HONOLULU — As George Zimmerman’s second-degree murder trial for the killing of Treyvon Martin crawls to a close in Florida, Hawaii is in the midst of its racially charged murder trial.
Claims of self defense and the right to bear arms are central in both cases.
Zimmerman, a 29-year-old Hispanic who headed the neighborhood watch patrol in his Sanford, Fla., community, maintains he shot and killed the 17-year-old Martin, who was black, in self-defense. Immediately after the shooting, Zimmerman was accused of targeting Martin because of his race, and Florida’s conceal-carry law came under intense scrutiny.
In Hawaii, U.S. State Department Agent Christopher Deedy is on trial for killing 23-year-old Kollin Elderts following a confrontation at a fast-food restaurant. The second-degree murder trial started on Monday in Honolulu’s First Circuit Court.
Immediately after Deedy, a 29-year-old Arlington, Va., resident, shot and killed Elderts, a local minority, on Nov. 5, 2011, racial tensions flared, as did the debate over whether Deedy should have been allowed to carry his weapon while he was out drinking.
Deedy was in Hawaii with the U.S. State Department’s Bureau of Diplomatic Security to protect dignitaries including Secretary of State Hillary Clinton and President Barack Obama during the Asia Pacific Economic Cooperation conference, an event that attracted 21 world leaders and 20,000 participants from Nov. 7-13, 2011.
At 2:30 a.m. on Nov. 5, Deedy clashed with Elderts in a Waikiki McDonalds restaurant after both had been out drinking with friends.
According to Deedy’s defense attorney Brook Hart, Deedy witnessed Elderts harassing Michel Perrine, another customer in the McDonalds restaurant.
“While at the cashier counter, Elderts began to verbally harass Perrine using racial slurs. Perrine asked Elderts to leave him alone, not to single him out, and stated words to the effect that he was a ‘local,’” a defense filing said.
There was a brief but escalating brawl that involved Deedy and Elderts and their friends inside the restaurant.
In court on Monday, the prosecution and defense told different versions of what came next.
Honolulu Deputy Prosecutor Janice Futa said: “The defendant is up and draws from his right rear hip area the gun. Kollin turns around and sees him and the defendant within three feet of Kollin Elderts and fires his gun. He misses. Kollin, now having been shot at by the defendant, lunges toward him reaching for the gun. They grapple in front of the counter and then two more shots ring out. After the shots, Kollin falls on top of the defendant onto the floor. The third bullet was fired. After the third bullet was fired, the gun jams.”
Defense attorney Hart said: “The evidence will show that he used a number of measured steps to try to sway Mr. Elderts, and Mr. Shane Medeiros (Elderts friend) for that matter, from their violent assault.”
Hart said the slur- and profanity-laced exchange between Elderts and Perrine got Deedy’s attention.
“These are now fighting words,” says Hart. “This is a threat of violence. This is what Deedy is trained to perhaps respond to, although he wasn’t here to respond to the laws of harassment or bullying. He’s a federal agent and his job is to serve the community.”
Hart said Deedy showed Elderts his State Department badge and credentials and Elderts responded: “What, you gonna shoot me? You got a gun? Shoot me. I’m gonna gut you.”
The prosecutor has painted Deedy as an inexperienced agent who consumed alcohol against State Department policy while carrying a firearm and “stuck his nose” into a situation in McDonalds “that was not his business.”
However, Hart said the defendant was not drunk and showed the jury video of him being arrested to bolster his claim.
Hawaii has a concealed-carry law, but typically only law enforcement officers and retirees are issued permits. However, Hart maintained the U.S. State Department authorized Deedy to carry a weapon at all times.
Deedy sustained several injuries to his face including a broken nose and pummeled jaw, which Hart said backed up Deedy’s claim that he drew his firearm in self defense. Deedy was taken to the hospital after complaining about his injuries. However, Deedy refused to take a blood-alcohol test.
A city autopsy report showed Elderts consumed marijuana and cocaine before he died and had an alcohol blood level of 0.12, well above the state’s legal limit for driving of .08.
He also had previous run in with the law, according to public records. In 2008, Elderts was charged with disorderly conduct, and in 2010, he was charged with a petty misdemeanor for operating a vehicle under the influence of an intoxicant.
The well-publicized trial is expected to take several weeks and could include as many as 100 witnesses.
