanabata you watch too many cartoons
on August 6,2013 | 10:48PM
Mypualani wrote:
SELF DEFENSE TO WHAT ?
on August 6,2013 | 06:47PM
lee1957 wrote:
Bingo! Elderts was a punk bully, wonder where he learned that?
on August 6,2013 | 07:29PM
Mypualani wrote:
too bad you don't get what you deserve fred, what shame.
on August 6,2013 | 10:35PM
junia wrote:
Its in the bloodline... poodles have no chance with pitbulls. Hitler said: The bigger the Lie the more people believe it....keep believing
on August 7,2013 | 01:17AM
Tony91 wrote:
No, if in fact Deedy identified himself as an officer and advised about the gun, then Elderts should have put his hands up and done nothing. Instead, Elderts pursued. He was not defending himself...he was attacking. Eldert's prior conviction and reaction to the police (resisting arrest) prove that Elderts was likely not defending himself when presented with a law officer, on the contrary. No one deserved to die that night, not even a low life thug like Elderts. However it sure sounds like reasonable doubt has been established.
on August 6,2013 | 12:35PM
mcc wrote:
He did not have the right to shoot and kill him.
on August 6,2013 | 01:30PM
kiragirl wrote:
Deedy approached Elderts when he was sitting down and waiting for his order. If Deedy did not do that, nothing would have happened.
on August 6,2013 | 12:55PM
Kalaheo1 wrote:
Just 30 seconds before, Deedy was coming towards Elderts. Do you think Elderts would have been justified in shooting Deedy at that point, or is it only law enforcement who can that?
on August 6,2013 | 01:58PM
Mypualani wrote:
LIES LIES AND MORE LIES
on August 6,2013 | 06:45PM
LanaUlulani wrote:
Looks like Obama's Trigger Man Deedy is on his way to implicating himself of depriving Elderts of due process of law.
on August 6,2013 | 11:48AM
toad103410 wrote:
Hope this is short and to the point. Deedy should not have gone drinking with his weapon. Against policy. Prosecution says he was drunk but cannot prove it. Elderts, on the other hand was drunk and had traces of marijuana in his system. Given his past violent run ins with the law it seems something like this was bound to happen. Having said that, he did not deserve to die that night. I am sure he was a good friend and son, but drugs and alcohol changes people's behavior.
on August 6,2013 | 11:50AM
lookup wrote:
True...drugs and alcohol changes peoples behavior but...people who have been trained as special agents should be able to defuse a minor situation such as this where there was only wise comments being made and no actual threat and not make it into terrible situation where somone is killed.
on August 6,2013 | 12:03PM
cojef wrote:
The photos of Deedy from the inception of the trial to the current, shows the dramatic changes in the way he looks. His last picture shows that he appears to have that gaunt, lack of or disturbed sleep individual, and rightly so as he is fighting for his freedom. Feel sorry for him as I did for George Zimmeman, but the circumstance of shootings differ drasticlly. How the video tape is viewed by the jurors will determine the outcome of the case. The witnesses presented by either side will assist the jurors how to interpret the video tape. It will enable how the fight started, where it took the combatants and the degree of sobriety of the individuals. Those are the elements I would be looking for and make decision as the veracity of the witnesses as a juror. The veracity of eye witnesses in many instances are perceptions of the crime scene and usually differ as night and day. The video tape together with witnesses' testimonies will enable jurors to clarify questionable issues.
on August 6,2013 | 11:55AM
Mythman wrote:
All the local potheads will say "see, the US put another one over on us" when the jury finds there was no murder.
on August 6,2013 | 12:22PM
8082062424 wrote:
No the local will feel they have been right not to trust the government and trust it less.. and also dislike out siders and not trust them even more. same thing if he is found guilty all the anti local folks will say he did not get a fair trial and cry foal same as some folks on the mainland will feel. no real winners here.
on August 6,2013 | 03:42PM
allie wrote:
agree
on August 6,2013 | 03:15PM
false wrote:
Hart knows that a good direct testimony by Deedy may be a key to this trial. He will keep Deedy to the "facts" and be assured that they have went over it very carefully. If I'm not mistaken, the prosecution will be limited to ask questions only in line to that which has been raised in direct. Prosecution can either make it or break it here.
on August 6,2013 | 12:29PM
hapaguy wrote:
I believe what you are saying only applies to "recalled witnesses". In cross-examination you can ask leading questions but there are restrictions on leading questions also....
on August 6,2013 | 12:44PM
false wrote:
hmmmmmm..
on August 6,2013 | 03:42PM
Mypualani wrote:
No you are mistaken, the Prosecution is not limited to the line of questioning of the direct.
on August 6,2013 | 07:06PM
localguy wrote:
Deedy says he was trained on on taking back or taking away a weapon. Yet on confronting Elderts he was losing badly, obviously not a start student in self defense or taking down a perp, very weak in physical strength. Looks like he realized his physical weakness and his failure to not get into a situation he could not get out of. There was no reason for Elderts to lose his life had Deedy simply done what any real professional law enforcement person would do. Deedy is simply a "Rent a cop."
