Monday, July 28, 2014         

 Print   Email   Comment | View 115 Comments   Most Popular   Save   Post   Retweet

Parents of man killed in Deedy murder case blast prosecutors

By Associated Press

LAST UPDATED: 04:48 p.m. HST, Oct 11, 2013

The parents of a Hawaii man shot and killed during a 2011 confrontation with an off-duty federal agent at a Waikiki McDonald's restaurant publicly pleaded today for a new, more aggressive prosecutor to handle the agent's upcoming retrial.

Prosecutors charged State Department Special Agent Christopher Deedy with murder, but a jury in August wasn't able to reach a verdict. A retrial is scheduled for June.

Jenell Elderts and her husband Kendall Elderts told reporters they were abandoned and lied to by prosecutors who didn't ask the judge to allow the jury to consider a lesser manslaughter charge. They said they were promised manslaughter would be an option.

But Prosecuting Attorney Keith Kaneshiro said in a statement today that no promises were ever made regarding charges.

Deedy was in Honolulu to help provide security for an economic summit in November 2011, and was off-duty when he went to the fast-food restaurant after a night of bar-hopping with friends.

He was charged with murder, with prosecutors claiming during trial that he was as an inexperienced agent who was intoxicated and defensive after being warned about the hostility of Hawaii locals toward outsiders.

Deedy testified that he was protecting himself and others by intervening when he saw Kollin Elderts harassing another customer. He said he fired his gun while Elderts was on top of him throwing punches.

Elderts, 23, died of a single gunshot wound to the chest. Deedy, 29, remains free on bail and has returned to the mainland.

"I think we need a different prosecutor," Jenell Elderts said today. "We just need a more aggressive approach to prosecuting this guy."

Kaneshiro said after the mistrial was declared that there was no evidence to support a manslaughter charge. He said the retrial will also be handled by the same prosecutor who tried the first trial: Deputy Prosecuting Attorney Janice Futa.

"We prosecute cases according to the evidence and the law and are not influenced by civil cases," Kaneshiro's statement on Friday said.

Elderts' parents have a civil suit pending against Deedy. Their attorney, Michael Green, said it was offensive prosecutors didn't at least ask for manslaughter.

"At least it's an issue to go up to the appellate court with," Green said. "I don't buy their reason for it. It makes no sense."

Green's comments could have an impact on the retrial and the civil case, said Brook Hart, who was Deedy's lead defense attorney.

"The judge, prosecutor and defense counsel all agreed there was no evidence to support any instruction on reckless manslaughter," he said. "It's not something the prosecutors did or failed to do. It's the facts of the case."

 Print   Email   Comment | View 115 Comments   Most Popular   Save   Post   Retweet

