Tuesday, July 29, 2014         

 Print   Email   Comment | View 30 Comments   Most Popular   Save   Post   Retweet

Judge releases documents in Deedy murder case

By Ken Kobayashi

LAST UPDATED: 08:36 a.m. HST, Feb 26, 2014

A state judge has released the transcripts of closed court proceedings she held before declaring a mistrial in federal agent Christopher Deedy's murder case.

Circuit Judge Karen Ahn's ruling Monday came as a result of a request by the Honolulu Star-Advertiser and Hawaii News Now seeking to make public the record of the closed sessions.

The closed proceedings on Aug. 26 dealt with the jury foreman's concern that he saw a juror shaking hands with someone who would sit in the courtroom gallery with one of  two families.

Deedy's family sat on one side of the gallery, while the family of Kollin Elderts, the man Deedy shot, was on the other side.

The juror, however, said he used to work with the person seven years ago and it didn't affect his judgment.

The transcript was redacted to keep confidential the names of the foreman and the juror and which family the person was sitting with.

Ahn later in open court declared the mistrial after the jurors said they were deadlocked unable to reach a verdict.

Deedy, a State Department special agent, faces a retrial on the charge of murdering Elderts for the 2011 shooting at a Waikiki McDonald's restaurant.

Jury selection for the retrial in Ahn's courtroom is scheduled for June.

