Quantcast
  

Tuesday, April 22, 2014         

 Print   Email   Comment | View 362 Comments   Most Popular   Save   Post   Retweet

Deedy did not seem drunk, doctor says

By Sarah Zoellick

POSTED:
LAST UPDATED: 03:08 p.m. HST, Jul 24, 2013


During the eighth day of testimony in State Department special agent Christopher Deedy's murder trial, a witness for the first time noted that Deedy did not appear to be intoxicated in the early-morning hours of Nov. 5, 2011, after he fatally shot a 23-year-old Kailua man at a Waikiki McDonald's.

An emergency room physician testified that he did not recall smelling alcohol on Deedy's breath when he examined Deedy shortly after he arrived in handcuffs at the Queen's Medical Center.

Dr. Kyle Perry said he noted in Deedy's medical record that Deedy showed no signs of distress, had normal coordination, was speaking in full sentences and could move without difficulty.

When asked by the defense if he had any reason to believe Deedy was intoxicated, Perry said, "At that time, no, I did not."

Deedy was taken to Queen's after complaining that his nose and jaw hurt. He was diagnosed with a broken nose. According to his medical record, he arrived at the hospital at 4:08 a.m. The shooting occurred around 2:45 a.m.

Earlier this week, evidence specialist Toy Stech said she noticed "a strong smell" of alcohol on Deedy's breath and a "sour smell," as if the alcohol were emanating from the agent's pores and perspiration, when she photographed him and tested him for gunshot residue at the hospital from about 4:40 to 5 a.m.

Earlier Thursday, retired police Sgt. Kenneth Schrei­­ner told the Circuit Court jury that Deedy slurred his speech, seemed "semi-unsteady on his feet" and that his eyes appeared glassy. Schrei­ner also said Deedy's breath smelled of alcohol.

The jury has heard from other responding officers and McDonald's customers who said they thought Deedy appeared to be under the influence of alcohol when he fatally shot Elderts.

Deedy, 29, of Arlington, Va., was here to help provide security at the Asia-Pacific Economic Cooperation conference. He and two friends went to bars in Chinatown and Waikiki before ending up at McDonald's.

The prosecution contends Deedy was driven by alcohol and inexperience when he shot Kollin Elderts, who was unarmed.

The defense maintains Deedy had some beer but was not drunk. His lawyer told the jury Deedy fired his gun to defend himself from a drunken Elderts, who attacked him.

Previous witnesses have testified that a bullet casing fell from the chamber of Deedy's 9 mm Glock handgun when an officer was instructed to "make it safe."

Cindee Lorenzo, a criminalist and firearms expert with HPD, testified Thursday that she can't say with certainty what prevented the bullet casing from automatically ejecting.

Lorenzo also positively identified the three casings found at the scene as being associated with bullets shot from Deedy's gun.

Perry also testified that he examined Deedy's friend Adam Gutow­ski, who was with Deedy that night and scuffled with Elderts and his friend Shane Medei­ros.

Perry said Gutowski told a triage nurse that he might have been hit by a gun while trying to break up a fight. He found a bruise on Gutow­­ski's right cheek, a laceration and swelling commonly refered to as a "goose egg" above his left temple, and a cut on the left side of his head that was less than 1 centimeter long, he said.

Perry said he could not recall whether Gutow­ski smelled of alcohol or exhibited signs of intoxication.

Perry told the prosecution that neither Gutow­ski's nor Deedy's injuries appeared to be life-threatening.






 Print   Email   Comment | View 362 Comments   Most Popular   Save   Post   Retweet

