commentary by Patrick H. Moore
State Department Special Agent Christopher Deedy is back on trial in Honolulu for the alleged murder of Hawaiian Islander Kollin Elderts in an early morning altercation at a Waikiki McDonald’s in November of 2011. The first trial resulted in a mistrial in July of last year when the jurors deadlocked and could not reach a verdict.
In his opening statement on Thursday, Deedy’s new defense attorney Thomas Otake stated that during the altercation, the Agent was protecting himself and other from an aggressive Kollin Elderts, who was celebrating the birthday of friends and had reportedly had been drinking and smoking marijuana, according to prosecution witness Maile Goodhue, a friend of Elderts. According to Otake, Deedy’s actions that morning were “in line with his law enforcement training.”
In contrast to Elderts, SA Deedy had been drinking but had not been partaking of the cannabis. According to Otake, “(Deedy) knew his limits.” Deedy had been hand-selected to be in Honolulu to help provide security for the Asia-Pacific Economic Cooperation summit.
So let’s step back for a moment and grapple with the intoxication issue. The killing occurred early in the morning. Both the alleged victim and the alleged perpetrator were under the influence. Since Elderts’ death occurred early in the morning, he and Deedy may have both been up all night partying, although undoubtedly at separate locations.
Thus, we presumably have a stoned and intoxicated young man and an intoxicated SA, both somewhat the worse for wear after their “long day’s journey into night.” Of course, we have no idea “how intoxicated” either of them actually were.
Based on the Thursday testimony of Ben Finkelstein, another agent who had arrived in Honolulu with Deedy, SA Finkelstein had taken it upon himself to explain to the apparently “green” Deedy “that while Hawaii is beautiful and most people are friendly, there are “some people who dislike the federal government and dislike mainlanders.”
Finkelstein testified that he explained to Deedy about the word “haole,” which is a pejorative Hawaiian term for a white person. Finkelstein further testified that his grandmother, who grew up in Hawaii, taught him the word without mentioning any negative connotation, but that friends of his who served in the Marine Corps told him the word had been used on them in a derogatory way.
(Among other things, it may be safe to assume that there was plenty of “macho steam” emitted by both Elderts and Deedy on the morning of the slaying. Most anyone who grew up in California like myself with any street familiarity would most likely be fully aware that “haole” is a pejorative term, not unlike the use of the “N” word by white people when speaking derogatorily about black people).
The perception among many Islanders is that Elderts’ death was racially motivated and was the handiwork of a drunken, white Federal agent.
In the prosecution’s opening statement, Honolulu Deputy Prosecuting Attorney Janice Futa essentially repeated much of what she told jurors in last year’s mistrial — that Deedy was fueled by alcohol, power and a warning from a fellow agent about the hostility of Hawaiian locals toward government employees and outsiders.
Futa didn’t mince words stating that Deedy unjustifiably used his firearm and intentionally killed Elderts. She stated, quite logically, that Deedy shouldn’t have been drinking alcohol while armed, even if he was off-duty.
Futa said that Elderts was in a good mood when he and friend Shane Medeiros changed their minds about going to eat at Denny’s and instead stopped at the McDonald’s for a snack to end the night:
“Neither Kollin nor Shane could know the tragic consequence of that decision,” she said, adding that Elderts was shot within six minutes of entering the eatery.
In his opening statement, in an attempt to cast Deedy in a good light, Otake said that Deedy ultimately found himself pinned under the wounded Elderts and tried to render aid.
Otake said that Deedy pushed Elderts off of him, got down on his knees and covered the wound.
“He tried to stop the bleeding. He tried to save Mr. Elderts’ life.”
In a decision from the bench that may help the prosecution, and contrasts with the first trial, Judge Karen Ahn previously ruled that the current jury will not be permitted to see the portion of a bystander’s cellphone video that shows Deedy trying to render the first aid. The jury in the first trial saw the entire footage.
* * * * *
At the first trial, SA Christopher Deedy took the stand on his own behalf and described the series of events that led him to fatally shoot Kollin Elderts following an argument that escalated.
During the scuffle, Deedy said that a scuffle broke out and that Elderts attacked his friend, Adam Gutowski.
“Mr. Elderts grabbed Adam Gutowski and then I saw Elderts hit Adam.”