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.
on October 11,2013 | 11:50AM
allie wrote:
I agree with Deedy's parents and said so 9 months ago. Kaneshiro is a real embarrassment
on October 11,2013 | 12:39PM
dontbelieveinmyths wrote:
Where exactly did you and the Elderts family get your law degrees from? Thought so.
on October 11,2013 | 02:09PM
Adam1105 wrote:
Typical, very typical, empty "reply." Make a totally MEANINGLESS statement then think "I won the argument." We're all citizens here discussing a public trial. Let's just close down the comments section close the courtroom doors and let the authorities run everything.
on October 11,2013 | 06:28PM
808Warriors wrote:
Again Allie, you're typing too fast. You mean you agree with "Deedy's parents" or Elderts' parents?
on October 11,2013 | 02:22PM
Leinanij wrote:
She doesn't have a brain, that's why she's been in school for too long.
on October 11,2013 | 02:24PM
allie wrote:
giggle..Elderts parents..multi-tasking in class..:)
on October 11,2013 | 02:37PM
on October 11,2013 | 02:46PM
HAJAA1 wrote:
Knowledgeable people know that the prosecutors had no manslaughter charge in this case. Do your homework before commenting on the forum.
on October 11,2013 | 11:55AM
HawaiiCheeseBall wrote:
Even the judge said the evidence did not support a manslaughter charge.
on October 11,2013 | 11:57AM
droid wrote:
The judge shouldn’t be voicing an opinion on what charges to file. That’s solely up to the prosecutor.
on October 11,2013 | 11:22PM
RichardCory wrote:
And yet you've offered no analysis on the law to justify your claim that manslaughter was not an option (well, aside from saying that "knowledgeable" people just "know" that). Do you actually have any real basis for what you are saying?
on October 11,2013 | 01:22PM
tigerwarrior wrote:
Are you implying that Hawaii Supreme Court justices AREN'T "knowledgeable" because they agree that the jury should have been given the manslaughter option? Elaborate--please. Does it make any sense that these prosecutors believed there was sufficient evidence for a murder verdict--but not enough evidence for a manslaughter verdict? Shouldn't it be the other way around? It's akin to saying there is enough evidence to prove rape--but not enough to prove sexual assault. Precedent has shown that it is not uncommon for law enforcement officers to be convicted of voluntary manslaughter--showing it shouldn't be out of the realm of possibility for a law enforcement officer to be found guilty of such if the evidence supports it. And then again--shouldn't this be about what the jury believes occurred--not what the judge, prosecutors, defense attorneys and the rest of us armchair lawyers think?
on October 11,2013 | 03:57PM
st1d wrote:
when did they hear this case? where is the published findings of the hawaii supreme court on this case?
on October 11,2013 | 04:19PM
tigerwarrior wrote:
While the Hawaii Supreme Court did not hear this specific case, they did make a ruling on such cases in general. Here's an quote from a Star-Advertiser, August 27, 2013 article entitled, "Manslaughter ruling hangs over mistrial": "Almost every defense attorney I talk to was surprised that manslaughter instruction was not given based on the (state) Supreme Court's ruling on this issue, " said David Hayakawa, who has practiced as a criminal defense lawyer in Hawaii for the past 25 years.
on October 11,2013 | 05:59PM
tigerwarrior wrote:
@st1d Here's an excerpt from the August 20, 2013 edition of the SA article entitled, "Lacking option, jury's task is harder": "But in what is considered precedent on the issue, the Hawaii Supreme Court declared in a 2001 decision [state v. Haanio] that trial courts must instruct jurors on a lesser offense when there's a 'rational basis in the evidence for a verdict acquitting the defendant of the offense charged and convicting the defendant of the included offense.'" The court [Hawaii Supreme Court] concluded that the better rule is that trial courts must instruct juries on all lesser included offenses (as specified by state law), despite any objections by the defense, and even in the absence of a request from the prosecution."
on October 11,2013 | 06:38PM
st1d wrote:
so, it's not relevant. as there was no rational basis in the evidence for a verdict . . . convicting the defendant of the included offense. the key is "no rational basis" as it was in this case.
on October 11,2013 | 08:15PM
HAJAA1 wrote:
And by the by, the headlines are incorrect. This person was not a "man" - he sure didn't act like one now did he?
on October 11,2013 | 11:56AM
lookup wrote:
and who are you to judge... let he who has no sin be the one to cast the first stone!
on October 11,2013 | 12:34PM
Kuokoa wrote:
Ok, I cast the first stone!
on October 11,2013 | 01:15PM
lookup wrote:
are you saying u r perfect? are you a hypocrite?
on October 11,2013 | 01:26PM
hanalei395 wrote:
A punk who feels "brave" because he is packing a concealed weapon, and who is LOOKING for a fight, goes up to someone and kicks this person, who then retaliates, ... and spooking the punk who then finds out he can't fight. And in complete fear he brought onto himself, he takes his concealed weapon and shoots. ... Is this punk is a man?