on August 6,2013 | 12:30PM
Bully wrote:
Big mistake. Deedy will be on the stand and cannot lie.
on August 6,2013 | 12:40PM
Mypualani wrote:
IRT Bully oh and the prosecution will catch him in a few, judging from what he says. Like being told to do a 24 hr gun carry, does it include consuming ALCOHOL? while carrying his weapon?
on August 6,2013 | 07:09PM
Jonas wrote:
For you Elderts supporters, you can only hope to get involuntary manslaughter at best. Of course, the witnesses for the prosecution saw the events one way, and the witnesses for the defense saw it another. Their testimonies almost offset each other. As for the alcohol, there is no definitive evidence that he was drunk or even intoxicated. Doesn't matter what the cops thought or smelled when they got there because the doctors refuted that. Bottom line - no blood test, no weight to that issue. As far as the videotape goes, it isn't good enough to prove anything. Hell, I could create a narrative for that whole situation if I needed to. There is nothing in this case that proves anything "beyond a reasonable doubt." For you Deedy supporters, there is a decent chance that he will walk. His story about Elderts reaching for his gun and feeling his life threatened is plausible. And it would give justification for the shooting. And there is no video evidence to refute that. Just as well, I can't see Hart putting him on the stand unless there is a very good reason to do so. All in all, a very unfortunate situation - and one that should never have happened. It doesn't really matter who started the altercation. Either party could have (and probably should have) walked away. But that is irrelevant. I think it boils down to 3 issues: 1) did Deedy have the legal authority to carry concealed? 2) was Deedy drunk or intoxicated when he was carrying? 3) was Deedy's life threatened enough to justify using lethal force?
on August 6,2013 | 12:43PM
hapaguy wrote:
I agree with some of your comments. I have served on a jury before (we convicted a drug dealer) and what you really need to focus on is the unbiased witness testimony. In this case I would think that the jury would focus on the unbiased witness testimony and try to align that with video evidence to see which side it more closely resembles: the prosecutions version of events, or the defenses version of events.
on August 6,2013 | 12:53PM
fbiguy wrote:
Do you really want law enforcement officer to "walk away?" I hope they don't walk away when you are getting verbally or physically abused by punks.
on August 6,2013 | 12:56PM
Jonas wrote:
Physically abused, no I wouldn't want them to walk away. Verbally, I can take care of that myself.
on August 6,2013 | 01:42PM
Mypualani wrote:
Jonas I do not not support Elderts in any way shape or form, I support the laws that we all have to abide by here in the state of Hawaii. there is a decent chance that he will walk. His story about Elderts reaching for his gun and feeling his life threatened is plausible. And it would give justification for the shooting. I do't know what laws or statutes you been reading but you skipped a few details, in this case Deedy went over and commited a class c felony when he threatened (un-biased witnesse) to shoot Elderts, telling him that acting like that will get you shot! at which point Elderts who is also under the influence of Alcohol and drugs, yells if you going shoot me, fn shoot me then, Elderts gets up and argues with Deedy, Deedy kicks Elderts (simple assult misdemeanor) draws gun and shoots at Elderts and then what ever shot hits Elderts, he dies. Now I have no love for Elderts, but if something like this can happen to him just stop for a moment and think what if this were my loved one! son, daughter, sister, brother or what have you. No one deserves to die like this for the reasons that the defense is giving and trying to juice up for all it is worth. My take is Deedy does not deserve to get away with what he did, his actions and words caused this. Elderts played a part in this to be sure but his actions does not warrant his death. And there is no video evidence to refute that. Just as well, I can't see Hart putting him on the stand unless there is a very good reason to do so. All in all, a very unfortunate situation - and one that should never have happened. It doesn't really matter who started the altercation. Either party could have (and probably should have) walked away. But that is irrelevant. I think it boils down to 3 issues: 1) did Deedy have the legal authority to carry concealed? 2) was Deedy drunk or intoxicated when he was carrying? 3) was Deedy's life threatened enough to justify using lethal force?
on August 6,2013 | 07:23PM
Tahitigirl55 wrote:
Deedy testified that federal law allows him to carry a weapon and the director of his agency issued an e-mail instituting a 24-hour-a-day carry policy. I wonder if this stand when under drunk? Maybe that is what he thought. What a yoyo.
on August 6,2013 | 01:01PM
toad103410 wrote:
He was probably drunk but that cannot be proven because he did not consent to being tested. Also the treating doctor did not believe that he was intoxicated.
on August 6,2013 | 01:40PM
Peacenik wrote:
haha, talk about yo-yos. Yo-yos R U.
on August 6,2013 | 02:05PM
Kailuaraised wrote:
The federal law allows you to drink and carry.