The prosecutor warned in her opening statements that witnesses will offer different versions of what occurred and some, at that time of morning, were under the influence of alcohol. The prosecutor also said the surveillance videotape from McDonalds of the incident was “frustratingly fuzzy.”
HawaiiReporter.com joined Hawaii News Now and the Star Advertiser last year in a motion to view the McDonald’s surveillance tape of the shooting, but Circuit Judge Karen Ahn sided with the prosecutor who said pretrial publicity of what was on the tape could prejudice the jury and denied the motion. The defense also wanted the tape released.
The judge also sided with the prosecutor against Deedy on several other motions including his request to move the trial to U.S. District Court and to dismiss the case.
Outside the Honolulu courtroom, a group calling itself World Can’t Wait organized a protest demanding “justice” for Elderts. The group, which holds events in several cities, said on its website it aims to “stop the crimes of your government” and details their opposition to Deedy here.
Racial tensions have been brewing since shortly after the 2011 shooting, showing up in news interviews, letters to newspaper editors, court documents and protests.
Protesters from the World Can’t Wait group compared the case to that of the Trayvon Martin’s killing, claiming in Hawaii, a white agent attacked and killed a local minority.
It took prosecutors about 10 days to charge Deedy with second degree murder when, by the prosecutor’s own admission, there were more than 100 witnesses reporting different versions of the shooting.
Meanwhile, the debate over whether Deedy targeted Elderts for racial reasons or whether he should have used his firearm to defend himself and others continues both in and out of court.
Just like the George Zimmerman trial, in the end, it is the jury that must decide whether Deedy was justified in using lethal force.
Elderts supporters include family, friends and protesters who have followed Deedy to and from the courthouse.
Supporters of Deedy have launched a website, DeedySupport.com, in his defense.
The website says “Law enforcement officers should not be treated like murders when they protect the public.”
Why are you stating a white person is a majority in Hawaii?
The article does not say that whites are a majority in Hawaii.
white people are the majority next to asians
It is my experience, though the wht/Caucasians are not the majority, they certainly run the political apparatus. They seem to be the most prosperous. Though the Japanese are the majority in these islands, they work or is the face for the wht ruling class that has ever been present from the monarchy. Certainly as it appears, the victim was among the minority class. Wht visitors from Amerika realize they aren't in the majority in Hawai'i nei. That might put them on the defensive as are blacks and to a lesser degree Hispanics in the U.S.
Sounds like the local guy was acting like a dick and ran up against the wrong haole. Got what he deserved.
Case closed…let's move on.
Sounds like someone couldnt defend himself like a man and had to resort to a gun. Case open..lets get his ass in jail.
You have a lot of guts when you can hide behind a fake name. Someone is dead because Deedy is an irresponsible jerk who clearly should not be charged with protecting the public. I really hope you're not a law enforcement officer because between you and Deedy, the public should be very afraid.
Disgusting that people actually root for murderers. First of all, Deedy approached Elderts and confronted him, not the other way around — but only digest this fact if you are at all interested in the facts. So Deedy is the dick here. He wasn't placating any sort of dangerous situation (according to the testimony of the supposed "bullied" person), he was just looking for an excuse to prove how big his metal dick was. Now go ahead and give this comment thumbs down, maybe it will make your soul grow back.
Whether Mr. Elderts was a jerk or not isn’t the question. Was it wrong for some one, including “wrong haole”, to shoot him or not? Harassment alone isn’t cause for someone to shoot another, especially when it is done to another apparent stranger. Was Fed. Agt. Deedy’s life being threatened? Did Fed. Agt. Deedy have to stand his ground to defend against lethal attack? At the same time, did the Fed. provoke the confrontation? Isn’t this actually the same circumstances as in the Zimmerman acquittal? (I believe was wrong – misapplication of the statute) If one is going to provoke an encounter, then he cannot rely on self-defense in shooting another. After provoking a confrontation, the provoker must take his licks or remove himself from the confrontation. Agt. Deedy as a fed. agent, therefore, isn’t charged with protecting the public. He is a protector of the U.S. which is a municipal corporation since 1871. See the District of Columbia Organic Act of 1871.
souunds like the White boy got cracks because he couldnt mind his own business, and had to hide behind a gun. lets see if he burns for his actions
Fed. Agt. Deedy should not have interfered into some apparent harassment at the expense of another unrelated soul. Having consumed alcohol, possible dislike for arrogant local folk, possible feelings of defensiveness for failing to be in the majority, and concealed carry of piece, are all factors warning Agt. Deedy to tread lightly. The evidence tells me he didn't heed all these tell tail markers. He obviously voluntarily ignored being cautious and claimed self-defense after the fact. It is up to the judicial system to see that justice is carried out. (I don’t have much faith in this system especially in light of the Zimmerman acquittal, inter alia.) I have no dog in this fight, except to see that Fed. Agt.. or any other LEO, don’t get away scott free.