COMMENTS
(362)
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.
bodysurf_ah wrote:
Another great day for the special agent! Keep your head up bro, it will end one day.
on July 19,2013 | 01:46AM
MalamaKaAina wrote:
Huh, a great day, covered in the victims blood and he shows no signs of distress?
on July 19,2013 | 04:28AM
ethann81 wrote:
I guess your sarcasm worked too well.
on July 19,2013 | 04:42AM
hanalei395 wrote:
After committing a horrific deed, a drunk will sober up no time. But the smell of alcohol stays.
on July 19,2013 | 10:17AM
peanutgallery wrote:
Not possible for this guy to get a fair trial here. Racism is just too much a part of everyday life now.
on July 19,2013 | 02:42AM
Mypualani wrote:
WHY?
on July 19,2013 | 03:23AM
pcman wrote:
Deedy having a weapon had the responsibility to walk away. Having a badge and creds he had the duty to show them before using his weapon. There is no stand your ground law in Hawaii so Deedy can't use that defense. Hawaii's self defense law gives the benefit of a doubt to the person without the weapon, unfortunately. Race is not an issue in this case, because it is not a reason to kill a person. Deedy's lawyers have to overcome the prejudice of liberalism and anti-gun attitudes of the jurors.
on July 19,2013 | 04:51PM
Mypualani wrote:
Maybe some on the jury are not anti gun, I am for self protection and all, but to go and pick a fight and then pull a gun and say well my life was in danger so I killed the guy, that is not a right don't care how it's sliced and diced saw the tapes and heard testimony from a sober witness because she was the designated driver. That Elderts shouted if you going shoot me then f'n shoot me. Sounds like Deedy decided hey I am gonna shake this guy up. That's when everything went to hell. Instead of Elderts pissing himself a fight ensued with Deedy and friend throwing the first blows. So lylas that Deedy's rage did't take other lives also.
on July 19,2013 | 06:26PM
Mypualani wrote:
Glad
on July 19,2013 | 06:35PM
MalamaKaAina wrote:
You can thank the great divider for that!
on July 19,2013 | 04:25AM
false wrote:
They can all thank Deedy's friend Fein.... for planting the seed of racism. If he didn't program Deedy with the racist definitions, this wouldn't have happened. Drunk is not likely to make good decisions. Best is that Elderts went to his seat and stayed out of the way. Who got up and entered Elderts' personal space? In Hawaii personal space is really important. That comes largely for the oriental influences but who would know that? Hawaiians definitely believe in personal space and regard. But who isn't made that way? Deedy just didn't abide by social customs which is what Fein..... should have cautioned him about.
on July 19,2013 | 05:30AM
Fred01 wrote:
Are you joking? Asians do not value personal space. Where are you from?
on July 19,2013 | 04:48PM
sailfish1 wrote:
Yes they do.
on July 19,2013 | 05:23PM
false wrote:
E Fred, don't try to get too close for lei giving. It's not welcome. Bowing is how they protect their space. Where do you come from? Papakolea and Punahou and not scholarship.
on July 19,2013 | 05:41PM
Mypualani wrote:
False at least you know what you speak of. They do value personal space.
on July 19,2013 | 06:28PM
kolohepalu wrote:
Fred a little slow, as he as previously proved.
on July 19,2013 | 10:57PM
Fred01 wrote:
Ever been off this rock?
on July 22,2013 | 02:51PM
Mrs_G wrote:
Put the racism card away, Pnut. Use the one with the "A" on it. . . A-T-T-I-T-U-D-E. Regardless of race, it's the "I'm superior" attitude that can bring a situation to a head quickly. I've seen it many times and it's not limited to whites although it seems that way sometimes.
on July 19,2013 | 06:43AM
soundofreason wrote:
Put a "Proud to be White" sticker on your car to prove your point. That's about all it would take. Funny how "proud to be...." anything else is ok BUT ...........
on July 19,2013 | 07:34AM
hanalei395 wrote:
But what? Since you're complaining, it's OK for you to put a "Proud to be White" sticker on your car.
on July 19,2013 | 09:37AM
droid wrote:
There is a white man selling “anti-haole” t-shirts at skate shop in Kailua. Maybe if you give him some of your stickers, they would cancel each other out?
on July 19,2013 | 03:51PM
8082062424 wrote:
i bought 30 of them friends on the mainland and outer islands all wanted one. it was not meant to be antii
on July 19,2013 | 06:05PM
Mypualani wrote:
Lol
on July 19,2013 | 06:29PM
false wrote:
That's all about skate boarding and really well done.
on July 19,2013 | 09:01PM
kolohepalu wrote:
Ah, because it would have certain connotations to certain people, like: "proud to be the ones who stole your Kingdom", or "proud to be the ones who fought for slavery", or "proud to be the ones who wiped out the Indians"- so yeah, it might cause some problems.
on July 19,2013 | 11:01PM
hawaiikone wrote:
Of course white men are the only ones on earth that have ever committed injustices against anyone else. Absolutely. Or maybe they get so much attention because they're the only ones in history that have tried to correct their past mistakes? Always smart to go after the deep pockets.
on July 20,2013 | 06:06AM
kolohepalu wrote:
Haha, yeah, nice corrections.
on July 20,2013 | 09:00AM
51butterflies wrote:
Point well taken about ATTITUDE,Mrs. G. If one has taken the time to embrace living in Hawaii, you realize it is peoples' attitude toward one another and not skin color or culture, that makes or breaks people. Living in Hawaii is unique. Hawaii is not racist, BUT it is the one state where you will get a taste of your own racial prejudices if you come here with that chip on your shoulder- and the "I'm superior" attitude. And if you don't want to IMPROVE your attitude and LEARN and GROW about your fellow humans, then we rejoice at your departure.
on July 19,2013 | 10:30PM
false wrote:
Finally some one who gets "it". Just couldn't explain how much going to Zippy's is so much fun. We are all friends at Zippy's. These consultants for the secret radar used to sit and talk business. They were here for installation. Loved to tease them that we had their table wired. Okasan always greets with a smile and her tutu man. Then the plantation guy arrives, his chick is on dialysis. Then there's the haole man with big smile and Nook reading and nurse wife. He is dying of brain cancer. We are an `ohana and it is about attitude. We are glad to share the space at Zippy's for breakfast.
on July 20,2013 | 05:28AM
allie wrote:
Hawaii is a horribly racist state but I do think the incompetent "special agent" is guilty of manslaughter.
on July 19,2013 | 06:53AM
kailuabred wrote:
Hawaii is no more racist than any state in the souther US...probably less so.
on July 19,2013 | 07:53AM
sailfish1 wrote:
"souther US" - What about the rest of the U.S.? I would say Hawaii is racist. There are plenty of people in Hawaii who don't like white people, mainland people, and Asian people (especially tourists).
on July 19,2013 | 05:29PM
false wrote:
Hawaii is no different from anywhere else on the planet. What is the word "gaigin"? What is it in Tahiti? Outsider? What is it in China? India? everywhere on the planet outsiders are labeled. We are no different. And every where you travel you need to regard the customs and the cautions. Regard is a lot different from going out and stirring up a lot of trouble with a gun.
on July 19,2013 | 09:04PM
wiliki wrote:
Manslaughter is debatable, but I don't agree on the racist part. We have stereotypes like any other people, but there's no hate involved there.
on July 19,2013 | 08:24AM
copperwire9 wrote:
Thanks. Allie is just exhausting.
on July 19,2013 | 10:03AM
Mypualani wrote:
Which makes me think about that song. Mr. Sancholee. We all tease each other and yeah get plenty stereotyping here we call each other names, but we as a state are made up of people from a lot of ethnic backgrounds. Me I am Hawaiian, Caucasian Chinese. Now how did that happen? Good point Wilki.
on July 19,2013 | 02:27PM
Shh wrote:
If you feel that way Allie then get the hell out of here! You mean YOU are racist! Any article with the topic of Hawaii or Hawaiians you seem to say something racist. Like I said, Keep your trap closed and do yourself a favor and go back home! You don't like it here so why stay?
on July 19,2013 | 09:26AM
hanalei395 wrote:
allie is leaving with NO Aloha, and absolutely NO leis. (Unless she buys it herself).
on July 19,2013 | 09:48AM
allie wrote:
I think I may be swamped with lei's. My boss at work says he will have a farewell party for me late in the fall!
on July 19,2013 | 02:15PM
aomohoa wrote:
No, you misunderstood as usual. He will throw a party to celebrate that you are finally leaving. LOL
on July 19,2013 | 03:59PM
2NDC wrote:
How many days AFTER you've left the island is this party gonna take place? ;-)
on July 19,2013 | 04:03PM
hanalei395 wrote:
No love for Hawai'i, AND YET ...."swamped with leis". If those suckers only knew.
on July 19,2013 | 07:50PM
saywhatyouthink wrote:
yea right, aloha oi
on July 19,2013 | 10:35PM
allie wrote:
No Hawaiians are mentioned in this article. I dislike nobody hon. Just reporting that racism is common out here. But yes, one can find racism anywhere in the world.
on July 19,2013 | 02:14PM
turbolink wrote:
Not even Republicans? You like them too after your gospel of hate through the years?
on July 19,2013 | 05:38PM
kelbells34 wrote:
allie...If you think Hawaii is a "horribly racist" state, I'd hate to see you on the East Coast, down South...Honestly, A LOT of people don't like Caucasian people from the mainland because they act like they know everything. I took a survey in college and EVEN Caucasian people claimed to dislike Caucasian people from the mainland. Maybe, they should take a look at themselves and realize they are no longer "superior" and cannot treat people the way they have been for centuries. It's NOT really their fault since treating others as second class citizens has been passed down from generations, but if nothing changes, people will continue to dislike Caucasians from the mainland. Look at Paula DEEN...who the heck in this day and age would think of having a "plantation style" wedding? With all "black" waiters?!?!?! THAT is why Caucasians have names like, "Cracker". Some of them are whip cracking CRAZY people. DEEDY proved his point! Caucasian from the mainland...Just Sayin!!!
on July 19,2013 | 09:58AM
Hapa_Haole_Boy wrote:
kelbells34, really good post. The ending just made me laugh though, b/c when you started mentioning "cracker", that Chris Rock improv show segment on that topic just came to mind. "Crackah a $ $ crackah!" hahaha.
on July 19,2013 | 01:54PM
Fred01 wrote:
Racist loser.
on July 19,2013 | 04:52PM
kelbells34 wrote:
OMG...That's EXACTLY who made me think of that name...Chris Rock, "Bigger and Blacker"!!!
on July 19,2013 | 09:44PM
kolohepalu wrote:
Look- you've upset fred again. Good.
on July 19,2013 | 11:06PM
allie wrote:
I agree..one can find racism anywhere. I have always said that.
on July 19,2013 | 02:16PM
turbolink wrote:
And if isn't there, you will be sure to find a way to introduce it with your race-baiting comments.
on July 19,2013 | 05:40PM
kolohepalu wrote:
Right on.
on July 19,2013 | 11:05PM
aomohoa wrote:
I should really keep track of how many times you say something negative about Hawaii and then say how much you love Hawaii the next day. Multiple personality disorder possibly???
on July 19,2013 | 03:56PM
kolohepalu wrote:
No. Hawaii is the only state where WASP isn't the predominate one- and it makes some people uncomfortable- probably the ones that need to be.
on July 19,2013 | 11:03PM
hanalei395 wrote:
What peanuts means by"racism" .... non-whites in Hawai'i are not subservient to whites anymore.
on July 19,2013 | 07:19AM
allie wrote:
Elderts was white hon.
on July 19,2013 | 07:26AM
hanalei395 wrote:
In general, non-whites in Hawai'i are not subservient to (Anglo) whites anymore.
on July 19,2013 | 07:37AM
hanalei395 wrote:
And that's "racism" ....according to peanuts.
on July 19,2013 | 07:52AM
allie wrote:
ummm...Hawaiians were in charge for most of our history hon and well into the 20th century. Asians may have felt that Hawaiians dominated them. Read the history and you will many of them did
on July 19,2013 | 02:17PM
kolohepalu wrote:
No- Elderts was local- his culture was not "white".
on July 19,2013 | 11:08PM
false wrote:
If Spanish isn't white, how can Portagese be white?
on July 20,2013 | 05:34AM
wiliki wrote:
Racism involves hate. But in this case, it's just a bias on the part of the jurors. They don't trust Deedy.... why should they? Definitely racism on Eldert's part.
on July 19,2013 | 08:20AM
NanakuliBoss wrote:
Not racism on Elderts part. Get serious. More of spontaneous anger. Elderts was bought up in Kailua! That's the most white community in the State. Went to school with whites! Nothing wrong with that. Have plenty old time H friends in Kailua. Plenty good people over there. No bring in the R card.
on July 19,2013 | 10:12AM
wiliki wrote:
I disagree. It depends on which crowd Elderts ran around with. You can have a bunch of racist thugs (sometimes they call em jocks) in any lily white crowd.
on July 19,2013 | 11:46AM
sparkyzane wrote:
To say he was from Kailua and associating that with lily white is inaccurate. The area where he's from is not lily white and is not an area to be in on a Friday or Saturday night.
on July 19,2013 | 02:13PM
NanakuliBoss wrote:
In general, spark, you shop ,eat, go school. In Kailua with a mix but there is a greater population of H. Not a problem. Now if Elderts was from the Leeward Coast, oh imagine the spin.
on July 19,2013 | 03:36PM
control wrote:
so kailua doesn't have "kill haole day" anymore?
on July 19,2013 | 03:49PM
false wrote:
Haven't heard that lately. There are so few of them and so many more of some other guys. Think the tides have turned and someone else's group is target for "beef". It's about the action. Target is just a blind.
on July 20,2013 | 05:37AM
allie wrote:
Elderts was white. Portuguese are white. I am not blaming him for that.
on July 19,2013 | 02:18PM
aomohoa wrote:
So what do you consider a Mandan?
on July 19,2013 | 04:07PM
8082062424 wrote:
well that funny coming from a white Mandan
on July 19,2013 | 06:13PM
kolohepalu wrote:
You don't get it- skin tone does not equal culture, especially in Hawaii. The only "whites" are visitors or those who fail to adapt to local culture, and yeah, they're treated as outsiders- just like in any other foreign place.
on July 20,2013 | 09:12AM
control wrote:
elderts was a hothead, wasn't his first run in or trouble with the law. he wasn't an angel either. I cannot say if race was an issue in this case, neither can you, we need to find out the entire conversation that went on during the time, also what elderts was saying to the other customer (the other customer may not have known that he was being insulted racially). I agree that while 2nd degree murder is out, manslaughter is a possiblity or some other charge (hopefully). Unlike the zimm case Deedy will probably be convicted of something IMHO.
on July 19,2013 | 03:48PM
hapaguy wrote:
On what basis would you say Murder 2 is out?
on July 19,2013 | 07:06PM
lynnh wrote:
Oh yeah? I grew up in Kailua and anti Haole has always been an issue in Kailua. You know nothing. The facy that you even use the term "whites" shows your contempt.
on July 19,2013 | 11:42PM
Mypualani wrote:
Me too Kill ha'ole day died out a while ago. It's not even referred to in Nanakuli or Waianae.
on July 20,2013 | 04:17PM
kolohepalu wrote:
Exactly- I guarantee you Elderts had white friends or co-workers he was completely fine with. This is about an insecure drunk from the mainland getting in over his head.
on July 20,2013 | 09:10AM
Nevadan wrote:
You have been drinking too much of that stuff.
on July 19,2013 | 09:00AM
junia wrote:
Yes, the racism is thick here...listen to what everyone else said about the drunk they saw that night and than listen to the breathless md trying to cover for him, go figure why. Nobody likes a liar unless they're one themselves. The doc showed his true '"colors".
on July 22,2013 | 08:30PM
Mypualani wrote:
This racism stuff is getting old. Peenuts. Please come with something to back up your claim.
on July 19,2013 | 03:24AM
ethann81 wrote:
Let um sulk
on July 19,2013 | 03:42AM
hanalei395 wrote:
On DHHL, KSBE, etc., peanuts REALLY sulks.
on July 19,2013 | 09:43AM
lynnh wrote:
I am Native American. I am very anti-violence and always have been.I was picked on by just about every local punk while I was in grade school. Why? Because I was very skinny and small at the time. Easy target. I heard the "H" word so often I learn to hate anyone that said it. It wasn't until I was in high school and hit 6 ft tall that it stopped... after I knocked the hell out of a local punk that kept hassling me. Even then I got mobbed by a bunch of @#$$ies that couldn't fight their own battles. But it did stop. Cowards.
on July 19,2013 | 11:52PM
Ldub20_Owl316 wrote:
Probably the locals that you said gave you grief were likely lower class citizens here.
on July 20,2013 | 01:15AM
kolohepalu wrote:
Gee, from your previous post, I thought you were poor and from the rez, chief- forgot that? At any rate, you don't get bonus points for getting picked on. Fat kids, kids that don't speak English well, ugly kids, gay kids- any of them would have it just as hard, so boo hoo.
on July 20,2013 | 09:24AM
Mypualani wrote:
Gee and this doesn't happen anywhere else in the world yeah, bullying only in Hawaii. I guess that was a bus load of Hawaiian kids who was bullying that elderly Caucasian woman on the school bus. You know the one who ended up with a bunch of money so she could be comfortable and retire. I admit I was a bully in grade school "Waimanalo" until this white kid billy set my but straight, he asked me a simple question " why you hate me what did I do to you" ? My answer was because you one H***e and you stole our land. He told me he didn't steal any land and that he couldn't help how he was born. Lets just say billy wasn't a target from me or anyone else for that matter from that day forward. Today we are still friends, good friends. He taught me how ignorant I was at the age of 8. He opened my eyes to how wrong my thinking was and I moved on from there, most of my best friends are Caucasian . The kids I work with have no issues with Caucasians the new target is Micronisians. It's a work in progress. Most of the people in Hawaii is mixed right about now. I am sorry that you were treated in such a hateful manner, there is no excuse for that.
on July 20,2013 | 04:29PM
false wrote:
Nice. Really how it is.
on July 21,2013 | 06:03AM
MKN wrote:
I find it curious that all the police personnel are saying that he was drunk (including the evidence specialist) and this doctor says he didn't seem drunk. I also find it curioius that the evidence specialist didn't report her personal observations for over a year. It seems that someone is either lying or really wasn't paying attention to Deedy's condition and made up an explanation later. Hard to say who it is at this point. I think that evidence specialist and the doctor cancel each other out though since both of their accounts of Deedy's condition occurred around the same timeframe. This is getting really interesting.
on July 19,2013 | 04:48AM
koolau wrote:
The physical altercation and realization that he shot someone probably sobered him up pretty quickly, as I suspect many would if involved in a shocking situation. I'm sure many can relate in their personal drinking episodes, how quickly they became sober when met with a close encounter.
on July 19,2013 | 05:02AM
false wrote:
Don't the pictures of Deedy confirm that he was glassy eyed and the sloppy facial muscles. Just looking at the mug shot compared to today's stance should be confirmation enough. Doctor says he wasn't stressed so why does he look so goofy at the picture taking?
on July 19,2013 | 05:33AM
allie wrote:
no proof of being drunk though.
on July 19,2013 | 06:54AM
Kamhaole wrote:
Let's take a picture of you after your nose has just been broken & see how goofy you look.
on July 19,2013 | 07:28AM
wiliki wrote:
Who can smile at a police mug shot?
on July 19,2013 | 08:28AM
Skyler wrote:
Especially with a broken nose & sore jaw.
on July 19,2013 | 11:47AM
Skyler wrote:
He arrived the night before on a red-eye (yes, red-eye) flight, got punched in the face, and got his nose broken; I'd say his glassy eyes & sloppy facial muscles were there for a good reason.
on July 19,2013 | 11:46AM
hapaguy wrote:
Not to mention all the barhopping and drinking he did with his old college roommate!
on July 19,2013 | 11:53AM
sak wrote:
With a broken nose, I guess my eyes would be a little glassy and most likely bloodshot.
on July 19,2013 | 03:52PM
hanalei395 wrote:
This is what the jury will keep in mind .... .....besides being reported that he smelled of alcohol.
on July 19,2013 | 05:52AM
8082062424 wrote:
I agree i was 18 all guts no brains. a bunch a of us went to sandys and we drank. after a while i went in water and ended up getting pounded bad by the time i got back to shore i was sober . and thanking god. not a mistake i ever made again
on July 19,2013 | 06:45AM
allie wrote:
yikes!
on July 19,2013 | 06:54AM
Bdpapa wrote:
You and whole bunch of us experienced the same thing!
on July 19,2013 | 09:46AM
Skyler wrote:
Shoots, I did that while sober... never again.
on July 19,2013 | 11:47AM
Publicbraddah wrote:
Good point, koolau. Which goes back to my argument of how drunk was he? So far, assessment by witnesses including police says that he was drunk but does his level of alcohol fall into the definition of being drunk? Deedy refused an alcohol test which was a smart move on his part so now, prosecutors have to come up with evidence to indicate he was actually "drunk". Police testimony probably carries some weight but now that the ER doctor has chimed in with his observation, it kinda throws a monkey wrench into the prosecutor's case.
on July 19,2013 | 06:57AM
kailuabred wrote:
Only time sobers someone up.
on July 19,2013 | 07:54AM
PTF wrote:
Yes it does. Not sure of what the rule of thumb is today but 15 years ago we all at work attended a substance abuse class for CDL(Commercial Drivers License) holders. They taught us that it takes one hour to burn up either a can of beer, glass of wine or a shot of whiskey.
on July 19,2013 | 11:02AM
Mypualani wrote:
Depending on height weight and over all body Fat, yes fat. Yes the alcohol is burned up through actions such as movement and breath.
on July 19,2013 | 02:39PM
wiliki wrote:
It brings up the point that even if they are drunk, people still can perform as normal. Or they can go bananas like Eldert did.
on July 19,2013 | 08:27AM
hapaguy wrote:
Stop exaggerating. If you watch the video at no time did Elderts "go bananas". Elderts can be seen defending himself from Deedy who was the aggressor the whole time...
on July 19,2013 | 11:56AM
Mypualani wrote:
I concur.
on July 19,2013 | 02:48PM
64hoo wrote:
your exaggerating the video only shows them in a little hoopla after that the fighting and scuffling with with deedy and gunshots that were fired was out of the video camera view. all you have on the video is the start of the rucus everything else after that is anybodys guess.
on July 19,2013 | 03:04PM
Mypualani wrote:
Well there are witnesses. They have not all testified yet.
on July 20,2013 | 04:31PM
WEATHER wrote:
koolau....Shock, accidents and other stimuli do not "sober you up".... if that were true every drunken driver would be able to pass a field sobriety test. If you're drunk, you're drunk, and the only thing that sobers you up is time. Period.
on July 19,2013 | 09:52AM
Mypualani wrote:
I stand corrected but yes it gets burned up in time.
on July 19,2013 | 02:50PM
KeithHaugen wrote:
If it had been you or me that shot and killed a man while out drinking and bar-hopping, we would have been tested for alcohol in our blood, whether we smelled of alcohol or not. It all boils down to the fact that even federal employees should not carry guns while off-duty and partying. If he had not been "packing," the murder would not have happened.
on July 19,2013 | 07:22AM
Nevadan wrote:
Aloha Keith. Your statement "....even federal employees should not carry guns while off-duty..." suggests that it is normal for federal employees to carry guns on duty?
on July 19,2013 | 08:53AM
NanakuliBoss wrote:
Why didn't the DOJ pick up Deedys defense cost if they thought he acted in the scope of a federal officer?
on July 19,2013 | 10:44AM
Mypualani wrote:
Because Deddy was not acting in the scope of his job, that is why he couldn't get the case moved or else he would have to get on the stand and testify to that, remember he said he was immune from prosecution because he was acting in the capacity of. Federal officer. Yeah sure.
on July 19,2013 | 02:53PM
Nevadan wrote:
On the contrary, State Dept (not DOJ) cannot take action. If it did, it would prejudice the present criminal trial. He will be fired after the trial, if he does not go to jail.
on July 19,2013 | 04:03PM
Mypualani wrote:
Mahalo Nevadan I stand corrected.
on July 19,2013 | 06:43PM
MoiliiliBoy wrote:
You would've been given the opportunity to be tested, just like Deedy was, and he refused. You can refuse also, no way of forcing you to be tested in the situation you provided. Drunk is layman's term, not definitive, but that is up to the jury to decide if he was reckless in his actions. Many on this thread say if Deedy didn't have his gun, no one would've died = uuntrue. Past several years, several people in 5-0 have died from one punch, pau. Head hits pavement then coma, then make. Elderts mounted Deedy, one of the best positions to be in when in UFC type situations, just pound away, head/neck doesn't get to absorb impact cuz of ground stopping head from thrashing back.
on July 19,2013 | 11:21AM
jess wrote:
He refused, which is our right too.
on July 19,2013 | 11:45AM
allie wrote:
agree..I have a terrible crush on keith though
on July 19,2013 | 02:19PM
control wrote:
what a broken record, we keep hearing the same things from Keith every day. guess he doesn't have a life, has to come here to express himself.
on July 19,2013 | 03:52PM
Skyler wrote:
Says 'con-troll' ...
on July 19,2013 | 11:53PM
kolohepalu wrote:
And yet you are here to read them every day, and even post. What a glamorous life you must have.
on July 20,2013 | 09:27AM
bluemoki wrote:
They don't say what time it was when the physician examined Deedy. He arrived at the hospital at 4:08 but we all know how long it takes to actually see the physician when you are sitting in the "emergency" room. My guess is that quite a bit of time elapsed from the time he was brought there until the time the physician saw him. I think this is relevant to whether or not he was still drunk - from the time of the shooting at 2:45 until the time the doctor saw him it could have been hours later and the effects of the alcohol already wearing off!
on July 19,2013 | 07:37AM
kolohepalu wrote:
Excellent point- odds are he was seen significantly later. But anyway- he was drinking, as an armed federal officer. Fail.
on July 19,2013 | 11:12PM
false wrote:
wouldn't a jolt of adrenalin change the exchange of alcohol in the system reducing its affect?
on July 20,2013 | 04:16PM
WooWoo wrote:
I think that the doctor's testimony carries a lot of weight because he is not biased by being a police officer or by having been at the scene of the crime. He was just presented with a patient, and he smelled no alcohol and noted no signs of impairment. The evidence specialist is employed by HPD and is not going to risk her job by saying things that go directly against the prosecution's case. The officers were at the scene of the crime and will have a tendency to jump to conclusions, rightly or wrongly. The doctor is the most unbiased testimony so far.
on July 19,2013 | 07:52AM
Usagi336 wrote:
What about the witnesses like the ex marine? Were they all biased too?
on July 19,2013 | 09:56AM
NanakuliBoss wrote:
The e.r. Is fully of alcohol and antiseptic smells. Guest how many drunks go to the er on a Saturday night? I don't think the doctor reported in his exam. Did the nurse testify?
on July 19,2013 | 03:42PM
false wrote:
That makes a lot of sense. Doctors would be desensitized to smells of alcohol because of constant exposure. Good thought, NB.
on July 20,2013 | 04:17PM
Mypualani wrote:
Doctor says "he dose not recall" there is a difference the somewhat small but a difference.
on July 20,2013 | 04:33PM
svkamahoi wrote:
Shame on the police for not testing for alcohol.
on July 19,2013 | 07:54AM
MoiliiliBoy wrote:
Read before you type.. he refused to be tested.
on July 19,2013 | 11:22AM
mitt_grund wrote:
Didn't earlier stories say Deedy refused an alcohol breath test? Was he given a special waiver because of his position as Secret Service? Or did the police just flub this area of investigation? Funny that if there is a traffic accident, a breathalyzer test is sought, but none in a homicide. Should be mandatory. In the case of driving under the influence, doesn't the law weight against you if you refuse a breathalyzer test? Even a blood test would have given some indication. Sounds like deference being given a fellow law officer.