on August 6,2013 | 03:53PM
lawman1175 wrote:
And here we go...
on August 6,2013 | 01:03PM
Tahitigirl55 wrote:
Deedy identified himself, which enraged the drunken Elderts, who grabbed at the agent's gun when the third and final shot was fired, according to the defense. I remember that the retired police said that it was the second shot that killed Elderts. Doesn't Deely pay attention to what is going on? He is quilty. Lock him up and throw away the key. Hope Elderts has some family in there.
on August 6,2013 | 01:05PM
toad103410 wrote:
.Feel sorry for the Elderts. I am sure he was good to his family and his friends. Alcohol and drugs have a lot to do with this case. I hope that iff Deedy does indeed walk, no one does anything irrational.
on August 6,2013 | 01:36PM
MKN wrote:
@Tahitigirl55: What does quilty mean?
on August 6,2013 | 02:23PM
AmbienDaze wrote:
that means you sit around sewing ulu print pillows and stuff.
on August 6,2013 | 03:47PM
Mypualani wrote:
Gee daze so she had a typo, what's your problem?
on August 6,2013 | 08:16PM
Hodad wrote:
If Ederts and Maderios weren't punks picking on a stranger, nothing would have happened. Someone shows a gun, stupid to lunge at them.
on August 6,2013 | 03:27PM
Grimbold wrote:
If you lunge at a gun somebody is holding while telling you to back off, you are guilty of your own death.
on August 6,2013 | 05:44PM
Mypualani wrote:
Yeah especially when you are getting threatened with being shot in the face by some drunk stranger
on August 6,2013 | 08:18PM
Mypualani wrote:
He didn't show his gun, he drew his gun and fired. but you got a point there, deddy was threatning to shoot Elderts. From the time Deedy approched Elderts to the time he killed elderts it took all of 35 seconds
on August 6,2013 | 08:17PM
gsc wrote:
Wheres the sound on live broadcast ?
on August 6,2013 | 01:22PM
Kailuaraised wrote:
It takes a bit for it to come on.
on August 6,2013 | 01:47PM
entrkn wrote:
We sure are getting a long hard look at the uglier sleazier side of Aloha, from lying crooked cops to our sewer rat thugs... Hawaii has to do better than this.
on August 6,2013 | 02:15PM
RetiredWorking wrote:
entrkn, if all you saw was lying crooked cops and sewer rat thugs, your vacation was in vain. There's no sense in you coming back.
on August 6,2013 | 03:04PM
Mypualani wrote:
Thank you RetiredWorking, I guess those two Marines are sewer rat thugs, and entrkn when you get trouble no call our lying crooked cops. Handle it yourself.
on August 6,2013 | 08:21PM
Tony96822 wrote:
gotta love webcasts, you can read everyones personalities and capture those idiots working in the courtroom laughing and taking their jobs seriously.
on August 6,2013 | 02:28PM
Tony96822 wrote:
glad they shut the sound after my comment. do it before not after.
on August 6,2013 | 02:32PM
Kuhio_ wrote:
I wish the camera man would show the monitor so we can follow the testimony. shheesssh. Wake up!
on August 6,2013 | 03:11PM
hapaguy wrote:
I've been listening to Deedy's testimony. The Prosecutor is going to have a field day when they cross this guy!
on August 6,2013 | 03:20PM
honopic wrote:
Deedy contradicted himself under oath. First he said he had four beers "maybe more, maybe less" that night, then said he makes it a habit to keep track of what he drinks, and tries to drink about one beer an hour. If he keeps track, why did he say "more or less?" And 8:45 to 1:15 is 5 1/2 hours, so by his own calculations, he could have easily had 5 beers or more. His own friend, Gutokwski, testified last week that Deedy had ordered 5 beers during the night, but he didn't really "keep track" of how much Deedy drank. The fact that his blood-alcohol content wasn't tested at the crime scene is a major factor, as is the testimony from the McDonald's employee who smelled alcohol on his breath. Most HPD officers can tell you that when they stop a driver on suspicion of DUI and ask if he's been drinking, "one or two beers" usually means at least twice that many, and enough to take out the breathalyzer. Add Deedy's alcohol intake to carrying a loaded gun in Waikiki at 2 A.M. and you have a recipe for disaster.
on August 6,2013 | 03:25PM
hapaguy wrote:
I agree. There are a lot of holes in Deedy's testimony and some of the things that Deedy has testified to the Prosecutors are going to have field day with.....
on August 6,2013 | 03:28PM
MKN wrote:
My question is which witness(es) for the prosecution stated that they heard Deedy say that he was gonna shoot Elderts in the face? Medeiros doesn't count because Elderts was his boy and I would expect him to say something like that considering that he's a convicted drug dealer. LOL!
on August 6,2013 | 03:44PM
invisibro wrote:
Alexander Byrd, the former Marine.