The author states: "Hart maintained the U.S. State Department authorized Deedy to carry a weapon at all times." This story acts as if Deedy's right to carry a weapon is disputable. A federal agent may carry a firearm in all 50 states, DC, and other US territories 24/7. No state government can control what a federal agent is allowed to carry. This is fact, and is not a point of contention. People in Hawaii need to realize that they are a part of the US federal system whether they like it or not, and Agent Deedy has law enforcement authority across the United States.
Yeah, you're just not supposed to be drunk when you are on duty. You need to realize that this is expressly prohibited and considered indecent conduct unbecoming of a federal officer. Don't pretend he wasn't drunk — whens the last time you went to 4 different bars in a single night and didn't get at least tipsy?
Yes, he can legally carry a gun in Hawaii. However, if you are following the trial, his own Agency has a Policy that agents should not carry their guns when they are intoxicated – which he clearly was. Just how intoxicated is going to be a major factor in the outcome of this trial.
He would not be protected under the LEOSA if he was under the influence of alcohol. That is separate from any 24/7 authorization by his agency to carry firearms. If his agency regulations state that he "should" not be under the influence, that's one thing. If their regs state that he's shall not be under the influence when armed, that's another issue entirely. However, Federal Agencies are going to want to protect their ability to be armed in all 50 states and territories, so I would expect his agency will state that he was authorized to carry his firearm at the time.
Therefore, this case is going to hinge upon (almost exactly like the Zimmerman case) whether or not he was justified in using deadly force. Remember, generally speaking, an unarmed person can still inflict great bodily harm or worse. If that was the level of force inflicted upon the (now) defendant, the shooting would have been justified.
I must disagree with Guest’s premise re being armed. I agree any fed. agcy, including U.
S. State and all other LEOs, might want and will direct its agents to carry pieces at all times and in all jurisdictions. I dissent in that the question comes down to “jurisdiction”. Esq. Hart is in error, as far as jurisdiction is concerned. Mr. Guest is also in error. Fed. Agts have no lawful authority to go heeled outside the U.S. jurisdiction. The U.S. jurisdiction is restricted to Washington, D.C., U.S. Virgin Islands, Puerto Rico, Guam, Am. Samoa, the Trust Territories and Fed. enclaves. Therefore, Mr. Deedy, as all other Feds and other jurisdiction LEOs, has no lawful authority to carry a piece in HNL County. The Sheriff of HNL County is the sole arbiter in authorizing any civil servant to pack a piece. The people themselves are guaranteed the right to arms as mandated in the Second Amendment. (All of Hawaii’s restrictions on the people’s right to arms are unconstitutional) We know about jurisdiction by an Arizona case where the U.S. Supreme Court ruled the Fed. has no jurisdiction in Mariposa County and hence any other county in the several states of the Union.
“they are a part of the US federal system whether they like it or not,” Guest. This is a misnomer. If Hawai’i was really a “state” of the Union, it would not be part of the U.S. Federal System. As a matter of law, each state is independent, free and sovereign. Therefore, each free state is not part of the fed. gov’t. (though it appears that way) but only created it to govern those common affairs shared by each state as defined in the organic law. As a matter of law, it is debatable whether Hawai’i is a lawful nation state of the Union. (Absent treaty of cession)
I'm not a fan of guns, but…if the agent had not been armed, those boys would have put him in the hospital or worse. It's a sad fact…seen it dozens of times.
Addressing this issue of “not a fan of “guns”“. As a matter of law if Hawai’i was really a “state” of the Union, all citizens, except for a few exceptions, are members of the militia. As such each shall keep and bear arms, accouterments and such battle field equipment and ammunition suitable for a current day battle. Re the outcome of the confrontation, it seems to me only speculation will result in hospitalization. Suppose Fed. Agt. Deedy said nothing to any other party but to his own? Would there be cause for these local folks for an altercation?