on October 11,2013 | 12:55PM
Publicbraddah wrote:
Let's not forget that Elderts was not a babe in the woods on this one either. Two losers....that's the final verdict.
on October 11,2013 | 01:16PM
hanalei395 wrote:
One murdered, and the other will be in prison. ... Who will then be in fear of his life,. .... for the rest of his "life".
on October 11,2013 | 01:31PM
allie wrote:
cool it hanalei. Both were at fault
on October 11,2013 | 02:38PM
kennysmith wrote:
on October 11,2013 | 11:56AM
hanalei395 wrote:
That murderer Will go to PRISON.
on October 11,2013 | 12:18PM
allie wrote:
manslaughter hon..not murder. Listen to da parents
on October 11,2013 | 12:39PM
hanalei395 wrote:
Go "da" your #ss.
on October 11,2013 | 01:06PM
allie wrote:
hanalei..ever the racist but not at all native American
on October 11,2013 | 02:39PM
hanalei395 wrote:
Per this stupid foreigner ..... "Not at all native American". ........THANK GOD !
on October 11,2013 | 02:56PM
Fred01 wrote:
Hanalei395: You are a loser at life with an inferiority complex and no culture or class. Get lost!
on October 11,2013 | 03:05PM
RichardCory wrote:
"GO'S" Are you serious? Nah, you have to be trolling. 10/10. Would rage again.
on October 11,2013 | 01:23PM
hanabatadayz wrote:
your son was a loser..get over it
on October 11,2013 | 12:02PM
lookup wrote:
and who are you? defininatly you are not judge and jury! you still get hahbata or what? do not juge a person unless you can walk a mile in their shoes!
on October 11,2013 | 12:32PM
townbound wrote:
I would gladly do so. Cause then I'll be one mile away, I'll judge them then......and I'll have their shoes!!!!
on October 11,2013 | 01:26PM
gmedley wrote:
lookup- that was funny- (you still get hanabata or what?).
on October 11,2013 | 01:39PM
hanabatadayz wrote:
why would i wanna walk in a druggie,punk losers shoes for?
on October 11,2013 | 02:34PM
Nevadan wrote:
Whose fault that he was a loser?
on October 11,2013 | 12:38PM
lookup wrote:
Ah come on...He did not deserve to die! How many people in your life are disgusted with you and your attitude?
on October 11,2013 | 01:28PM
Nevadan wrote:
He would still be alive if he had better parenting.
on October 11,2013 | 01:56PM
Leinanij wrote:
That may be true. But then it may have been someone else's son too. Deedy was primed for a fight and got one. That's why he was packing.
on October 11,2013 | 02:29PM
hanabatadayz wrote:
exactly..now the parents crying foul..it runs in the family i guess
on October 11,2013 | 02:36PM
syhud wrote:
Yeah sure, if he didn't die he would recover from his gunshot wound and still be in Waikiki being the same punk that he was.
on October 11,2013 | 02:34PM
jess wrote:
Coming from the person bad mouthing the deceased on the internet.... Who's the loser again?
on October 11,2013 | 01:36PM
hanabatadayz wrote:
not me..i'm still alive
on October 11,2013 | 02:33PM
slacker47 wrote:
Surprised only option was first degree murder!! There always has to be lesser charges to be considered and not just one. Why bother with new trial if only top option again. The weasel defendant has seemed to get things his own way so far,and this all happened two years ago in November. Recently sentenced former Detroit mayor got 28 year sentence for extortion and many other charges,so why not the weasel who took a life do some time too.
on October 11,2013 | 12:15PM
tigerwarrior wrote:
@slacker Exactly. Why is manslaughter considered a lesser charge if prosecutors believed there was sufficient evidence to try this case for murder but not manslaughter? Some could argue that a charge of manslaughter won't stick because Deedy was a law enforcement officer. However, it should be said that Hawai'i's concealed carry laws are very strict even for off-duty law enforcement officers--and are very similar to that of non-law enforcement civilians who are granted a concealed carry permit. For example, any measurable amount of alcohol is prohibited when carrying a firearm--and it doesn't have to be the DWI Per Se BAC limit of 0.08 percent--any amount is strictly prohibited. The only way the manslaughter option would be annulled is if it could be proven that Deedy did in fact identify himself as a law enforcement officer--before shooting Elderts. If Deedy didn't flash any credentials--how on earth was Elderts to know that Deedy was a law enforcement officer--or just a madman who threw the first punch(kick) and then drew his sidearm soon after? Keep in mind that Hawaii has no stand your ground laws--so the self-defense plea is irrelevant if Deedy didn't at first identify himself as a law enforcement officer and if his life or the life of anyone in the vicinity was in danger--both of which have yet to be proven.
on October 11,2013 | 04:19PM
st1d wrote:
"For example, any measurable amount of alcohol is prohibited when carrying a firearm--and it doesn't have to be the DWI Per Se BAC limit of 0.08 percent--any amount is strictly prohibited."