Remember when that drunk police officer hung around at the scene of the traffic accident where he rammed a young girl's car killing her. They let him hang around, as if he were on "active duty".


on July 19,2013 | 08:21AM
cllewis wrote:
Mitt... Apples and Oranges !! There was no special waiver, just the 5th amendment against self-incrimination. The difference in incidents involving motor vehicles is that when operating a motor vehicle you already consented to providing evidence of intoxication through "Implied Consent". A driver can and often does refuse, and as you mentioned then faces consequences for that refusal. Even in those cases the PD must get a search warrant to forcibly get the test results (blood, breath or urine). None of us can answer as to why the PD did not seek a search warrant in Deedy's case. Maybe a prosecutor or lawyerly type can answer, but it may have something to do with the elements of the crime in which he is charged. Intoxication probably isn't even a factor. Voluntary intoxication has many times over been dismissed by courts when tried to be used as a defense to a number of crimes! Again, I am not a lawyer.... But I did stay at a Holiday Inn Express last night :-)
on July 19,2013 | 10:56AM
Mypualani wrote:
You hit it right on the head, the nail
on July 19,2013 | 02:55PM
kelbells34 wrote:
MKN...yes, I can't wait to see if others will testify that Deedy was not drunk. If not, Dr. Perry will look like a liar or incompetent. To his defense, HPD is trained to tell if someone is intoxicated. I don't know about the evidence specialist. I hope the prosecution asked Dr. Perry if he had a cold that day (discrediting his sense of smell) or what hour was it on his shift or if he himself had been drinking.
on July 19,2013 | 10:26AM
inverse wrote:
According to the story, the ER doctor stated in court is what he noted in the the Hospital electronic medical record AT the time he examined Deedy. Also unlike HPD and the HPD evidence gatherer Stech, this guy has medical training and experience to help determine if someone appears impaired or drunk. As some others pointed out the Queens ER doctor is the LEAST biased so far with everyone testifying on Deedy's alleged drunkenness. Even before the Queens ER testified, that Toy Stech testimony, which she did NOT document on the time she was in the presence of Deedy, was over the top in saying how Deedy's "pore oozed" the smell of alcohol?. What was Stech doing, sniffing Deedy's skin? Given the capability of attorney Hart vs HPD's over the top testimony that is almost becoming unbelievable and the prosecution that is trying way to hard like in the OJ case, Deedy will be found innocent of murder and probably go back to the State Dept and continue on his career as a Federal agent, or until he can collect retirement. That is wrong, Deedy should found guilty of a much lesser crime and spend, at most a week or two in jail, HOWEVER he needs to be required to resign as a federal agent who is allowed to carry a concealed weapon and move on with his life doing something else. Fault lies with 50% Elderts and 50% Deedy and this is NOT 2nd degree murder. Add another thing into the mix, it was in the news that some guy was killed when HPD tried to subdue him while he was allegedly trying to avoid arrest, via some kind of chokehold. To be consistent, if they find federal agent Deedy guilty or murder in Hawaii, they should find the HPD officer using the chokehold to subdue a Hawaii resident of murder as well. I don't think at this point HPD should be so gung ho in supporting BEYOND the truth in getting the conviction of Deedy, cause soon enough the same prosecutors are going to turn their attention to their fellow HPD officer trying to convict him of murder as well.
on July 19,2013 | 02:01PM
Skyler wrote:
Inverse- if you happen to see this: Using < br > (or two of them, one after another) is a great way to put your thoughts into paragraphs.
Like this...
or like this.
on July 19,2013 | 11:56PM
false wrote:
have to try that too. < br > does it work?
on July 20,2013 | 04:20PM
NanakuliBoss wrote:
Kellbell, the doctor is just stating his observations. It doesnt mean he's a liar. He does a noble job. His job is to fix and mend people in medical emergencies. Spending time in a busy ER on a Saturday night, with a broke nose, is not high on the priority. Even if HPD bought him in.
on July 19,2013 | 03:48PM
Kailuaraised wrote:
I'd imagine it's high on the list when they bring in a guy in handcuffs who just shot someone.
on July 20,2013 | 05:15AM
sparkyzane wrote:
If he appeared drunk and smelled like they testified when Deedy refused the BAT the police should have gone immediately for a warrant. By not doing so waters down their testimony to just north of hearsay. If this was the case the police failed in not doing their jobs.
on July 19,2013 | 02:16PM
LMO wrote:
None of the other people testifying were doctors, or had any professional training in detecting alcohol. The only doctor to testify says Deedy was not drunk. The guy is going to get off scott free, just like Zimmerman, OJ, etc.
on July 19,2013 | 04:48AM
false wrote:
Then there will be more outrage. That's why Massie case was revived. Slight of justice again.
on July 19,2013 | 05:34AM
hanalei395 wrote:
To the reaction of the "Massie Case", in those days, all the Hawaiians had was ""auwe". The white supremacy government, that got the killers out of Hawai'i after being found guity and spending an hour in the governor's office, was really in charge of Hawai'i. The real leaders were the white supremacist businessman Walter Dillingham, and newspaper publisher propagandist Lorrin Thurston.
on July 19,2013 | 06:11AM
Bdpapa wrote:
This not the same as the Massie Case. I remember inthe mid '50s my grandparents and neighbors used to talk about all these acses. They would get very angry but didn't know what to do about it. I thik, in a way, they wish they had done something at that time. But, they just didn't know what to do! Frustating times. But, again I don't see much correlation between the two cases. The Massie Case was a horrible case of the "supreme race" taking advantage of the common people. The Deedy case is just two stupids who met at the wrong point in time.
on July 19,2013 | 09:54AM
MoiliiliBoy wrote:
Cops are trained to detect. If not, how come drunk drivers are found guilty of DUI based on the cop's testimony? If the cops weren't trained, either a smart defense lawyer or judge would rule against the prosecution all the time.
on July 19,2013 | 11:25AM
hapaguy wrote:
So you are saying that our HPD agents from the Waikiki Substation, who deal with drunks on a daily basis, do not know a drunk when they see one?
on July 19,2013 | 12:07PM
Mythman wrote:
It was really Agent's inexperience that broke his nose as he tried to put his nose into the ejection port of the Glock auto when he was beating his friend up as the perp sat quietly in his chair waiting for his sack of burgers.
on July 19,2013 | 05:46AM
1coconut wrote:
Posters if Deedy gets off or not the real problem with this case is HPD blew the investigation and it seems like they are making up stories to cover their incompetent rear ends. No breath analyzer test and no blood test, an evidence specialists who altered her written report over one year because she was ask by HPD to include the drunkenness in her report. How does she remember how Deedy smelled a year after the incident. Again I remind everyone truth means nothing in court. The Trevon Martin case is hard to understand by Hawaii law because we do not have the stand your ground law. That law makes it almost impossible to convict anyone of murder or man slaughter in case of a physical confrontation. I sure hope we don't ever have that law in Hawaii.
on July 19,2013 | 05:57AM
thos wrote:
"The Trevon Martin case is hard to understand by Hawaii law because we do not have the stand your ground law." You are mistaken. Stand your ground was not any part of the Zimmerman trial because the defendant did not assert it to justify his actions. Instead he claimed the right of self defense - - something entirely separate and apart from SYG - - and the jury agreed that the prosecution had not proved their charge beyond reasonable doubt. Whether or not Hawaii victims should CONTINUE to be forced to retreat in the face of mortal danger until no further retreat is possible before the use of deadly force to defend themselves in extremis is legally sanctioned is a separate issue and deserves a full public airing. It is not unreasonable to believe that many citizens of Hawaii will advocate for an in situ right of self preservation including the use of deadly force WITHOUT retreating, which is to say the right to stand their ground when attacked. So those on both sides of this issue deserve to be heard.
on July 19,2013 | 06:39AM
lee1957 wrote:
If Hawaii had a SYG, we would not have to worry about future Wonder blunders, 'cause everyone knows Stevie wouldn't come.
on July 19,2013 | 07:37AM
MakaniKai wrote:
@lee1957 - True dat - LOL!
on July 19,2013 | 07:49AM
Skyler wrote:
Loq would be sooo jealous.
on July 19,2013 | 11:52AM
kelbells34 wrote:
Zimmerman was also NOT tested for alcohol. Later, the 911 operator claimed Zimmerman sounded like he was intoxicated. Now, the Martin family is looking to the FBI. I don't think Zimmerman refused the test, he just was not given one. The news said Deedy refused...That makes him look like he has something to hide. So, if he takes the stand, I want to know why he refused the test. Why isn't there a standard procedure for a murder suspect? It seems as if they pick and choose who to submit testing to. The other month, a person claimed he was so drunk, he didn't know where he put a dead body. He had an alcohol test given hours after he supposedly dumped the body and it was 0. Point is, why was he given one and NOT Deedy or Zimmerman?
on July 19,2013 | 10:57AM
cojef wrote:
Think that somewhere in the text of incident back when it happened, Deedy refused and indicated he would do so if directed his supervisor. If this be the case, a warrant would be necessary as it could not be determined if he had been on duty or not. HPD could have gotten hold of his superior and settle the issue, when Deedy refused the breathlyzer test. Failing to follow up with his supervisor is the bugaboo. One can conclude that HPD had a responsibility to notify Deedy's supervisor immediatly, since HPD and State Department Security Unit are brothers in law enforcement. The matter could have been easliy resolved and the evidential and investgative matter complete in a neat package. Afterall there are 2 law enforcement entities and they were not communicating together seems a shame.
on July 19,2013 | 11:53AM
NanakuliBoss wrote:
Cojef, deedy was not representing a law enforcement entity. That's why DOJ isn't defending him.
on July 19,2013 | 03:55PM
false wrote:
DOJ wants to keep a low if not invisible profile because it doesn't want the bills in the civil suit. It's going to come and then, maybe, there will be justice and closure. We can say we were treated fairly and with regard.
on July 20,2013 | 04:26PM
control wrote:
Deedy refused to take the case because it was within his right to refuse to take the test. to you and many it could indicate that he knew he was too drunk so didn't want the test, to others who know the law know that he still had that right of refusal. if he were questioned on the stand he could again say that he wasn't "drunk" and did not feel the need to take the rest. Nothing proven and a smart lawyer could sidestep that issue quickly.
on July 19,2013 | 04:01PM
aomohoa wrote:
So if someone pleads the 5th do you think they are guilty?
on July 19,2013 | 04:18PM
jess wrote:
He refused the blood test, if you were in his position (or got a DUI or any other alcohol related issue) you could do the same. It's part of our 5th amendment right. Because we don't have Stand Your Ground the chances of a conviction for Deedy are pretty high. Not sure how the government is training their agents, but I know most cops are taught to subdue a perp in a safe/non-lethal manner, it doesn't always happen (see Steven Dinnan / Waimanalo) but they are taught to do so. Deedy didn't even try to subdue Elderts, just pulled out his gun and shot him after a scuffle. Braddah can't scrap so he shoots.
on July 19,2013 | 11:50AM
lokela wrote:
HPD only saves the breath analyzer test and blood tests for DUI drivers. For pedestrian fights etc. they just cuff um and haul um away.
on July 19,2013 | 06:12AM
RichardCory wrote:
I believe the word you are looking for is "them."
on July 19,2013 | 06:22AM
inHilo wrote:
Richard, maybe you were looking for "them" but Iokela wasn't. Free yourself from the prison of language.
on July 19,2013 | 07:10AM
Usagi336 wrote:
He had hawd time undastan um.
on July 19,2013 | 10:02AM