"However, Deedy refused to take a blood-alcohol test."
If you refuse aren't there actions the police take, like arresting you for suspected of drunkenness while using a firearm? This case like Zimmerman is filled with so much of one or more of the following, incompetence, negligence and favoritism based not on facts but whim. e.g. the entire Zimmerman case is really about stalking and provoking a confrontation. The fact that Zimmerman was losing a fight is irrelevant, for he knew that he possessed a hidden handgun and that is the reason he allowed himself to confront Martin. The legal system needs reform.
I agree the police if it were us would take the blood test sample. This would violate the 4th Amendment to the Bill of Rights, 1791. Additionally, HNL finest take a solemn oath to support and defend the Fed. Constitution and the State Constitution. So much for oaths. I agree to the parallels to the Zimmerman case. I further agree, one simply cannot stalk or provoke another and later rely on self-defense. Zimmerman should not have been acquitted and Mr. Deedy is culpable because of this same provocation. Agreed the criminal justice system drastically needs reform, however there are more pressing problems facing the U.S. There was no true, unbiased, proper criminal investigation of 9/11 so that 10 or 11 years later the world still don’t know who were the true perpetrators.
Your article failed to mention that Elderts had marijuana and cocaine in his system and an autopsy BAC of .12 (well over the benchmark for drunk driving of .08). Also that Deedy remained at the scene after the shooting performing CPR on Elderts until police and paramedics arrived. Just because the two are different races doesn't mean this had anything to do with racism. In fact, if anything, there is evidence that Elderts was using racial slurs against Deedy because he was not "local".
you don't read and comprehend well do you? it is in the article,
It is admirable for Mr. Deedy to perform all these humanitarian efforts and Mr. Eldert’s body be so polluted. However, these efforts do not mitigate the provocation of the incident and done post injury. Should Mr. Deedy had used these concerns before the altercation the results would have been better and confirmed his good intentions. Accusatory slurs of non-local is not cause to murder another. I don’t believe racism is a significant factor as in the Zimmerman case.
Irresponsible journalism. It is only racially charged because you are saying it is.
And this one will probably end the same way the Martin trial will end…with this author and this "paper" looking like a bunch of idiots and race baiters.
Educate me Jimmy, & those who vote up here.
I read ONLY 2 clear mistakes.
1)Racially charged murder trial grips Hawaii" is A LIE. Hawaii is not 'gripped"
2 "a local minority" ?
This is par for the media. Hawaii News Now & S.A. are WAY more irresponsible.
Example are S.A.'s editorials.
This is a case of self-defense. It appears that Deedy was seeking to stop the bullying directed against one haole guy who was minding his own business. He id himself as law enforcement, which sent Elderts into a rage. He and Mederios assaulted someone with Deedy…its clear on the video, then Elderts came after Deedy and pushed him clear across the restaurant and broke his nose, before Deedy shot him. Elderts been arrested before and fought with cops. Another thing highlighted is sloppy police work. No measurements to see where shots came from, no notes, LOST CAMERA with scene photos (are you kidding…one picture of Deedy close up?) cops testifying with selective amnesia, clear bias by one who put post on Facebook, worst of all, no blood alcohol from Deedy (yes he could refuse, but he was under arrest, so cops could have gotten a warrant or taken under exigent circumstances.) This case is wasting taxpayer money.
You need to go back to law school Mr. Pilot. There is no requirement under the law that a suspect in a Murder case provide any blood or breath sample to test for alcohol. He refused to take a test – end of story, the jury knows he is hiding something. You can't get a warrant from a judge to forcibly take blood – because he is not required to give any under the law!! Exigent circumstances is 1 exception to the warrant requirement but does not apply to drawing blood for a person already arrested and in custody for a crime. The only exception under the current law is for drivers of a vehicle when somebody is killed or seriously injured.
you are correct in your facts.
Deedy isn’t entitled to self-defense in this set of circumstances. By provoking a confrontation deprives one of the self-defense defense. This is the same as in the Zimmerman case where the jury failed to make the connection between stalking and self-defense. It cannot be a waste of taxpayer “money” when a public servant is held to account. I too have no doubt the HNL authorities are incompetent.
This article is useless and inaccurate. Fire the author and lets get some real news here
Comments are closed.