Deedy further states that Elderts’ friend Shane Medeiros then tackled Gutowski, after which Elderts pushed Deedy down to the ground.
“I stood up both arms in front of me, palms forward, and I said, ‘Stop, I’ll shoot,’” Deedy said.
Deedy said he gave Elderts plenty of warning before pulling out his gun, but Elderts kept moving toward him.
Christopher Deedy: “I hoped, I prayed he would stop.”
Deedy’s former defense attorney Brook Hart: “Did he stop?”
Christopher Deedy: “No.”
So according to Deedy, he and Elderts grappled with each other, and then he shot him. Deedy stated that everything seemed to slow down and it was eerily quiet when it happened.
“As he drove me back what (in what) seemed like in slow motion, he drove me down on to the ground.”
Deedy testified that he blacked out shortly after that, but then regained his senses and realized he had to try to revive Elderts.
The cell phone video which will not be permissible evidence in the current trial shows Deedy covered in blood. Deedy testified that Elderts was still breathing when Deedy was trying to administer CPR. The local police officers arrived on the scene shortly thereafter.
When questioned by police, Deedy admitted that he was the one who shot Elderts. Deedy explained that it was after his arrest, while in the squad car, that he fully realized what had happened.
“It was like a ton of bricks hitting me in the chest. I was at that moment just trying to keep myself together after being in a fight for my life.”
* * * * *
During the trial, in an interview, local defense attorney and former prosecutor Victor Bakke stated that the prosecution “blew it” during Deedy’s cross-examination. Bakke’s take was that Deedy’s testimony was polished and convincing.
“He seemed very controlled in his thinking and the way he responded and I think that’s the best thing about his testimony is that he was able to walk the jury step-by-step through his thinking process as this case evolved.”
Bakke also stated that he thought the prosecution’s cross-examination of Deedy was very weak and that they actually helped Deedy by repeatedly asking him why he didn’t leave the McDonald’s before the fight escalated.
“When you ask dumb questions like, ‘Why didn’t you leave?’ Of course he’s gonna say, ‘Because I couldn’t, because this guy was endangering the lives of other people,’” Bakke said.
Prosecutors also asked Deedy if he saw Kollin Elderts with a weapon.
“I did not see a weapon in his hand,” Deedy said.
“Did you see a weapon on either hand?” asked deputy prosecutor Janice Futa.
“No ma’am,” Deedy said.
“That’s because there was no weapon. It wasn’t even alleged that there was a weapon and those kinds of questions really detract from the credibility of the prosecutor, like where are you going with this?” Bakke said.
Bakke concluded the interview by saying that he did not anticipate the jury finding Deedy guilty of murder and that he would either be acquitted or a mistrial would be declared, which is precisely what happened.
* * * * *
Now that the new trial is underway, Our Man Bakke is back. KHON2 asked him how this trial would be different from the previous one.
“One of the big problems that is already happening for the defense is that the judge is reconsidering her prior rulings for the first case,” he said. “She’s ruled not to allow part of a video to show to the jury.”
That of course is the video of Deedy giving the victim CPR.
Also, “the defense will not be able to introduce evidence that the victim had a prior disorderly conduct.”
Bakke believes the prosecution now has the upper hand because they’ve had the opportunity to correct the mistakes they made in the first trial.
“The fact that there are different rulings and they’re tending to be in favor of the prosecution makes that job of the defense attorney much more difficult. It’s going to be difficult to get jurors who will come in with an open mind because people have seen at least the video of events and may have formed their own conclusion already.”
* * * * *
What seems to be missing is any information describing how the altercation got started in the first place. Did Elderts and Medeiros purposely “mix it up” with the SA’s? Were dirty looks and macho grandstanding flying around the McDonald’s “breakfast line”.
My initial take it that despite Attorney Bakke’s recent statements that the new trial will favor the prosecution, it’s somewhat hard for me to conceive of this ending in a second-degree-murder conviction against SA Deedy unless there is solid evidence that he and/or SA Finkelstein started the altercation. But we shall see. It is expected to be a long trial which, according to Bakke, will may also work to the prosecution’s advantage. Furthermore, the socio-economic/racial make-up of the jury may play a key role in the outcome.
This is one where I would like to be in the courtroom “drinking it in.”