PA:Barbershop Shooter Acquitted, Case in Shirt Pocket

Gun Watch ^ | 19 October, 2014 | Dean Weingarten

[marktwain]

A jury recently found Albert Dudley not guilty of aggravated assault, simple assault, reckless endangerment, and possessing an instrument of crime.

In 2012, Dudley become involved in an altercation with another barber at the shop where he worked.   Dudley had a concealed carry permit, and during the altercation, his firearm was fired, striking his opponent.  Versions of the event vary considerably.   From the article about the arrest:

Later, Dudley gave investigators a written statement saying he had been at work when the victim arrived, appearing intoxicated. He claimed the other man became physically aggressive during the argument.  

Originally, the suspect stated that during the tussle his gun fired accidentally while in the holster but changed his account several times, according to the criminal complaint. Dudley also said the victim took the gun from the holster and gained control of the weapon, but eventually the suspect regained control of the gun.

While gripping the firearm from the top, the gun fired as the victim backed Dudley into a wall, the gunman said.

At the trial,  Dudley took the stand and told this account:

On Thursday before closing arguments, Dudley took the stand and told the court the victim attacked him and he never meant for anyone to get shot on the day of the fight. He said the victim, whose name is being withheld by The Times Herald, was drunk started the fight. He further testified the man tried to grab his gun and in the struggle of getting his gun back, the gun went off. Dudley said once he realized the gun went off he offered to drive the victim to the hospital, but an ambulance and the police had already been called.

 Given the variation in accounts, and the potential attempt to alter a crime scene (Dudley was found with an empty case in his shirt pocket), I can see why the prosecutors decided to go forward to a jury trial.  Do not alter a crime scene.   It makes you appear guilty.

I have had shell caseings end up in my shirt pockets, so it can happen without evil intent.   Apparently the jury thought so as well.   The prosecutor was gracious at the end of the trial.    

Prosecuting attorney Rebecca Strubel said she respected the jury’s verdict, but did not comment any further.

©2014 by Dean Weingarten: Permission to share is granted when this notice is included.
Link to Gun Watch

[marktwain]

Do not mess with a potential crime scene. If you were justified, the evidence will support you.

[Lurker]

And make sure to be very polite to the investigating officer, the prosecutor, and the judge. That means making sure they only have to listen to one story. Yours.

[RightOnTheBorder]

If the shooter was not guilty of a crime, doesn’t that mean the man the article keeps calling “the victim” should have been charged with assault? Sounds to me like the “victim” was the man who was assaulted then prosecuted.

[JoeDetweiler]

“... the victim, whose name is being withheld by The Times Herald...”

What the heck? I’ve never seen this before. The only time I’ve seen the news withhold the name of a victim is in cases of rape or sexual assault. The victim isn’t underage if he’s working as a barber. Anyone know the story here?

[Hugin]

Another reason not to talk to the police. Even if you are innocent, you can easily say something a prosecutor can construe as showing guilt. Everything you say can be held against you, but nothing you say can be used for your defense.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6wXkI4t7nuc

[Hugin]

If the shooter was not guilty of a crime, doesn’t that mean the man the article keeps calling “the victim” should have been charged with assault?

Not necessarily. Could be a "he said-he said" situation, without enough evidence to prove who started it.

[Pontiac]

Another reason not to talk to the police. Even if you are innocent, you can easily say something a prosecutor can construe as showing guilt.

This can’t be said enough.

The only things you should say to the police in a case like this is your name and I have nothing else to say until I have my lawyer present.

If for no other reason you need the time to calm down and start thinking rationally again. Someone who has just been through a life and death struggle is pumped full of adrenaline and is not in a normal state of consciousness.

Also most of us are not lawyers and may not be aware of all of the laws that may apply to situations such as this barber is involved in here. And even if you are a lawyer you are still in a compromised state of mind and need assistance.

The police are not your friends and even if they tell you that they are just trying to help you they aren’t and you should not believe that they are. It is not in your best interest.