on August 6,2013 | 03:51PM
Mypualani wrote:
And another fellow Marine who was not drinking, the cahier witness and Ms. Au who was the designated driver, no alcohol. Funny how west only heard sounds but not words when deedy spoke but then she heard the word gun then freaked.
on August 6,2013 | 08:25PM
umanasibo wrote:
At least one, the U.S. Marine, Alexander Byrd, testified that Deedy mouthed the words, "I am going to shoot you in the face."
on August 6,2013 | 03:51PM
hapaguy wrote:
It was the unbiased witness Alex Bryd the USMC (retired?) that testified that Deedy told Elderts he was going to shoot him in the face. Read it here: http://www.staradvertiser.com/specialprojects/court/christopher-deedy/week2/20130716_Eyewitness_in_murder_trial_says_Deedy_repeatedly_threatened_to_shoot_Elderts_in_Waikiki_McDonalds.html?id=215746801
on August 6,2013 | 03:56PM
xxNOTxx wrote:
Hapaguy, you're right about Byrd---his unbiased account of Deedy telling Elderts that he was going to shoot him in the face hopefully will help the jury see Deedy's testimony is full of untruths and find him guilty.
on August 6,2013 | 04:44PM
MKN wrote:
@hapaguy: So out of that whole conversation, the marine heard only that statement? He didn't hear the whole part about Elderts responding back and the rest of their conversation before the kick and the rest of the incident? Very strange and I find it hard to believe that those words were the only statements he heard from Deedy and that he heard absolutely nothing from Elderts. I wonder if he just wanted the free trip back to Hawaii? LOL!
on August 6,2013 | 09:53PM
invisibro wrote:
Correct me if I'm wrong but isn't 8:45-1:15 only 4 1/2 hours?
on August 6,2013 | 03:44PM
Kailuaraised wrote:
No you're right.
on August 6,2013 | 03:51PM
hapaguy wrote:
Actually the testimony was 8:45 to 2:15 so 5.5 hours is correct. I think that's a typo in Honopic's comment.
on August 6,2013 | 04:07PM
hanalei395 wrote:
Right after Deedy goes up to Elderts, sitting at his table (on the video), Deedy's attorney Brook Harts says, "Alright, stop right there (the video), now move ahead to ............................". ( A not too subtle way of not letting the jury to view the part on the video where Deedy kicks Elderts, and the start of the fight).
on August 6,2013 | 04:21PM
Kailuaraised wrote:
They're talking about the kick right now.
on August 6,2013 | 04:26PM
hanalei395 wrote:
To TALK about the kick, to talk about it as "no big thing", just a minor incident, ... and not showing the video of how it all started ........ would be a clever move by the defense.
on August 6,2013 | 05:27PM
Kailuaraised wrote:
Were you even watching? They were going over the video. They talked about how it happened and why according to Deedy.
on August 6,2013 | 05:46PM
Kailuaraised wrote:
Nice try. You have not one, but two medical professionals who testified that he didn't seem intoxicated. There was also nothing in the police reports.
on August 6,2013 | 03:51PM
hapaguy wrote:
"I had 4 beers that night maybe more, maybe less: then later, "I make it a habit to keep track of what I’m drinking,” Deedy said.
on August 6,2013 | 04:06PM
MKN wrote:
Interesting. So exactly what witness(es) stated that Deedy said "I am gonna shoot you in the face!" or something to that effect? Also, did more than one witness state that this is what they heard Deedy state?
on August 6,2013 | 03:41PM
raygreiner wrote:
It's beginning to look like not only is Deedy innocent but there never should have been any charges brought in the first place. After having been an Hawaii resident for the last 30 years I will say that I am frequently disappointed with HPD and the prosecutor's office for their choice of cases to pursue and to drop. I remember a few years ago when a man was charged with unintentional manslaughter after he attacked and killed his "girlfriend" by repeatedly banging her head on the sidewalk. WTF? Then there was HPD's attack a few years ago on a combat deafened Vietnam vet who walked down a sidewalk after an HPD officer yelled at him not to. "Luckily" the police broke a few of his ribs because when he was taken to the hospital HPD was told the man was deaf. They attacked him so violently that they broke his ribs without ever noticing.
on August 6,2013 | 03:47PM
LKK56 wrote:
Deedy is doing a good job on the stand - like most "mainlanders" - he can talk. This has the possibility of turning into a hung jury. The prosecution would probably try him again. Where is Deedy getting the money for this trial and maybe the next trial or civil trial? If it is out of his or his families pocket, there goes the summer house. This is a lesson for all, you all have rights, but rights come at a very high cost. In Deedy's case, financially, in Elderts case - his life.
on August 6,2013 | 04:14PM
MKN wrote:
@LKK56: Good questions. Even if he is acquitted, Deedy is probably going to be messed up financially after this. Wrongful death is a lot easier to prove versus Murder 2 or Manslaughter. My guess is he will probably lose his job after all this is over.