would you please cite the section of the hrs where this is stated. couldn't find any reference to your statement in the hrs.

on October 12,2013 | 12:46AM
jeffreyandlisa wrote:
I find it despicable that they are trying him again. He had his trial, and that should be it. The government should not be able to try him again just because they didn't like the outcome of the first one.
on October 11,2013 | 12:24PM
lookup wrote:
there was no outcome...hung jury...no decision made beyond a shadow of a doubt
on October 11,2013 | 12:29PM
Leinanij wrote:
What's despicable is when people who know absolutely nothing about the justice system make stupid comments.
on October 11,2013 | 02:31PM
atilter wrote:
nothing new being said here! groundless opinions abound signifying nothing - except to show that there are many who know nothing but have everything to say!
on October 11,2013 | 10:40PM
dlum003 wrote:
It's hard to sympathize with the Elderts', sorry. By the available indications, that kid was a cocky punk looking for any chance of trouble. No that does not excuse Deedy's overzealousness, both were at fault, but his card was up and he died. Now more money wil be wasted on a case that was already tried and terminated.
on October 11,2013 | 12:26PM
Bdpapa wrote:
Your comment was kinda crude but I agree with it.
on October 11,2013 | 01:03PM
sohappy2beme wrote:
I have to agree with you as well. We all know the story...the local boys that go into Waikiki looking for trouble, looking to pick on the tourists. I know it doesn't mean he should be killed, but when you are a troublemaker, eventually your number is up. We live by the tourist dollar, and these local punks don't get that. They drive through Waikiki yelling at the tourists, telling the to go home, or in this case, harassing them. Elderts had a record, and unfortunately for him, he picked the wrong time and the wrong place to flex his macho muscles.
on October 11,2013 | 02:00PM
bluebowl wrote:
I guess he never read the paper or listened to the news, otherwise he might have known about all the security coming to town for APEC .
on October 11,2013 | 02:27PM
stingray65 wrote:
That was justifiable shooting...End of the story!!
on October 11,2013 | 12:32PM
lookup wrote:
Apparently not , according to the law no decision was made...new trial is scheduled!
on October 11,2013 | 12:37PM
hanalei395 wrote:
The story ends when the murderer is in OCCC or Halawa.
on October 11,2013 | 01:19PM
Fred01 wrote:
We would all be better off if you were in Halawa.
on October 11,2013 | 03:06PM
BigOpu wrote:
I think most people won't be hugely affected by the outcome one way or another. There is still interest, but no one will turnover cars and set fires to the streets once a decision is made. Kinda want to get it over with already. But hey, the parents should fight for their son's justice no matter what the public perception of him is.
on October 11,2013 | 12:35PM
lookup wrote:
I agree...what ever happened that night Elderts did not deserve to die!
on October 11,2013 | 12:51PM
Fred01 wrote:
Perhaps those who go around picking fights and bullying people do deserve to die?
on October 11,2013 | 03:07PM
pridon wrote:
Really, it's Obama's fault. He should have APEC in Chicago. All Hawaii got out of APEC was shut down roads, interrupted business and bad publicity and unfortunately a death. If convicted, IMO Deedy will be pardoned by the President, if he can do so on a State case.
on October 11,2013 | 04:20PM
Bdpapa wrote:
We all would do that!
on October 11,2013 | 01:04PM
wiliki wrote:
Eldert's family is mistaken..... they got the strongest case. If they had gone for man slaughter, then there might have been an acquittal.
on October 11,2013 | 12:55PM
RichardCory wrote:
That makes zero logical sense. In fact, I think the logic might somehow dip into the negatives. Anti-logic, if you will. Think about it: Manslaughter is a lesser offense than second degree murder, and it's easier to prove than murder. If the jury would have acquitted Deedy of the lesser offense of manslaughter that is legally easier to prove than second degree murder, then they necessarily would have also acquitted Deedy of second degree murder. Adding lesser alternatives to convict someone doesn't make it easier for that person to get acquitted--it only makes it easier for them to be convicted.
on October 11,2013 | 01:33PM
tigerwarrior wrote:
Apologies for not reading your comment before I contributed mine--you put it a lot better than I did. I'm truly amazed at how two people can see the same thing and interpret differently. I guess this is the reason for the mistrial and hung jury. But then again--if I were serving on the jury--I would except neither murder or acquittal--manslaughter is the only option I would vouch for.
on October 11,2013 | 04:37PM
Kalaheo1 wrote:
RichardCory wrote: "That makes zero logical sense. In fact, I think the logic might somehow dip into the negatives. Anti-logic, if you will. "