false wrote:
Like the juror? Talk about isolated experience. Regarded less because of syntax or accent or speech impediment?
on July 20,2013 | 04:28PM
KeithHaugen wrote:
This was not a pedestrian fight, it was a killing. An officer should have immediately checked the shooter's blood alcohol level. Maybe Deedy was let go because he was a gun-toting fed.
on July 19,2013 | 07:24AM
Nevadan wrote:
Key point !
on July 19,2013 | 08:56AM
sparkyzane wrote:
5th ammendment
on July 19,2013 | 02:30PM
NanakuliBoss wrote:
Eh sparks, the fifth pertains to the right of a suspect to refrain from testifying. The right to not draw blood is the fourth amendment, which is considered a search. Das why need warrant from judge.
on July 19,2013 | 04:04PM
Kailuaraised wrote:
It's the fifth. Deedy has a right against self incrimination. That's why it's called pleading the fifth.
on July 20,2013 | 05:18AM
hapaguy wrote:
If he wasn't drunk and he did nothing wrong why not cooperate?
on July 20,2013 | 12:24PM
Kailuaraised wrote:
@hapaguy, you do realize when they say "anything you say can and will be used...." they mean it. Even if he blew a .000000001, the prosecution would use it. It's best to not say anything to Officers.
on July 20,2013 | 02:33PM
hapaguy wrote:
The prosecution could use it to do what? You said that there is nothing wrong or illegal with him having a drink and carrying....
on July 20,2013 | 08:49PM
Kailuaraised wrote:
@hapaguy, you're not getting it. I could blow a .00001 and the prosecution will say that I was impaired. The truth is that there is no way that amount of alcohol would impair you. But, like someone else said, the truth means nothing in court.
on July 21,2013 | 04:52AM
hapaguy wrote:
You really believe that if Deedy (or anyone) had a .00001 alcohol level that a Prosecutor would try to argue in court that that was impaired? No prosecutor would be that stupid and no jury would be that stupid. You're just not intellectually honest enough to admit that Deedy was impaired and that's what led to all his poor decision making and that's why he wouldn't cooperate...
on July 21,2013 | 01:53PM
gobows wrote:
the Fraternity!
on July 19,2013 | 09:12AM
allie wrote:
yup
on July 19,2013 | 02:20PM
sparkyzane wrote:
5th ammendment
on July 19,2013 | 02:30PM
Usagi336 wrote:
Agreed. Operating a gun should be like operating a vehicle. As soon as someone is killed, the operator should be tested for drugs and alcohol. Apparently Hawaii Law does not see it that way.
on July 19,2013 | 10:04AM
MoiliiliBoy wrote:
Yes, if law doesn't support it, cops can't do it (legally). How does Keith suggest the officer immediately check the shooter's blood? Or Usagi, the operator tested for drugs/alcohol? I don't know of any test that tests for all illegal drugs. If so, is it a shi-shi test? Breath test? Blood test? Sweat test? IDK, never heard of such an all inclusive test.
on July 19,2013 | 11:29AM
Usagi336 wrote:
THC for one stay in your shee shee long time buddy. Surprising you didn't know that. Couple days at least for the occasional user.
on July 19,2013 | 12:50PM
Mypualani wrote:
30 days for weed.
on July 19,2013 | 03:21PM
NanakuliBoss wrote:
Blood test. Suspect taken to a hospital to draw blood.
on July 19,2013 | 04:05PM
sparkyzane wrote:
5th ammendment
on July 19,2013 | 02:30PM
Mypualani wrote:
Read on the KGMB site, that if the police did do a test it would have been thrown out because Deedy is protected under his 5th amended rights. two lawyers explained. the only way the police would have gotten the test legally would be to see a judge and they (police ) better have a dam good reason for the judge to sign off on the warrant. It is fifth because Deedy has the right not to incriminate himself, he must have been pretty sober by then if he knew he could refuse. Just saying hey I could be wrong I have been wrong before.
on July 19,2013 | 11:45PM
Skyler wrote:
Fourth dude... fourth amendment.
on July 19,2013 | 11:59PM
Kailuaraised wrote:
Deedy pleaded the fifth. Him not being forced is the 4th.
on July 20,2013 | 05:20AM
thos wrote:
What does it say about the MORAL TONE of the State Department set at the top by SecState Hillary Clinton that her DSS agents apparently see nothing wrong with carrying their department side arms into a drinking establishment or getting into a scuffle with civilians while so armed? A fish rots from the head down.
on July 19,2013 | 06:42AM
lee1957 wrote:
It says nothing. Department policy has been hashed out already, alcohol and gun powder don't mix. Law allows it, but State Dept policy does not.
on July 19,2013 | 07:39AM
Publicbraddah wrote:
On the issue of whether he was drunk or not, this is going to be a tough one with the comments made by the ER doctor. The defense can argue that Deedy's supposed "drunken state" was due to the injuries he suffered during the altercation. And then there's the issue of how drunk was he? You can have a couple of drinks and have the smell of alcohol on your breath but does that make you drunk to the point that it affects your decision making capabilities? Prosecution has to prove beyond a doubt. Interesting case.
on July 19,2013 | 06:50AM
gobows wrote:
My thoughts exactly. You can drink and smell, but how drunk are you?
on July 19,2013 | 09:15AM
hapaguy wrote:
I keep seeing comments that Deedy will get off because the prosecution needs to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that he was drunk. The fact of the matter is all this testimony regarding whether he was drunk or not only goes to the defendants state of mind. The case really hinges on whether or not Deedy was acting in self defense and to get a Murder 2 conviction whether or not he told Elderts that he was going to shoot him in the face (malice aforethought) prior to shooting and killing Elderts...
on July 19,2013 | 12:15PM
Bdpapa wrote:
Good point!
on July 19,2013 | 01:13PM
allie wrote:
I said the same a month ago! I still got blasted though
on July 19,2013 | 02:20PM
Mypualani wrote:
Thank you hapaguy.
on July 19,2013 | 03:23PM
squidman22 wrote:
When it comes to a situation when someone was killed by your action, whether intentional or not, I don't see how you can refuse a breath or alcohol test. It should be mandatory. A refusal should be considered an admission of guilt and be penalized like it is in DUI. You can refuse but you aren't getting off scott free.
on July 19,2013 | 07:09AM
sparkyzane wrote:
5th ammendment
on July 19,2013 | 02:32PM
NanakuliBoss wrote:
Sparks, 4 th.amendment.
on July 19,2013 | 04:08PM
Mypualani wrote:
We should write to our law makers give um something to chew on for the next ten years.
on July 19,2013 | 03:24PM
KeithHaugen wrote:
A police officer said he smelled of alcohol, but did not arrest him for killing a man? Now they have an MD who didn't "notice" anything unusual. Pretty soon they'll say the State Department gunman wasn't even there.
on July 19,2013 | 07:18AM
lee1957 wrote:
So you are saying the ER doctor is "in the pocket" of the defense team and deliberately lying? Sounds like MD's testimony doesn't fit the way you perceive the facts, therefore, it must be a lie. Perhaps the facts are not what you perceive.
on July 19,2013 | 07:42AM
kailuabred wrote:
I'll take a trained medical professional over a cop when it comes to evaluating coordination, etc... You just don't like the testimony 'cause it doesn't fit your opinion.
on July 19,2013 | 07:58AM
dsl wrote:
of course YOU would - it fits your belief. This ER Dr sees so many people day in and day out that they all become one. It's hard to believe that just 1 person didn't smell alcohol on the killers breath.
on July 19,2013 | 08:19AM
gobows wrote:
Any ER doctor would take offense to your comment. They're trained to be observent.
on July 19,2013 | 09:18AM
hapaguy wrote:
Yeah and none of the HPD personal who testified that Deedy was drunk are trained observers huh
on July 19,2013 | 11:58AM
gobows wrote:
i am NOT criticizing HPD. just commenting on dsl's comment that the ER doctor "sees so many people" that they "all become one".
on July 19,2013 | 12:25PM
NanakuliBoss wrote:
How many DUI reports did the doctor present to court concerning alcohol observations? How many patients did the police officer treat at the ER? None.
on July 19,2013 | 04:10PM
Mypualani wrote:
you got me on that one NanakuliBoss.
on July 19,2013 | 11:48PM
Denominator wrote:
So you know everything about what the police should have done and what the doctors should have notices and probably what the court should be doing too. You must be really brilliant.
on July 19,2013 | 09:17AM
control wrote:
I agree, like cnn and the other media in the zimmerman case, Haugen has deedy convited already.
on July 19,2013 | 04:05PM
2NDC wrote:
Frankly, I'd take the word and observations of the ER doctor over HPD. Most HPD officers aren't trained to differentiate between a person who appears drunk, and someone suffering from a broken nose and the psychological trauma of a fatal shooting. ER doctors go thorough extensive training and often encounter drunks, crime victims and folks suffering from psychological trauma. Add to that the documentation of the observations AT THE TIME OF THE INCIDENT, and my money is on the doc to have things right.
on July 19,2013 | 04:17PM
soundofreason wrote:
So let me see if I have this straight. Some have said he appeared drunk and just minutes later, people thought he was ok "enough" to let him continue rendering medical aid to the victim. Can't have it both ways.
on July 19,2013 | 07:27AM
gobows wrote:
The cop said...."he looked like he knew what he was doing"....
on July 19,2013 | 09:19AM
Denominator wrote:
Certainly appears to be enough reasonable doubt to preclude a conviction.
on July 19,2013 | 10:17AM
hapaguy wrote:
Yeah if he was being charged with public drunkenness. But he's being charged with Murder 2 and the Use of a Firearm in the Commission of a Felony neither of which hinges on whether he was drunk or not.....
on July 19,2013 | 12:32PM
hapaguy wrote:
What "people" are you referring to?
on July 19,2013 | 11:59AM
ryan02 wrote:
It probably matters WHEN the doctor saw him, not just when you arrive at the ER. It can take hours before you get to see a doctor, especially if you have no visible injuries, heart attack, etc. Deedy was probably low on the ER list. Remember when HPD didn't test Officer Arakawa right away after he killed that girl while driving drunk? All it takes is time to let the alcohol wear off. I think the police originally intended to help Deedy (a type of law enforcement official) off the hook by covering up his drinking at the time, but there was just too much evidence against him, and now the efforts to protect him at the time are coming to light. If we had more honest cops, this wouldn't happen.
on July 19,2013 | 08:08AM
wiliki wrote:
If the doctor didn't notice, then how drunk could have Deedy been?
on July 19,2013 | 08:17AM
hapaguy wrote:
He never testified he didn't notice. He testified that he couldn't recall.....Big difference.....
on July 19,2013 | 07:10PM
false wrote:
What do you recall after how many hundreds of patients? The case was probably not elaborated. Doctor does what doctor needs to do to stay out of the confusion.
on July 20,2013 | 04:33PM
livinginhawaii wrote:
Who is more likely to identify inebriation - a cop or an emergency physician? I'm thinking that this guy was wobbling because he was punched in the face and in shock from taking a life...
on July 19,2013 | 08:21AM
ryan02 wrote:
Actually, that's part of a cop's job, and they receive specific training on it.
on July 19,2013 | 08:56AM
gobows wrote:
Adrenaline.......rushing thru his system.......pushing the alcohol out of his pores.......His heart must've been pumping 200x more than normal.
on July 19,2013 | 09:21AM
8082062424 wrote:
Well the marine who took the stand stated he was drunk and rambling on . since this marine try to get deedy to settle down i think he got pretty close to him. and this was before deedy got hit or took a life. If deedy was not drunk and this was his normal attitude and behaviour it paint a way worst picture who he is as a person. nothing more then a bully with a badge.. At least being drunk give him some what of a excuse for his behaviour that night. the video does not lie
on July 19,2013 | 09:47AM
gobows wrote:
I agree....Deedy was "under the influence"....no doubt. To what degree?.....no one can tell absolutely......no test was done.....the door remains slightly ajar....
on July 19,2013 | 11:43AM
2NDC wrote:
The Marine also changed his testimony a couple of times. He then said his memory got "better over time". I'm thinking that the media coverage of the case influenced his memory somewhat. The MD OTOH documented his observations ON THE DAY OF THE INCIDENT when he examined Deedy. The notes in the medical file were made and no mention was made of them being altered. Of all of the witnesses testifying as to the state of Deedy being drunk or not, my money is on the doc.