on August 6,2013 | 09:56PM
Kalaheo1 wrote:
I found some previously unpublished photos of the event: www.cartoons.ac.uk/record/AC2135
on August 6,2013 | 04:30PM
Surfer_Dude wrote:
Deedy just came across as a well rehearsed intelligent, articulate professional. This could be just enough to put reasonable doubt in the head of one juror.
on August 6,2013 | 04:43PM
xxNOTxx wrote:
But lets wait and see how really good Deedy will do under cross examination by the prosecution---Deedy's testimony didn't impress me, as Hart was leading him around all day. I thought the prosecution could have objected more than they did.
on August 6,2013 | 04:55PM
Mypualani wrote:
Or it could backfire! to perfect puka's and all. funny how his defense witnesses have these selective memories, The Expert gave an opinion he didn't examine the body, the security only validated what the procecution is trying to prove. Deedy gettin on the stand opens the door, I am sure he and hart practiced on what the prosecution may ask! After all of this the Judge will give her instructions to the jury, does this case meet all the elements the agent couldn't be charged with manslaughter because, that is not the crime Deedy commited with the elements that are involved.
on August 6,2013 | 08:33PM
MKN wrote:
@Surfer_Dude: It could go either way. Deedy testifying is a two-edged sword. He could totally exonerate himself or get himself into more trouble. More to come tomorrow.
on August 6,2013 | 09:57PM
Kalaheo1 wrote:
If I were Deedy and I had carefully monitored my alcohol intake as he claimed he did, I would have welcomed a hospital drawn alcohol test. I would want the whole world to know how careful I had been and I would want to remove any doubt that I was under the influence that night.
on August 6,2013 | 04:44PM
Kauai2011 wrote:
Elderts didn't deserve to die in this incident. Federal Agent Deedy knows better that he should have defused the situation by walking away with his friends and let the McDonalds Security Guard call HPD. I think the alcohol Deedy drank that night significantly impaired his judgement. He knew he did wrong and refused to submit to a blood alcohol test.
on August 6,2013 | 04:47PM
hon2255 wrote:
Elderts was acting like a punk , bully, instigating the fight , he did assault Deedys friend , and Medeiros was in on the assault also, two cocky young men ignorant of the laws and disrespectful to the tourist, and to the federal officer. Did he have to get shot, we all wish it didn't happen but it did. Self defense.
on August 6,2013 | 05:00PM
Mypualani wrote:
hon2255 wrote: Elderts was acting like a punk. so what? Elderts didn't instigate the fight, as for deedy's friend he lunged in first, what you think everyone is as blind as you? the only on ignorant of the laws is Deedy, he broke a few that night.
on August 6,2013 | 08:36PM
Peacenik wrote:
good try hanalei, nice disguise.
on August 6,2013 | 05:13PM
hanalei395 wrote:
Good try for what, Dummy? (If you're not talking about me ...sorry)
on August 6,2013 | 07:24PM
51butterflies wrote:
The ID badge- only one witness, West, for the defense, thought Deedy showed badge. No other witnesses saw ID badge. Deedy's rehearsed , biased, testimony does not match what other witnesses said they heard, including unbiased marines. Deedy made mistakes at the time of this situation- responsibility needs to be taken where due.
on August 6,2013 | 04:59PM
Kailuaraised wrote:
It's not like he claims he screamed out that he was an agent. Most people probably weren't paying much attention to his hands. Deedy's testimony does do a good job of playing out according to the video. That's all that's needed.
on August 6,2013 | 05:14PM
Mypualani wrote:
No he was too busy yelling that he was going to shoot elderts face, as for his testimony no it does not do a good job, what is he going to say when he's asked : Why did you push past ms.west and go after elderts? after getting your face slapped wy did your gun come out? and why did you fire three shots? I paid attention to his hands I paid attention to everything in tha video. If you think most people think like you, that it's okay to kill someone because you have a problem with the way they act, got news for you. This agent made his bed is gonna have to get used to it.
on August 6,2013 | 08:41PM
Kailuaraised wrote:
I don't even understand what you're typing half the time.
on August 7,2013 | 01:54AM
50skane wrote:
manslaughter
on August 6,2013 | 05:09PM
Kailuaraised wrote:
Deedy will walk. No way he gets convicted. He comes across as very educated and believable. He's well spoken and seems like he was trying to do the right thing. Medeiros came across as a punk and the video/testimony does not paint a good picture of Elderts. If Elderts previous conviction comes out that will be the nail in the coffin.
on August 6,2013 | 05:11PM
Mypualani wrote:
seedy deedy won't walk. Sorry
on August 6,2013 | 08:45PM
GorillaSmith wrote:
This looks like te jury will be out 5 minutes before voting to acquit. There are going to be some hard questions as to whether the prosecutor's office was blatantly playing a race card in bringing this ridiculous case to trial in the first place.
on August 6,2013 | 05:12PM
Mypualani wrote:
irt Gorrila the only thing rediculous is you comment.