wiliki is not the strongest commenter here. That was a typical statement for him.

on October 11,2013 | 06:03PM
ValleyIsleLaw wrote:
A jury trial is always a matter of constantly changing circumstances resulting in constantly changing strategies and tactics by all of the attorneys involved. I don't think that anyone, particularly those who were not there on the front lines or in all of the late night sessions in the prosecutor's office, can ever judge Janice Futa's judgment or decision on this matter from afar. Too many factors were involved in that decision which we just don't know. That being said, however, Eldert's parents have a right to grieve and be emotional no matter what we may think about Kollin. We all would do the same if our kid was shot justifiably or not. I, for one, suggest we cut them a little slack.
on October 11,2013 | 01:02PM
Kuokoa wrote:
Who threw the first punch, and who went for the gun first? The BOY needed or should have been disciplined by his parents more.
on October 11,2013 | 01:18PM
lookup wrote:
Deedy was the first to kick and the only one to draw a gun. He could dish it out but could not take it!
on October 11,2013 | 01:25PM
gobows wrote:
elderts kept fighting a man with a gun, when he didnt have one. did his parents teach him that?
on October 11,2013 | 01:38PM
hanalei395 wrote:
Elderts kept fighting like a man, AFTER being shot. And after Deedy took out his CONCEALED weapon, he IMMEDIATELY started shooting. Deedy was out to kill.
on October 11,2013 | 01:57PM
hanabatadayz wrote:
your comment makes no sense..how can he fight back when he was already dead from the shot?
on October 11,2013 | 02:39PM
hanalei395 wrote:
He was dying. The McDonald's manager said Elderts was on Deedy giving him "soft punches" ...then stopped while still on Deedy. She didn't know then that he had just died.
on October 11,2013 | 03:26PM
hanabatadayz wrote:
it was a defensive kick..he didn't bring his leg back to wind up
on October 11,2013 | 02:40PM
hanalei395 wrote:
You're a LIAR. It was all on the McDonald's video. It shows Deedy pushing the G.F of Deedy's friend aside (who was trying to hold Deedy back), going up to Elderts and then kicks him.
on October 11,2013 | 03:36PM
hanalei395 wrote:
On the stand, the prosecutor forced Deedy to admit, to confess, that there was no crime that was committed, BEFORE he kicked Elderts.
on October 11,2013 | 04:19PM
DeltaDag wrote:
Evidence aside, which person would you rather have in line with you at a fast food restaurant at oh dark thirty: Deedy or Elderts? Who would you feel most comfortable with? The probable answer to this question likely bodes ill for a retrial.
on October 11,2013 | 01:21PM
gobows wrote:
the parents blame the prosecutor over failing to go for a manslaughter, when the JUDGE SAYS NO EVIDENCE FOR THAT......GO SWITCHNG OUT THE JUDGE!!
on October 11,2013 | 01:37PM
HawaiiCheeseBall wrote:
Yep all this manslaughter talk is moot. Unless something new pops up in the retrial its going be the same thing, murder or acquittal, no in between.
on October 11,2013 | 01:59PM
zelda123 wrote:
The Parents are right !!! Futa and Kaneshiro are LOSERS, The would never be able to hold there own on the open market! USELESS LOSERS !
on October 11,2013 | 01:40PM
kiragirl wrote:
The parents "maybe" right but only because of the mistrial. Not sure if they can "choose" the prosecuting attorney. To reassign someone else to this case would not be good because Futa knows what to expect in the next trial so should be able to 'better' prepare herself. I think a conviction will be obtain this time.
on October 11,2013 | 02:12PM
allie wrote:
on October 11,2013 | 02:39PM
Peacenik wrote:
What happened to their high makamaka attorney? why did he say something earlier. Isn't that what he get the big bucks for, to be on top of things? parents can't raise their kid right, and expect society to bear the cost. got the blame everybody but themselves attitude.
on October 11,2013 | 03:29PM
FM wrote:
hard to be aggressive when the evidence is stacked against you. they were lucky to get a mistrial. elderts are just trying to make their case against deep pockets. shameful.
on October 11,2013 | 01:55PM
Leinanij wrote:
Look on the good side people. With Kaneshiro's abysmal record of convictions compared to Carlisle, we don't have to spend money to build more prisons.
on October 11,2013 | 02:36PM
Mythman wrote:
Did I miss it of was there news of the results of the state department's own internal investigation? That's where Mr Green's case is going to be found, not in another trial. And allie went to law school as a topping on a slice of pizza, Pepperoni U.
on October 11,2013 | 02:41PM
HawaiiCheeseBall wrote:
I can understand the parent's position, after all their son was killed and the accused has not been convicted. Taking a step back however, I think its a tough case. The crime scene "video" wasn't that great, there were witnesses telling all kinds of conflicting stories. Everyone keeps pointing at the Prosecutors for not seeking a manslaughter charge, but they lose sight of the fact that there was no support for a manslaughter charge, even the judge said so, so manslaughter in this case is simply not an option. I could not think of one thing the prosecutors did wrong, they presented the case they had. I did not hear of anyone accusing them of holding anything back. You have to acknowledge that the defense team were no slouches and there was plenty of evidence and testimony to support their version of events. Because of the evidence out there we all have to recognized that there may never be a conviction in this case. Sometimes in life, that's the way it is.
on October 11,2013 | 02:45PM
roadsterred wrote:
Lesson 1 - Never get into an argument with someone who is armed with a gun. Lesson 2 - Never try to wrestle with someone who has a gun. Lesson 3 - Go to lesson 1.
on October 11,2013 | 03:12PM
gobows wrote:
this is why Deedy is "not guilty". once the gun was pulled out, elderts needed to pull back. BUT since he rushed to attack Deedy, it then became a "self defense" issue. not manslaughter or 2nd degree murder.
on October 11,2013 | 03:46PM
hanalei395 wrote:
The gun was CONCEALED. Once Deedy pulled it out, he IMMEDIATELY started shooting. And Elderts retaliated after Deedy kicked him. It was all on the McDonald's video.
on October 11,2013 | 04:04PM
sak wrote:
They will just have to put a hold on the two new Escalades that they want to buy if and when their big payday comes from a law suit. How much could a loser of a son's life be valued for for loss of his income earned had he survived? Not much, and Deedy will just declare bankruptcy and they will end up buying Kia's instead of the Escalades.
on October 11,2013 | 03:14PM
Leinanij wrote:
That's a poor excuse for a comment sak. Hope you never lose a child and have to read that losers think all you want is a car instead of justice for your son.
on October 11,2013 | 03:31PM
sak wrote:
Parenting issues are brought up here for the real loser. The Parents should be blasted for not doing their Parental duties properly. It is their loss, true, but to the community and tourists visiting Hawaii, a gain.
on October 11,2013 | 06:44PM
gobows wrote:
you got some inside info on that? you must be a relative?
on October 11,2013 | 03:44PM
Peacenik wrote:
that you're actually an ug_y CM?
on October 11,2013 | 03:21PM
konag43 wrote:
regardless what anybody says the deceased was no angel deedy over extended his authority but it would never have happened if the deceased did not start the fight. local boys have a problem with picking fights with malahini's.
on October 11,2013 | 03:56PM
honokai wrote:
I doubt the community feels threatened by Deedy. If the prosecutor had real backbone, he would just drop the charges and tell the family that state resources need to be directed elsewhere. Then Michael Green would be free move forward on his civil action.
on October 11,2013 | 04:35PM
builderguy wrote:
There was no evidence to support manslaughter? Is this really what kaneshiro said, if so then how can they go for murder ? This doesn't make sense, isn't murder a more serious charge? The defendant killed a unarmed man.
on October 11,2013 | 04:53PM
Kalaheo1 wrote:
builderguy wrote: "There was no evidence to support manslaughter? Is this really what kaneshiro said, if so then how can they go for murder ? This doesn't make sense, isn't murder a more serious charge? The defendant killed a unarmed man."