on July 19,2013 | 04:24PM
8082062424 wrote:
well if he was not drunk and this was normal behaviour and attitude as i said it paints a way uglier picture of who he is as a person
on July 19,2013 | 06:31PM
Kailuaraised wrote:
Agreed. The Marine also said Deedy fired before they were wrestling. Deedy doesn't even draw his weapon in any of the frames.
on July 20,2013 | 07:15AM
hapaguy wrote:
Incorrect again. At 27m49s of the 1h49m12s video, you can see Deedy pulling out the weapon from his back right pocket. At 27m52s you can see the gun in Deedy's right hand and Elderts is holding Deedy's right wrist to presumably keep from getting shot. If you look at the McDonalds employee behind the counter she is covering her ears! Why is she covering her ears? Most likely because Deedy was firing his gun and shots rang out....
on July 20,2013 | 12:17PM
Kailuaraised wrote:
OK, but do you see Deedy pointing the gun and missing before the wrestling like the Marine claimed?
on July 20,2013 | 02:36PM
hapaguy wrote:
That's exactly my point! Neither you nor I can tell from the video when Deedy fired. YOU HAVE TO GO BY THE WITNESS TESTIMONY
on July 20,2013 | 08:31PM
dlum003 wrote:
dah dah Deedy daaaaah, lah dah Deedy daaaaaaaaaah dah dah ...
on July 19,2013 | 08:43AM
cigaripo wrote:
An unarmed Elderts is a life threatening threat to an armed Deedy who is a trained Federal Agent trained with martial art skills and skills to handle trouble in the least provacative way? As with police officers, they're trained to quell incidents with the least amount of violence and the safety of themselves, the instigator, and especially others around. But Deedy disregarded any training protocall and unholstered his weapon instead of try to secure it from losing possession. Why did he have the need to use deadly force, when the only threats were verbal and not directed to him. There wasn't any physical confrontation (just verbal) between anyone till he stepped in and provoct Elderts with shooting him if he doesn't shut up. Deedy and police are trained to quell incidents, which by first having someone call police and then step back and protect that nothing more happens till they arrive is what should have occured. He made bad judgement calls, caused by his impairment by alcohol...maybe not drunk but impaired. Whether proven guilty or not he'll have to live with it for the rest of his life...with the "ifs", could've", "should've" that will change his life and career. A living hell, but he's not the dead one. If the law doesn't punish him hopefully the man upstairs will.
on July 19,2013 | 08:56AM
gobows wrote:
Amen!
on July 19,2013 | 09:23AM
Peacenik wrote:
Bad decisions were made by both sides. But the questions of whether Deedy felt he needed to protect his own life, is validated by his photo taken that night and the Doctors report that his nose was broken. Again what Elderts actually said to Perrine using the word "Ha__l_ (got flagged last time I used it), whether in an offensive way, friendly way, threatening way matters a lot. Deedy may have learned some Karate in his class, but it doesn't make him a master. I learned some bayonet training in basic but pitted against an enemy, I'd say my chance would be 50-50 or less of winning.
on July 19,2013 | 09:47AM
cigaripo wrote:
This would be considered a mutual confrontation with both sides getting into physical altercation. Where or what was the life threatening besides the gun that Deedy pulled out in a show of hie empowerment. He hasn't been in fight before, c'mon. At no time was there a threat to his life until he drew his gun, which he never should have. His intent was to show off empowerment his credentials and expected Elderts to back off. His worst move which should convict him is saying he had a gun and would shoot Elderts, which he did, which means he had intent to use deadly force.
on July 19,2013 | 10:17AM
Peacenik wrote:
Yes, he underestimated Eldert courage or strength making him a stu__d pussey, but that's not a crime. Using a gun, after realizing you bit off more than you can chew and realizing "he could get killed or maimed for life, if he didn't do anything" does not put him in good light, but it probably wouldn't render him guilty of murder, maybe manslaughter. Again what was said to Perrine by Elderts plays a key role, if Deedy had any justification in reprimanding Eldert. What if a cop overheard a customer tell another customer, "what you looking at, f'king N___, Kanaka, Slant-eyed" fa__ot", he may feel an obligation to correct the offender of inappropriate "hate crime behavior'. However, still I really don't know what was said to Perrine, just speculation or hear-say on both sides.
on July 19,2013 | 10:50AM
NanakuliBoss wrote:
Funny how you can get flagged for the Ha--- word from a newspaper yet they throw around the First Amendment when the government tells them what not to print.
on July 19,2013 | 04:17PM
false wrote:
Getting so any ethnicity mentioned gets post deleted.
on July 20,2013 | 04:36PM
MKN wrote:
@cigaripo: What martial art skills? Deedy couldn't fight for beans!!! LOL! Agree with the rest of your statement though.
on July 19,2013 | 10:08AM
Usagi336 wrote:
Yup. If the defense proves that he was sober, then why couldn't he subdue Kollin without using his weapon? You're right.
on July 19,2013 | 10:15AM
Kailuaraised wrote:
Elderts got on top of Deedy. He deserved to get shot.
on July 19,2013 | 01:39PM
KoloheWiz wrote:
and you are in serious need of a craniorectumectomy with statements like that
on July 22,2013 | 02:21PM
inverse wrote:
You didn't read the recent story of some Oahu resident dying as a result of an HPD officer trying to apprehend and arrest him? That guy wasn't with killed with a gun but with a chokehold. Seems like Deedy and HPD are in the same situation and if they find Deedy guilty of murder they should also find the HPD officer guilty of murder as well.
on July 19,2013 | 02:16PM
gobows wrote:
not so fast my friend...............a civilian was involved.............hold your horses............
on July 20,2013 | 11:57PM
cigaripo wrote:
Sticks and stones can hurt me , but words can't. Elderts didn't have a stick, didn't have stones, all he had were words. Deedy didn't have stick and stones, but he had a gun and Eldert's words hurt him. Basic playground rules should guide the judgement, but the law bends and twist.
on July 19,2013 | 10:42AM
Kailuaraised wrote:
Elderts mounted Deedy. Someone testified to that. He was well within his rights to shoot at that point.
on July 19,2013 | 01:40PM
NanakuliBoss wrote:
Nowhere in the video does it show Elderts mounting Deedy.
on July 19,2013 | 04:20PM
Kailuaraised wrote:
No where in the video does it show Deedy shooting Elderts. So it must not have happened right?
on July 20,2013 | 07:16AM
hapaguy wrote:
Nowhere in this McDonald's surveillance video CAN YOU SEE when the shots were taken. What do you expect to see? A picture that captures a flash at the muzzle? A puff of smoke coming out of the muzzle? The bullet caught on camera in midair? C'mon get real! That's why you have to rely on witness testimony about when the firearm was discharged. Bryd said Deedy shot first THEN they struggled to the ground and Deedy fired two more shots one of which killed Elderts...
on July 20,2013 | 12:22PM
Kailuaraised wrote:
And Byrds testimony does not back up what he claims. Deedy does not have his gun drawn before they were wrestling again. Besides, I was referring to Nanakuliboss who claims that if the video doesn't show Elderts mounting him then it didn't happen.
on July 20,2013 | 02:38PM
hapaguy wrote:
It does back up what he testified to. The frame at 27m48s that you like to refer to shows Deedy pulling something out of his back pocket. The frame after that 27m50s you can't see Deedy's right arm at all. He could be shooting at that exact moment which would be consistent with Bryds testimony. The next frame at 27m52s you can see Deedy holding what looks like the gun in his right hand and Elderts holding Deedy's right wrist. You can also see the McDonalds employee covering her ears like a shot just rang out!
on July 20,2013 | 08:53PM
2NDC wrote:
Yup, "rape" and "forcible sodomy" are two of five justifications to use deadly force here in PRHI.
on July 19,2013 | 04:25PM
ryan02 wrote:
Deedy kicked Elderts first -- it was only after the kick that Elderts got physical himself. Then Deedy tried to shoot Elderts, and that's when Elderts tried to grab for the gun, which any person would have done at that point when some drunk guy is firing shots in McDonalds. There was no need for Deedy to kick first, and no need to escalate to using a gun, and no need to go out drinking while carrying a gun and impairing his judgment. The first kick, drinking, and pulling at gun and firing wildly in a crowded McDonalds will result in jail time for Deedy and major lawsuits from all the people he put in danger that night.
on July 19,2013 | 02:00PM
gobows wrote:
Did Elderts grab first? or Did Deedy shoot first?
on July 19,2013 | 02:46PM
DA_HANDSOME_CHINAMAN wrote:
WOW, The other people testified that Deedy smelled of alcohol and slurred. The doctor said "no" and the wounds were not life threatening. If Deedy wasn't drunk, THEN he had better find a good answer for drawing his weapon and shooting Elderts. Either way, drunk or not, Deedy should spend a long time in jail, I'd say something like 20 years if he was drunk and life if he wasn't drunk.
on July 19,2013 | 10:51AM
Dolphin743 wrote:
If you wait until your wounds are life threatening to act, you might already be dead. Not a very good self-defense plan.
on July 19,2013 | 11:03AM
hapaguy wrote:
Except that Deedy was the assailant and Elderts was the victim who was defending himself.....
on July 19,2013 | 12:02PM
control wrote:
want a good answer......maybe he felt that his life was in danger? it wasn't that his wounds weren't life threatening, as long as they can prove that he was in a situation where he felt his life was in danger that would give him cause for shooting. and looking at the video it looks like elderts was kicking deedy's butt (not that he didn't deserve it though).
on July 19,2013 | 04:12PM
nodaddynotthebelt wrote:
Frankly, this doctor's assertions that he did not smell any alcohol will not weigh as much as the numerous claims by officers and customers that show otherwise. But I am sure that Mr. Hart will bring in his expert witnesses to try and dismiss all the witness accounts that favor the prosecution. Fortunately, Hawaii has several key witnesses that will help their case against this alleged murderer.
on July 19,2013 | 11:48AM
lawman1175 wrote:
True that. Seems alot will be revealed when Deedy takes the stand to show justification in using lethal force.
on July 19,2013 | 12:12PM
hapaguy wrote:
Mark my words: Deedy will never take the stand......
on July 19,2013 | 12:21PM
control wrote:
actually it could be used to show that not everyone was in agreement about deedy being drunk and incapacitated as the prosecutor is making it out to be. it could be used to skip a murder charge (but probably not a manslaughter charge IMHO). as for the key witnesses, I would like to hear what elderts said to the other guy first, and then during the confrontation. if the defense can show that elderts was threatening then it could justify deedy's actions. you know how it is, a good lawyer can virtually get the guy off against a poor prosecution and shoddy investigation.
on July 19,2013 | 04:16PM
NanakuliBoss wrote:
Attorney Hart has gotten some bad people off in the past. Money talks folks. Child molesters,rapist, murderers, he defended them all.
on July 19,2013 | 04:24PM
lawman1175 wrote:
Problem with doc's response is that it is not a definite answer. "I do not recall" leaves the door open to possibilities. On Nov. 5, 2011, I don't recall eating lunch that day. I'm pretty sure I did, but it is possible that I did not eat lunch that day. The inference from the doc's statement helps Deedy, but a more definite answer would have been better for him.
on July 19,2013 | 11:55AM
gobows wrote:
where's the cross examination questions?? must've been some time between the incident and Deedy being examined by the ER doc. Deedy surely sobered up by then.?
on July 19,2013 | 11:58AM
NanakuliBoss wrote:
"I don't recall" in court testimony releases you from perjury if somebody outs you.
on July 19,2013 | 04:26PM
hapaguy wrote:
I keep seeing comments that Deedy will get off because the prosecution needs to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that he was drunk. The fact of the matter is all this testimony regarding whether he was drunk or not only goes to the defendants state of mind. The case really hinges on whether or not Deedy was acting in self defense and to get a Murder 2 conviction whether or not he told Elderts that he was going to shoot him in the face (malice aforethought) prior to shooting and killing Elderts...