on August 6,2013 | 08:47PM
GorillaSmith wrote:
Could you please re-post in English? You appear to be exacerbated but it's more than a bit difficult to glean your meaning. Many thanks.
on August 6,2013 | 11:42PM
Kailuaraised wrote:
Do you mean ridiculous?
on August 7,2013 | 01:54AM
george702 wrote:
I'm quite sure that in his training manual they recommend pacing yourself to one alcoholic beverage per hour while you are carrying a loaded firearm. On par with one snort of coke per shift. What a crock. No matter how he explains it, he can't account for what the video shows, nor can he erase what came out of his mouth, "I'll shoot you in the face" comment. This is a case where is his of deadly force was clearly unjustified. The prosecution should be able to destroy him. Can't wait.
on August 6,2013 | 05:23PM
Kailuaraised wrote:
I doubt the prosecution will destroy him. He's legally allowed to drink and carry. He just cannot become impaired.
on August 6,2013 | 05:45PM
george702 wrote:
Do you really think that they authorize consuming alcohol and carrying a firearm? Very naive viewpoint. Can you imagine the liability of a law enforcement agency if this were authorized?
on August 7,2013 | 05:10AM
Grimbold wrote:
When in anger you attack someone and are told "I shoot you in the face' by your opponent it is a warning and you say: Ok I back off and back off. You do not try to lunge for that gun. Self defense for Deedy to shoot that moment!
on August 6,2013 | 05:54PM
Kalaheo1 wrote:
Uh, if Deedy actually said "I'll shoot you in the face," then Elderts was the one who was justified in using deadly force to defend himself.
on August 6,2013 | 09:01PM
Kokida wrote:
What I notice is that not one of Deedy's superiors has been at trial in his support.
on August 6,2013 | 05:40PM
Kailuaraised wrote:
Where would they come from? They live in DC.
on August 6,2013 | 05:44PM
Kalaheo1 wrote:
Then DC, I guess.
on August 6,2013 | 09:02PM
First-Responder wrote:
I grew up in Kailua and went to school with hotheads like Elderts. Deedy described the type and behavior to a tee - racial terminology, in your face confrontation and false brevado. Although it is regrettable that a shooting occurred, after listening to Deedy this afternoon, I can see how this incident led to a bad outcome for everyone involved.
on August 6,2013 | 05:41PM
Iuki wrote:
I still don't understand why Deedy was packing his gun. He was just dining out and doing some drinking with a couple of friends. For that he needed to be armed? And he identified himself as a "cop." He is a security officer for the federal government, not exactly a cop designated with keeping the peace in a McDonald's.
on August 6,2013 | 05:51PM
Kailuaraised wrote:
This has been beaten to death. He's a federal agent, AKA a cop. He's a sworn officer of the law. He's authorized to carry off duty. He's also authorized to legally consume alcohol while carrying as long as he is not impaired. It's his choice to carry. A retired HPD officer already testified that it's standard procedure for even off duty HPD to carry at all times.
on August 6,2013 | 05:56PM
312guy wrote:
@luki agent deedy is not a security officer, they are deployed to protect heads of state and put themselves in harms way. if he did nothing you would be complaining why he did not step in to protect the person or say something. I can see that you would be one to do nothing in a situation like this
on August 6,2013 | 06:15PM
Mypualani wrote:
@312dummy so why does deedy's title say 'Diplomatic Security officer" ? you put down another poster for using the word and then disparage that person, what not enough hugs? Trying to look smart but you not, mean da dope!
on August 6,2013 | 08:53PM
hapaguy wrote:
Deedy testified that he told Gutowski that they were going out for a night of "drinking and craziness". I've asked the Deedy supporters many times this question and none of them will answer me: If Deedy had asked his superior if he thought it was ok to be out with his old college roommate and frat buddy for a night of "drinking and craziness" do you think his superior would have said it would be ok to be packing?
on August 6,2013 | 06:18PM
Mypualani wrote:
Hapaguy didn't you read, Deedy got an email to carry for 24 hrs! The email didn't say that he couldn't have a few beers, and besides according to kraised it's not illegal so it's okay, because he knows that there are alot of LEO's who do this, perfectly legal until someone gets killed. Drinks and craziness mean da dope on these boards.
on August 6,2013 | 09:00PM
Kailuaraised wrote:
You'll do anything to convict Deedy. A retired HPD even testified that they carry and consume alcohol.
on August 7,2013 | 01:35AM
Mypualani wrote:
Dis guy is Done. Prosecution on cross will crucify him, did the email say you can consume alcohol on that 24 hr carry? Puhleeeese Deedy, independent witnesses heard you yell out I am going to shoot you. That's your defense? Blame it all on the dead guy?
on August 6,2013 | 06:10PM
Kailuaraised wrote:
Again, it's not against the law to drink and carry. That point is getting beaten to death.
on August 6,2013 | 06:13PM
Mypualani wrote:
And I will continue to beat it like a drum. it may not be against the law but his job policies that's a no no a big one.
on August 6,2013 | 09:01PM
MKN wrote:
@Mypualani: He testified that he had an email directive from the secret service agency head that they are to be armed at all times, so based on this, you could make an argument that he was required to be armed. If that's the case, then it's not his fault that he was carrying a gun at that time despite the rules stating otherwise.
on August 6,2013 | 10:06PM
Kalaheo1 wrote:
Kailuaraised wrote: "Again, it's not against the law to drink and carry. That point is getting beaten to death."

