Deedy defense seeks end to trials
CRAIG T. KOJIMA / CKOJIMA@STARADVERTISER.COM
Judge Paula Nakayama and Chief Justice Mark Recktenwald listened to Christopher Deedy’s defense lawyer Thomas Otake on Thursday. Deedy shot and killed Kollin Elderts, 23, during an altercation at a fast-food restaurant in 2011. The hearing was held to decide whether to try Deedy in the case for a third time.
CRAIG T. KOJIMA / CKOJIMA@STARADVERTISER.COM
Kalama o ka Aina Nihieu of the organization Justice for Kollin Elderts talked to the press after the hearing before a panel of the Hawaii Supreme Court on Thursday in Honolulu.
Five state Supreme Court justices heard oral arguments Thursday on whether to allow a third trial of Christopher Deedy, who as an off-duty federal agent shot and killed Kollin Elderts, a 23-year-old Kailua man, at a McDonald’s in Waikiki on Nov. 5, 2011.
Deedy’s two previous Circuit Court trials in Honolulu ended in mistrials. The first, in 2013, on a second-degree murder charge, ended in a hung jury. During the retrial in 2014, the jury acquitted Deedy of murder but was deadlocked on a charge of manslaughter. The court ruled the state could retry him on the manslaughter charge.
Deedy is appealing that ruling to the high court in part on the basis of double-jeopardy protection.
Three justices questioned Deedy’s lawyer, Thomas Otake, on his understanding of double jeopardy, and one said his understanding does not meet the criteria in this case.
Otake said the prosecutor failed to convict on murder, so wants to retry the manslaughter charge with different evidence. “Now you’re going to produce different evidence,” he said. “That’s exactly what double jeopardy is supposed to prevent.”
Justice Richard Pollack said, “There’s no definition of double jeopardy that encompasses that theory.”
Don't miss out on what's happening!
Stay in touch with top news, as it happens, conveniently in your email inbox. It's FREE!
He said double jeopardy “is second prosecution for the same offense after acquittal, second prosecution for the same offense after conviction, and multiple punishment for the same offense. What has occurred here doesn’t follow these three criteria.”
City Deputy Prosecutor Donn Fudo, addressing the justices, said Otake was “in the threat of perjury” in saying he previously made the claim of double jeopardy. “Why isn’t that motion for double jeopardy protection brought before the second trial?” he asked. “If you have a legitimate double-jeopardy claim, bring it before the subsequent prosecution or you waive it. … They made it 4-1/2 months afterwards.
“Double jeopardy is waivable,” he said.
Otake said he did attempt to stop the second trial based on a double-jeopardy objection. “We did. We absolutely did,” Otake said.
In 2011 Deedy, then 27, a federal State Department agent from Arlington, Va., was on his first day in Hawaii for an assignment to assist with security for the Asia-Pacific Economic Cooperation summit of world leaders. Deedy was off-duty and armed with a 9 mm semi-automatic handgun when he went up to Elderts’ table at the McDonald’s on Kuhio Avenue and intervened because he perceived Elderts was threatening a customer.
“The family has always been very clear that manslaughter should have been the original charge, not because they don’t believe it’s murder … but because they believe it’s almost impossible to prosecute law enforcement,” said Kalama o ka Aina Nihieu, a spokeswoman for the family and coordinator of a group called Justice for Kollin Elderts.
“A federal agent isn’t like anybody else,” she said. “If they are given a semi-automatic weapon and become a drunken tourist on the town and then instigate a fight and murder one of our kanaka maoli youth, this isn’t the average type of situation.”
She said family members have suffered financially, spiritually and mentally from the trauma of two trials and could not bear to relive his killing by attending the hearing Thursday. Deedy also did not attend the hearing.
Fudo told the high court that according to witness testimony, Deedy appeared to be “a drunk tourist in a night of craziness, goading Elderts, ‘I’m going to shoot you in the f—-ing face if you’re acting like this.’”
Otake also said that because the prosecutors did not pursue a manslaughter charge in the previous two trials, they cannot pursue it now.
Justice Sabrina McKenna said, “That’s not true, is it, counsel?” adding that in the second trial the state did include manslaughter and assault charges. She added that Deputy Prosecutor Janice Futa, lead prosecutor in the first two trials, never said Deedy was not guilty of manslaughter.
Otake also raised the theory of acquittal, saying that Judge Karen Ahn, by not including jury instructions regarding the manslaughter charge, in effect acquitted his client of manslaughter.
Pollack asked, “So in your view, every single time a judge decides not to give an instruction, that that is equivalent to a judgment of acquittal of the offense? That’s the theory you’re asking us to find.”
21 responses to “Deedy defense seeks end to trials”
Leave a Reply
You must be logged in to post a comment.
if there is a third trial you cannot use the evidence from the second trial that means no video or any other evidence that was presented in the second trial so it will be a he said or she said all heresay and you cannot convict anybody on heresay testimony, I think lawyer klastri might agree with that since he is a lawyer.
For Justice to prevail, Deedy must be tried, convicted, and incarcerated.
There is no excuse for any government employee to take his service pistol into a drinking establishment, imbibe and then, while under the influence, gun down an unarmed civilian.
If the first two attempts ended in MIS trial, then in the eyes of Justice he has not been tried at all, so there is no double jeopardy.
Despite what so many of them seem to think, being an employee of the hoity toity State Department does not elevate one above the law – – especially when homicide results.
Agreed
Doody is the ultimate puzzy. Starts a fight, starts losing then pulls his gun. The most gigantic puzzy of all time. Coward. Beyatch. The fact he’s still working as a federal agent is a mark against all agents – past, present and future.
I total agree.
What everybody is forgetting, he pulled his pistol out in a McDonald’s restaurant – a McDonald’s restaurant! He had no regard for anybody’s life and well being. This pro-of-an-agent missed his target on the first shot – just meters away. Deedy is the worst piece of scum on this earth.
Totally Disagree
Hes is not guilty of anything.
Totally disagree. third trial is nonsense – it would proceed with mistrial or acquittal and is only done to please the moke community.
Enough is enough. Two mistrials? Let the guy go and let the decease rest. It was a ‘hate’ crime when Deedy stepped in to help. Decedent was drugged up and calling some one a ef haole and attacking them is a ‘hate’ crime and should have been investigated as such. He stepped in to help someone, where as no one else would, plus identifying himself as a Federal Agent. ENOUGH.
The cost of every legal proceeding, is paid by “we the people” taxpayers.
When the government runs out of money, they will print more paper dollars and increase “we the people” taxes.
Justice has a very big price tag.
How much was spent thus far ?
Time to drop the charges. They could not convict him with 2 trials. Insanity is doing the same thing and expecting different results.
Sad outcome. Sounds like local guy mouthing off to the wrong guy who happened to have a gun. But no excuse for State Department agent for using his weapon. Should have been some conviction rendered but looks like Prosecution dropped the ball on this one. Nuff already.
There are no winners in this case; only losers. I hope that Mr. Deedy is no longer in law enforcement. I also hope that Elert’s family can move on at some point.
kept his job at the State Dept. and probably gotta raise.
If it should go to trial I hope I’m on the jury… ever heard of “Jury Nullification” ?
White boy is marked for life here.
And the haole hunt continues. Sad but typical and not even close to June.
Which one isn’t?
Deedy wins.
This case is costing us too much money. Pau already. Been years since it happened. If Deedy is guilty he will live with it. If not then he still lives with it. Move on folks and families. It is what it is. The event was on camera. If people can’t decide what went down then too bad.
Enough Already