on July 19,2013 | 12:16PM
gobows wrote:
IF, Deedy pulled his gun and just shot Elderts "in the face" like he said he would, while Elderts was just standing there, THEN, Murder 2.
on July 19,2013 | 12:28PM
gobows wrote:
BUT....Since Elderts RUSHED Deedy and tried to wrestle the gun away, and was shot while he was ONTOP of Deedy....hmmmm....Self Defense for Deedy??.....omg!
on July 19,2013 | 12:38PM
hapaguy wrote:
Watch the video frame by frame. Elderts did not rush Deedy. After Elderts dispatched Deedy to the ground, Elderts turned to help Medeiros and Deedy moved forward toward Elderts while Elderts had his back to Deedy. Elderts turned around to defend himself from being attacked from behind by Deedy when the struggle occurred. Don't forget, Deedy already attacked Elderts once by front kicking Elderts. Elderts was within his right to self defense after that.....
on July 19,2013 | 01:01PM
Kailuaraised wrote:
http://imgur.com/ixl9mCS Are you watching the same video? Shortly after this shot Elderts rushed Deedy and mounted him. Deedy had every right to shoot.
on July 19,2013 | 01:43PM
gobows wrote:
That is what I see too. Deedy didnt just pull his gun out and start shooting. Elderts tried to grab the gun. Then Deedy fired.
on July 19,2013 | 02:50PM
hapaguy wrote:
You always like to point to this frame to make your point. Just before this frame you are so enamored with, Deedy was trying to sneak up on Elderts from behind. Elderts then turned around to defend himself! Don't forget that Deedy had assaulted Elderts previously so Elderts was within his right to defend himself.
on July 19,2013 | 05:55PM
Kailuaraised wrote:
Be real. Sneak up? It doesn't matter who assaulted who at that point. The fight was over and Edlerts choose to go for the gun and charge Elderts.
on July 20,2013 | 07:18AM
hapaguy wrote:
Kraised you keep making asinine statements. It doesn't matter who assaulted who? The fight was over when Elderts went for the gun? Ridiculous! From the time Deedy first assaulted Elderts a front kick at 27m18s, to the time they both fell to the ground struggling for the gun at 27m53s, ONLY 35 SECONDS ELAPSED!
on July 20,2013 | 12:32PM
ryan02 wrote:
If some drunk is shooting in a crowded McDonald's trying to take their gun away is a reasonable thing to do. Just because Deedy missed with his first two shots doesn't mean he was gonna miss all his shots. Elderts tried to stop Deedy from shooting him, and failed. It was an attempt at self-defense on the part of Elderts.
on July 19,2013 | 02:04PM
gobows wrote:
If Elderts grabbed first, and then got shot, hmmmm.....doesnt look for the prosecution.
on July 19,2013 | 02:48PM
Kailuaraised wrote:
I don't think so. He doesn't fire any shots in the video or before they were wrestling.
on July 19,2013 | 04:13PM
gobows wrote:
Exactly.........The grab came first. The shots came second. Self Defense.
on July 19,2013 | 04:35PM
hapaguy wrote:
You and Kraised have said that before that Deedy didn't shoot until after Elderts grabbed him but in Bryd's testimony he stated the Deedy shot first and then the scuffle and then 2 more shots. I defy both of you to show anywhere in the video where you can see ANY shots being fired! YOU CAN'T TELL IN THIS VIDEO WHEN ANY OF THE SHOTS WERE FIRED!
on July 19,2013 | 06:07PM
Kailuaraised wrote:
@hapaguy, he doesn't even have his gun out in any of the video.
on July 19,2013 | 06:12PM
hapaguy wrote:
You are so full of it! At 27m48s of the 1h49m12s video you can see Deedy pulling something out of his right rear (back pocket) pocket. At 27m52s you can see the two of them scuffling in front of the cash counter and what appears to be the gun in his right hand. Also notice the McDonalds employee covering her ears like a shot just rang out!
on July 19,2013 | 06:58PM
gobows wrote:
i agree with hapa....looking at the video, looks like the gun is out.just before they go down and we cant see anymore. look at the worker holding her ears. doesnt prove anything, but sure looks like something loud is either happening or about to happen.
on July 21,2013 | 12:01AM
hapaguy wrote:
Your own image, that you always refer to, shows Deedy pulling something out of his right back pocket BEFORE THE SCUFFLE
on July 19,2013 | 06:59PM
Kailuaraised wrote:
It shows him putting his hand on it getting ready to draw should the need arise. That's how force protection works. He does not just pull his gun and aim it at Elderts and shoot.
on July 20,2013 | 07:52AM
hapaguy wrote:
How do you know he did not shoot? At 27m48s you can see Deedy pulling out the gun from his back right pocket. The next frame at 27m51s YOU CAN"T SEE DEEDY'S RIGHT ARM OR HAND. He could be pointing the gun and shooting at Elderts right then! The next frame at 27m52s you can see Deedy has the gun in his right hand and Elderts defending himself by holding Deedy's right wrist. The witness (Bryd) said Deedy shot first then they struggled to the ground exactly like the video shows.....
on July 20,2013 | 12:41PM
gobows wrote:
we agree that Elderts had his hand on Deedy. If i didnt want to get shot, I wouldnt be touching someone with a gun. the fact that Elderts had his hand on Deedy, tells me Self Defense. Elderts needed to stop and back off. Deedy wouldn't have shot him. if he did at that point, guilty,murder 2.
on July 21,2013 | 12:05AM
hapaguy wrote:
Except for the fact that the Witness Bryd testified that Deedy shot first and then they struggled which the video appears to corroborate. If a guy shot at you close range you wouldn't have time to turn and run away as others have suggested because at close range you would get shot in the back. Its totally logical that Elderts would grab Deedy's wrist, as the video shows, to prevent Deedy from shooting at him some more. Edlerts was defending himself...not the other way around....
on July 21,2013 | 01:59PM
hapaguy wrote:
Incorrect. For a Murder 2 charge/conviction all that is needed is that the defendant had intention to cause death or serious bodily harm to the victim prior to killing the victim. Deedy could have stated that he was going to shoot Elderts in the face then later beat Elderts to death with a McDonald's display and it would still be Murder 2.
on July 19,2013 | 12:58PM
gobows wrote:
The "i'm going to shoot you in the face" comment is what is creating this murder 2 prosecution. Ok, I can agree that if Deedy ended up killing Elderts in any fashion, that would be just cause for a murder 2 conviction.
on July 19,2013 | 01:29PM
hapaguy wrote:
There you go gobows. The "i'm going to shoot you in the face" comment is why our Prosecutors office pressed Murder 2 charges and not manslaughter. Now all the Prosecution has to do is prove it....
on July 19,2013 | 07:15PM
Waimanalodayz1 wrote:
This comment has been deleted.
on July 19,2013 | 01:05PM
Kailuaraised wrote:
What a joke this trial is. HPD doesn't write anything about alcohol in their reports and neither does the evidence specialists. Magically, they all remember him being drunk and unsteady a year later. A medical doctor comes out and testifies that he saw nothing indicating alcohol consumption. I'd take the MD's opinion over HPD. He's trained to observe and probably got the closest to Deedy than anyone else.
on July 19,2013 | 01:45PM
gobows wrote:
Absolute proof that the Fraternity is ALIVE and well. Plus so much time had passed by the time the ER doc examined Deedy, that he was probably sober by then.(my speculation)
on July 19,2013 | 02:52PM
kentfonoimoana wrote:
Let's not forget that Deedy refused to allow HPD to perform a sobriety test as well as refusing a toxicology test when he was booked. If he had nothing to hide at the time of the shooting - why refuse and then later claim "not intoxicated". He most likely consulted with his Arlington Va. attorney right after the shooting. This poor excuse for a federal agent initiated a fight - started losing - then resorted to lethal means. He deserves a stay in Halawa.
on July 19,2013 | 01:39PM
Kailuaraised wrote:
It's his constitutional right. If I drank half a beer I would register for alcohol. It would work against me in a trial if it came to that. Asserting his 5th amendment rights does not mean he is automatically guilty of being intoxicated.
on July 19,2013 | 01:56PM
kelbells34 wrote:
Dr. Perry is just trying to throw a curve ball to the Prosecuters....did he say all of that from the beginning? Why did they note every other witnesses statements were only stated years later? H e is claiming it was possible neither of them smelled of alcohol? So, who did DEEDY buy all the shots and beer for?
on July 19,2013 | 01:45PM
Kailuaraised wrote:
What's funny is the Dr is the prosecutor's witness. I highly doubt a MD would lie under oath involving a murder trial. And unlike the HPD jokers, his report backs up his testimony.
on July 19,2013 | 01:58PM
gobows wrote:
The Fraternity Handbook.....Rule 103.a. When another law enforcement officer is involved, never put anything in your report that may incriminate him. If put on the stand, you may state your opinion.
on July 19,2013 | 02:58PM
hapaguy wrote:
I agree with you wholeheartedly on that one. My theory is that to protect a fellow law enforcement officer HPD did exactly that but when the evidence starting coming together and they realized Deedy was a drunk fool who started everything they had to start telling it like it was: Deedy was stinking drunk, instigating a fight and throwing the first blow, then when he was getting his hat handed to him he had to pull a gun to avoid a beat down....
on July 19,2013 | 06:11PM
Kailuaraised wrote:
If he was stinking drunk, then how did an ER Dr. who was treating him not notice anything?
on July 20,2013 | 05:24AM
hapaguy wrote:
Stinking drunk when Deedy assaulted and killed Elderts. I am sure that after assaulting then killing someone then getting arrested that he would have sobered up hours later at the hospital. Also stop misquoting what the Dr said. He said he could not RECALL if he smelled alcohol on Deedy. I don't recall if I had lunch yesterday. That doesn't mean I did or didn't eat it....
on July 20,2013 | 12:48PM
Kailuaraised wrote:
Actually, I pulled that quote straight from the article. So I'm not misquoting anything. The Dr testified that he did not notice anything unusual and Deedy seemed fine. Only time will sober you up. About 2 hours passed from the time Deedy shot to being taken to the hospital. If he was drunk there is no way he would just sober up.
on July 20,2013 | 02:41PM
hapaguy wrote:
The Dr said he didn't notice because Deedy was not there to be treated for alcohol poisoning he was there for a broken nose etc...The Dr testified he could not recall if Deedy smelled of alcohol ...big difference....
on July 20,2013 | 08:59PM
gobows wrote:
He said he didnt recall. that lawyerspeak.....
on July 21,2013 | 12:07AM
Mypualani wrote:
HPD jokers? Wow I thought they were your friends you know law enforcement.
on July 19,2013 | 03:39PM
gobows wrote:
Jus a wannbe comedian here......
on July 19,2013 | 04:44PM
gobows wrote:
I didnt know Dr Perry was a Pitcher? Is this in High School or College? Or did he have a little time in the pros?
on July 19,2013 | 02:54PM
control wrote:
no facts, all fantasy. there is no proof to your claims, there is no "connect the dots", the jury relies on facts, while it can be proved that deedy had some alcohol they cannot prove that he drank all the shots and beer.
on July 19,2013 | 04:18PM
64hoo wrote:
I don't see the sa reporting about the gun expert on the stand that was reported on channel 3 news with joe moore by there reporter in court tells how the gun shooting occurred but from what I heard they were both stuggling with the gun when shots were fired. all the defense has to do is see if elderts shirt where he was shot has powder burns then we know after elderts broke deedys nose and knock deedy down and elderts jumped him and then they struggled for the gun and it went off where elderts was shot remember the video shows none of that incident because when this happened the video camera did not show that.
on July 19,2013 | 03:19PM
droid wrote:
There is a white man selling “ANTI-HA0LE” t-shirts at skate shop in Kailua. Maybe if you give him some of your stickers, they would cancel each other out?
on July 19,2013 | 03:52PM
aomohoa wrote:
Please don't generalize. I am a Haole and I respect other cultures and religious beliefs. I have found, If you are nice to people they will be nice to you, any where in the world.
on July 19,2013 | 04:04PM
51butterflies wrote:
Points are well taken ,Kalaheo1.
on July 19,2013 | 10:05PM
NanakuliBoss wrote:
True dat,aomohoa.
on July 19,2013 | 10:22PM
Kalaheo1 wrote:
Deedy was drinking alcohol that night. That is undisputed. Even his lawyer says so.