But it is very much against the State Dept's firearm policy. Deedy knowingly and willfully violated his own agency's firearms policy by drinking while carrying. That has mentioned once or twice too.


on August 6,2013 | 09:06PM
Kailuaraised wrote:
Again, what does that have to do with anything? He was also told to carry 24 hours. He's allowed to protect himself. He's also never off duty. Eldert's supporters keep harping on things that make difference.
on August 7,2013 | 01:36AM
312guy wrote:
in Duck commanders SI's words Just the facts Jack! Agent Deedy survivor of of libia deployment is not guilty! did his job stepping in, put himself in harms way of two aggressors. not guilty
on August 6,2013 | 06:11PM
Mypualani wrote:
Put himself in harms way? caused harm is more like it, yeah he stepped in alright into a big pile.
on August 6,2013 | 09:02PM
xxNOTxx wrote:
Deedy is very sly---he testified today that he saw Elderts playing with his waistband which led him to believe (from his training) Elderts was possibly carrying a concealed weapon---this happened during the frames that you can barely tell it's even Elbert in the video, so there is no way you can visually verify or dispute it. I wonder if any other witnesses saw Elderts playing with his waistband---doubt it.
on August 6,2013 | 06:32PM
Mypualani wrote:
The Prosecution can recall witnesse to rebut now that is where things get limited to direct.
on August 6,2013 | 09:04PM
Anonymous wrote:
Neither side is clean in all of this. A couple of drunk, high local punks thought it would be fun to go to Waikiki and hassle some tourists...maybe beat one up. It happens every night. But this time, they ran into a drunk tourist punk who was packing and who had a chip on his shoulder.
on August 6,2013 | 06:53PM
Anonymous wrote:
From the video, Elderts was clearly hassling the other guy at the counter. But then they sat at different tables and it seems like there would have been no trouble if Deedy had not tried to make dat-da-da. Elderts was acting like a "Richard" but nothing would have probably come of the situation if Deedy had just stayed at his table.
on August 6,2013 | 07:00PM
kelbells34 wrote:
Ask Deedy...When Perinne testified, (he did not feel threatened, "shrugged off" Elderts' comments, walked away and didn't feel a need for any help.) did Deedy still feel that he made the correct "assessed" decision to intervene? I'm not saying to ignore the situation. Just handle it differently. He should have called 911 if he felt the situation needed assistance. The security guard didn't feel a need to step in. She only felt a need when Deedy let himself into the situation. What if this incident took place in a club? Almost guarantee others would have been wounded or killed.
on August 6,2013 | 07:04PM
honokai wrote:
I will respect the decision of the jury. On a side note, I am sick and tired of beat downs. Assaulting people is a horrific crime. People have the right to their peace in this country. Calling people out and engaging in fights is a form domestic terrorism. I have no respect for thugs that invade the space and peace of others.
on August 6,2013 | 07:08PM
bleedgreen wrote:
One thing about a murder trial, the deceased usually is unable to testify, so you hear only one side of the story. So the prosecution has to rely upon the testimony of witnesses. One other thing. the jury will be instructed that if there is reasonable doubt, then they must return a not-guilty verdict. Prosecution witnesses paint different stories. Reasonable doubt established. Deedy will walk.
on August 6,2013 | 07:09PM
Mypualani wrote:
@ Bleed green your post would be funny if it wasn't so lame. Sorry but you forgott to mention that the judge will instruct the jury to the elements of the crime, you guys that are bringing in reasonable doubt are getting things pretty twisted. number 1. there is no doubt that deedy killed Elderts! he admits this, what the jury will be instructed on in this case is.....ready? all the elements of the crimes commited, if the jury finds that deedy met those elements. they must convict, if they find him not meeting those elements then it's aquit, you see they already know he killed someone, problem is Deedy does not rise to the level of self defense. because number 2 when defending yourself you can only use equal force, Deedy kicked, eldertds slapped his face, deedy pulls gun, elderts is un armed, but deedy is trying to asert that he thought that elderts had a weapon. he and his two friends put this b.s. in their testimony, but you see it's not as tidy as you all think. remember the un-biased witnesses, the cashire who broke down because she was terrified that deedy would kill her, she didn't know he was an agent. what she went through was very traumatic. deedy did wrong and the only thing he can do blame his victim. Not PONO
on August 6,2013 | 09:16PM
MKN wrote:
@Mypualani: Actually the law doesn't state that you need to use equal force. It states that lethal force may be used if an individual believes that he will be raped, sodomized, significantly harmed, or killed. If you hit someone enough times, that is considered lethal force. Elderts was high on cocaine, so we have no idea if he would have stopped hitting Deedy before Deedy was dead, so it's possible that lethal force was justified in this case.