I think it's because Deedy was intentionally using deadly force and he had a reasonable expectation that it would maim or kill Elderts.

Manslaughter is an unintended consequence like a drunk driver killing a pedestrian or struggling for a the gun have having it go off accidentally.

Because Deedy shot Elderts on purpose, manslaughter isn't an option. That's my understanding anyway, and it could be wrong.

on October 11,2013 | 06:10PM
tigerwarrior wrote:
There is such a thing as voluntary manslaughter--as I mentioned previously.
on October 11,2013 | 07:33PM
Kalaheo1 wrote:
"Voluntary manslaughter is the killing of a human being in which the offender had no prior intent to kill and acted during "the heat of passion," under circumstances that would cause a reasonable person to become emotionally or mentally disturbed."
on October 11,2013 | 10:08PM
Nevadan wrote:
The Elderts should also sue the State Dept. I trust the federal government that it would not protect an employee who used a federal bullet to kill someone off-duty in a personal dispute. Even if it did, it is not likely to win.
on October 11,2013 | 05:28PM
HonoluluHawaii wrote:
The prosecutors need to allow for the option of manslaughter in the next trial, otherwise they risk another hung jury. At least get something instead of nothing. Opinions seem strong on both guilty and not guilty for the murder charge. Let the jury weigh the manslaughter option.
on October 11,2013 | 05:47PM
skinut wrote:
Michael Green just wanted a conviction, any kind of conviction, because it would make his job easier in a civil case. The only winners in these types of cases are the attorneys.
on October 11,2013 | 05:52PM
Peacenik wrote:
That's where the mooola is.
on October 11,2013 | 10:03PM
busthalfnut wrote:
How the heck would he know? People in the know all knew it was a toss up going before trial even started. Outcome was no surprise.
on October 11,2013 | 06:30PM
312guy wrote:
my two cents: there should be no new trial, deedy go home dont carry gun when out drinking, moms posture in the photo just wants to collect money from this incident father is trully feeling the loss, may your son rest in peace. hooponopono
on October 11,2013 | 07:02PM
iwanaknow wrote:
Parents got a case of sour grapes?
on October 11,2013 | 07:29PM
awahana wrote:
If they won, then the State and the Prosecutor were the right ones for the job.
Lose, and its their fault, not Green's. Attorney trying to deflect the blame, so the parents don't go after him.
This attorney and this family deserve each other, it seems.
Good luck wasting taxpayer money a 2nd time.
If you did a better job of teaching your son morals, instead of making comments to strangers, in pubic, in the wee hours of the night, intoxicated, he would still be here. What good is going to church if your kids are misbehaving in society? Look inside yourselves. Look at your son's past criminal record.
Please wake up. We all pray for him, and hope no one else in the family suffers the same fate.
on October 11,2013 | 08:48PM
2NDC wrote:
Too bad the Elderts didn't raise their little boy right. Had they done better at parenting, maybe their son wouldn't have been out at a McDonald's restaurant at 2am all drunk and high on not only marijuana, but also Cocaine. If anyone is to blame, it would be the Elderts family. Same trial, same evidence, same result. Kaneshiro should do the responsible thing and decline to take the case to trial a second time. Waste of money, as it will either result in another mistrial or a "not guilty" verdict.
on October 11,2013 | 11:15PM
yhls wrote:
Kaneshiro and Futa are both an embarrassment. It's as if they want to make sure Deedy goes free.
on October 12,2013 | 07:08AM
Breaking News
Bionic Reporter
Needing a new knee

Warrior Beat
Monday musings

Small Talk
Burning money

Political Radar
On policy

Warrior Beat
Apple fallout

Wassup Wit Dat!
Can You Spock ‘Em?

Warrior Beat
Meal plan