That being said, no one is charging him with public drunkeness, he is charged with murder. Other than being an example of his poor judgement that night , I don't think it matters.

He started a fight, escalated it to physical violence. The video shows him reaching back and touching his gun when he first approaches Eldert. The video shows him pulling up his shirt and brandishing it, and a impartial witness says he was mumbling that he was going to shoot Elderts. Honestly, I don't care what his blood alcohol was.


on July 19,2013 | 04:21PM
64hoo wrote:
it dos'nt matter what he showed him its what happened after that, which the video dos'nt show. you folks are trying to make like he shot him after that but you don't know what happened after that incident, your only making conclusions. as one witness said he saw scuffling but did not hear a gunshot. so I make my opinon which is accurate that elderts jumped and punched deedy in the nose knock deedy down and they struggled with the gun and the gun went off while struggling with deedy over the gun. and that's when elderts got shot when they were stuggling for the gun. sounds like the accidently fired the shot that killed elderts. so you all have your how it happened I have my how it happened. I feel my way is right.
on July 19,2013 | 04:49PM
hapaguy wrote:
That's totally NOT what the witness testimony was. Bryd testified that DEEDY SHOT FIRST AND THEN THEY SCUFFLED. Completely reasonable for Elderts to defend himself from a drunk shooting at him....
on July 19,2013 | 06:15PM
saveparadise wrote:
So all the damage to Deedy's face took place between the 2nd and 3rd shot? Would you agree Hapaguy that it seems like the video is missing some frames then? Are we not being shown all the evidence? We cannot make so many conclusions just by what the SA and the news media is allowed to give us. Second hand news is considered hearsay.
on July 19,2013 | 09:36PM
hapaguy wrote:
You are misunderstanding what was being discussed. 64hoo, Kailuaraised and other Deedy supporters keep contending that Deedy did not shoot until they, Deedy and Elderts, were wrestling on the ground. There has been no testimony to that effect. Quite the contrary, Byrd's testimony is that Deedy fired the first shot before they wrestled to the ground...
on July 19,2013 | 09:54PM
Kailuaraised wrote:
I watched the video over and over and it doesn't show Deedy firing the gun anywhere. Deedy doesn't even draw his gun. It would be interesting to hear the cross examine of Byrd's testimony because it doesn't coincide with the video.
on July 20,2013 | 05:36AM
kelbells34 wrote:
Kailuaraised...I saw one of the videos where Deedy drew his gun and Elderts immediately started wrestling with him while standing. Then, a McDonalds worker covered her ears...So, either a shot went off in the first seconds or she was preparing herself for the shots to come. Then, they went to the ground.
on July 20,2013 | 12:47PM
hapaguy wrote:
From this video, low res, only 1 frame/sec capture rate, it would be a miracle to actually capture a frame that show the weapon discharging. You have to rely on eyewitness testimony to determine that. Bryd said Deedy fired first then they struggled to the floor. I've asked you this before and you never answer me. What do you expect to see in this video that will definitively show Deedy firing his weapon? A muzzle flash caught on cam? A puff of smoke emanating from the barrel of the gun? The bullet caught in midair?
on July 20,2013 | 12:55PM
Kailuaraised wrote:
@hapaguy, It doesn't show Deedy aiming. He was drawing at the exact same time Elderts charged him.
on July 20,2013 | 02:45PM
hapaguy wrote:
Kraised the frame at 27m48s that you like to refer to shows Deedy pulling something out of his back pocket. The frame after that 27m50s you can't see Deedy's right arm at all. He could be shooting at that exact moment which would be consistent with Bryds testimony. The next frame at 27m52s you can see Deedy holding what looks like the gun in his right hand and Elderts holding Deedy's right wrist. You can also see the McDonalds covering her ears like a shot just rang out!
on July 20,2013 | 08:41PM
gobows wrote:
kalaheo1 - Agree Agree Agree.......What I am afraid of, is the jury being told by the judge, that all that matters, is what was happening when the gun went off. Elderts grabbed the gun. Deedy shot him. That sounds like they might have to say it was "self defense". I dont like it......
on July 19,2013 | 04:49PM
sailfish1 wrote:
The alcohol the police and evidence specialist smelled on Deedy could be from Elderts sweat and blood that spilled onto Deedy during the confrontation. Or during the CPR that Deedy supposedly was doing on Elderts. That would go away in the few hours before he saw the doctor. All the other things, slurred speech, unsteady feet, and glassy eyes, would probably result after being in a fight. Without a breathalyzer test, there is no real evidence to confirm that Deedy was intoxicated.
on July 19,2013 | 05:52PM
64hoo wrote:
it was;nt a few hours after the shooting it was only 1 hour and 45 minutes when he saw the doctor that would not make the alcohol be out of your system. the doctor said there was no smell of any alcohol when he was treating deedy.
on July 19,2013 | 06:07PM
hapaguy wrote:
There you go again! Misquoting the article. The Dr never said "there was no smell of any alcohol". He said HE COULD NOT RECALL if there was any smell of alcohol.....
on July 19,2013 | 07:03PM
Kailuaraised wrote:
The Dr testified that he had no reason to believe that Deedy was intoxicated.
on July 20,2013 | 05:37AM
hapaguy wrote:
Let's approach this a different way and see if you can give an intellectually honest answer: Let's just say for the sake of argument that the Dr. said definitively that Deedy was not intoxicated and that all you Deedy supporters were correct that all the HPD officers that testified lied and Deedy never smelled like alcohol or slurred, or had trouble balancing, etc... and that Deedy never drank the alcohol that he paid for, he gave those drinks away. IF all that is correct, why refuse the field sobriety test and the blood alcohol test?
on July 20,2013 | 01:13PM
Kailuaraised wrote:
I could take a sip of beer and register a BAC. He does not deny consuming alcohol. He contends that he was not impaired. The DR testified that he examined and that he had no reason to believe he was drunk. Here is the quote straight from the article. "When asked by the defense if he had any reason to believe Deedy was intoxicated, Perry said, "At that time, no, I did not." Deedy refusing to do anything until talking to his lawyer is his constitutional right.
on July 20,2013 | 03:01PM
hapaguy wrote:
You are so hard head. Let me try one last time from a different angle. You keep saying that maybe he had a drink or two but he wasn't drunk or impaired AND you keep saying that there is nothing illegal about that. If he wasn't impaired, and it wasn't illegal there is nothing "incriminating" about it. If that is true, why not cooperate and submit to a field sobriety test and blood alcohol test?
on July 20,2013 | 08:46PM