on August 6,2013 | 10:12PM
Kapaho wrote:
It's amazing how the actions that early morning can have so wide discrepancy as to what really happened. Who's telling the truth? I think there is going to be an acquittal unless all the jurors decide beyond a reasonable doubt that Deedy intended to kill Elderts. Beyond a reasonable doubt is hard to prove with so much discrepancy on the part of the witnesses for the prosecution and the defense.
on August 6,2013 | 07:13PM
Mypualani wrote:
@ kAPAHO....The reasonable doubt thing is not an issue here, there is no doubt that a man is dead and who killed him. The jury will be instructed on the elements of the crimes that Deedy commited, Commiting a felony in the process of commiting murder, what does this mean? prior to killing elderts the punk, local lowlife moke as people here like to call him, however it would be interesting to see some here go up to his mother and tell her that to her face. anywho when you
on August 6,2013 | 09:23PM
false wrote:
Manslaughter isn't on the table so he gets off because they can't prove murder. Isn't that how Martin vx. Zimmerman went? Pau play already. Deedy beats the rap.
on August 6,2013 | 07:16PM
Mypualani wrote:
Deedy is not walking. why can't they prove murder? Deedy's criminal acts are all right there on tape along with unbiased witness testimony. what's allt his reasonable doubt stuff? reasonable doubt of what?
on August 6,2013 | 09:26PM
MKN wrote:
@Mypualani: They probably won't be able to prove murder because Elderts was rushing Deedy despite Deedy having a gun. I haven't made up my mind on whether or not Deedy is guilty or not, but at this point it could go either way (manslaughter or acquittal). I still think the prosecutor should have charged him with assault and terroristic threatening, but that's her fault for not doing so.
on August 6,2013 | 10:15PM
Mypualani wrote:
Deedy says Elderts the agressor? Deedy the agressor in this mess.
on August 6,2013 | 07:24PM
hon2255 wrote:
If Elderts didn't start this incident to begin with, this all wouldn't have happened, he was provoking innocent bystanders. Being a punk can get you in trouble.
on August 6,2013 | 08:06PM
Kalaheo1 wrote:
He didn't provoke Perrine. Perrine ignored him and went on peacefully with his life.
on August 6,2013 | 08:38PM
MKN wrote:
@Kalaheo1: Perrine was smart enough despite being drunk not to do anything, but it appears that Elderts tried awfully hard to provoke Perrine. Fortunately for Perrine, he didn't take the bait.
on August 6,2013 | 10:17PM
GorillaSmith wrote:
What is an "agressor"? Is it like an aggressor in English? Does Mypualani come from a land with limited verbs?
on August 6,2013 | 11:46PM
LKK56 wrote:
Deedy said he was not Drunk - he must be an alcoholic.
on August 6,2013 | 08:46PM
NanakuliBoss wrote:
Funny,Deedy giving testimony for a dead man he shot.lol.
on August 6,2013 | 09:31PM
51butterflies wrote:
Deedy' sdemeanor appears cocky, bullish , a know it all.,blaming. I am convinced Deedy was intoxicated, though it works in his favor not to have any blood-alcohol test facts from that fatal morning. Had he been rational, acted intelligently and educated as he wants us to hear and judge him from his testimony today, he would not have tried to reason with any drunk, drunken Elderts, nor Medeiros. Deedy should have not tried to resolve this situation by himself, called for HPD or Federal backup, or walked away. Deedy, I am convinced, misunderstood, misinterpreted, over reacted in a situation that only involved words. Perrine, nor anyone else in McDonald's was not physically hurt , nor endangered. Deedy also lacks understanding of the local culture. Deedy was also an irritator, aggressor who by his cocky, mainland type demeanor, added to the escalation of the situation that ended in a disaster. This is also Hawaii, the USA, not Libya or the Middle East, for which Deedy seems to be trained from his testimonial. He read too much into Elderts' physical stances. This whole situation is similar to a school brawl between boys.They both point the finger of blame to each other. Both boys deserve reprimanding, and when both are sober need to talk, not shoot it out. Except in this case one person was armed and used that weapon in a deadly manner. One person being dead, can't speak and defend himself. This was not an act of self-defense, this was an imbalanced, irrational , misunderstood fight between egotistical, intoxicated adults for which a deadly weapon ended one life tragically. Deedy shares the blame, no matter what the human court scene decides. As we tell school boys the finger needs to be pointed to themselves and what could each of them have done better not to have had this situation escalate.
on August 6,2013 | 11:28PM
IN OTHER NEWS
Breaking News