Order RE Motion to Unseal Transcript by Honolulu Star-Advertiser

 Print   Email   Comment | View 30 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.
toad103410 wrote:
This case is going to drag on and on while costing us taxpayers big bucks. Hope justice, at whatever cost, is served. IMHO both parties were at fault but if a firearm had not been involved it wouldn't have come to this.
on February 25,2014 | 02:14PM
Kailuaraised wrote:
Thankfully, your stupid opinion isn't a law. Deedy broke no laws by carrying his weapon. HPD protected a fellow cop by not getting a blood draw.
on February 25,2014 | 03:37PM
DAGR81 wrote:
Packing a weapon while drinking...how stupid is that. For a law enforcement officer that is criminal negligence.
on February 25,2014 | 04:09PM
Kailuaraised wrote:
No, it's actually not.
on February 25,2014 | 04:28PM
Nevadan wrote:
Think !
on February 25,2014 | 04:39PM
RNC404 wrote:
Really Think
on February 25,2014 | 06:45PM
RetiredWorking wrote:
Kailuaraised, it might not be negligent, but it sure was stupid of Deedy to pack and drink.
on February 25,2014 | 11:45PM
daniwitz13 wrote:
Deedy broke no law by carrying his weapon, it is when he use it, that it became a crime. What you say about what happened before the event is irrelevant, what he did with the gun is relevant, he took someone's life with it. Elderts did not have an equal weapon. It was all one sided, the one with the Gun will always win. It is all irrelevant who did what, who spoke first, struck first, who was on top, bottom, who was winning, who was losing, etc. The one with the gun shot the other that did NOT have a gun, period. You pay. Pity
on February 25,2014 | 07:03PM
Barefootie wrote:
actually Agent Deedy, did break the rules - he was carrying his weapon with him, while going out and drinking with his friends! All one has to do is look at the out come of the 'scuffle' and draw your own conclusions; one person dead!
on February 25,2014 | 09:33PM
Surfer_Dude wrote:
So in laymans terms, what does this mean? Who benefits....the defense or DA?
on February 25,2014 | 02:18PM
Tahitigirl55 wrote:
I would like to be selected as one of the jurors to determine this case.
on February 25,2014 | 02:18PM
Kailuaraised wrote:
Acquit Deedy.
on February 25,2014 | 03:34PM
DAGR81 wrote:
How stupid is that?
on February 25,2014 | 04:11PM
RNC404 wrote:
Drunk law enforcers should not be carrying guns. They no longer have control of a dangerous weapon. Alcohol definitely hindered his judgment!
on February 25,2014 | 06:48PM
Kailuaraised wrote:
Please, do tell us, since you seem to know, what was Deedy's BAC? Can you prove that alcohol impaired his judgement?
on February 26,2014 | 01:13AM
mokebla wrote:
I'm CWP carrier and alcohol and guns don't mix period. Any Law man knows that and HPD drop the ball, period.
on February 25,2014 | 03:36PM
gobows wrote:
i'm glad you agreed HPD fumbled. can't undo a wrong. because of that. acquit deedy.
on February 25,2014 | 03:52PM
RNC404 wrote:
Yes can't undo the death also...so acquit Deedy
on February 25,2014 | 06:51PM
entrkn wrote:
The state must acquit Mr Deedy, apologize for his inconvenience, and wish him well.
on February 25,2014 | 04:21PM
hanalei395 wrote:
A "Massie Case" WILL NOT be repeated.
on February 25,2014 | 06:25PM
waokele wrote:
No one was right in this shooting, but Deedy will not get a fair trail no matter what now.
on February 25,2014 | 04:37PM
daniwitz13 wrote:
No one has a Right to use a gun to take anyone's life. Anyone that uses a gun to shoot or kill someone that does not have a gun, must pay the price for it. Otherwise, one can just shoot the unarmed and go free. That is not justice, it is insanity of it. Pity
on February 25,2014 | 07:11PM
glenn57377 wrote:
There are circumstances where if someone is legally carrying a gun and his life is in danger or serious bodily harm is about to occur, in self-defense, you can shoot someone. However, a person has to know what the laws are for the State he/she is in when carrying, if allowed to carry. In my original home State, I could have one in plain sight in a vehicle and must identify it to police as a first action. My mother and father both had concealed weapons permits. My brothers and myself carried pistols in our car seats. Not once were they ever used. Rifles and shotguns were legal to carry in a vehicle.........rear window of a truck or in sight if a car. When weapon carrying becomes common, it is not uncommon. In Hawaii it is uncommon due to strict gun laws. Here, we usually have victims since only the unlawful carry weapons. The innocent do not stand a chance against a deadly attack because being defenseless, apparently, is State law. In the Deedy case, Federal laws were also involved - which, most likely, trumped State laws. If anyone has ever been on the losing end of a beating - you will wish you had a gun, or a baseball bat, or a stun gun, or a taser, or mace........all of which is unlawful in Hawaii. You will then just lay there and take your beating until the person decides to let you live, or not. Remember the Xerox shootings? Wouldn't it have been great if one or two of the victims would have had a gun in his desk?
on February 25,2014 | 10:19PM
McB0B wrote:
Deedy would have been acquitted if this juror hadn't held out due to his connection to the not exactly victim's family and everyone knows it apparently, so why waste money retrying him just to satisfy some people who don't believe in fair trials when one of their friends doesn't come out on the winning side of something he initiated?
on February 25,2014 | 05:11PM
username_required wrote:
Awesome sentence. Poetic.
on February 25,2014 | 09:17PM
seaborn wrote:
Too bad they weren't smoking marijuana instead of alcohol, they'd have been a lot more laid back, eaten their food, and had a case of the giggles. Alcohol sucks.
on February 25,2014 | 09:25PM
HAJAA1 wrote:
The good guy won. And people can't hack it. I, for one, LOVE it.
on February 25,2014 | 09:53PM
RetiredWorking wrote:
I love the fact that Deedy has already paid the price for killing Elderts, will pay again in his new trial, and the civil suit, and for the rest of his life, emotionally, financially and career-wise. Acquitted or not, Deedy loses.
on February 25,2014 | 11:53PM
Mypualani wrote:
Yeah I like that too.
on February 26,2014 | 07:22PM
HanabataDays wrote:
68 pages of REAL reading to do, then back here to make some comments that are relevant to this ruling.
on February 26,2014 | 12:16AM
Breaking News
Political Radar
`Values,’ too

Political Radar

Wassup Wit Dat!
Bettah Not Lose It

Political Radar
`My side’

Political Radar
‘He reminds me of me’

Bionic Reporter
Needing a new knee

Warrior Beat
Monday musings