Posted on 03/30/2006 12:46:38 PM PST by csvset
VIRGINIA BEACH – A judge today dismissed the first-degree murder charge against Navy SEAL Ronald Gasper, saying there was no evidence of premeditation.
Even so, the jury could still convict Gasper of second-degree murder or manslaughter. It is not clear how that would affect his possible sentence.
Gasper is accused of shooting to death a fellow SEAL, Bradley Jondahl, in 2004 after the two Navy men returned to Gasper’s apartment after a night of drinking.
Gasper admits shooting Jondahl, but claims it was in self-defense. His attorney argued in court that Jondahl was in an angry, drunken rage when Gasper shot him in the stomach.
The trial in Circuit Court began Monday with jury selection. Today, the prosecution rested and the defense began calling witnesses. The trial is expected to end sometime next week.
Dang
I prefer the old fashioned "Mine is bigger than yours"
TT
froggy ping
Gasper had recently returned from Iraq and was enjoying a night out with friends, testified April M. Rackard, a friend who was with Gasper during much of the day and night.
Rackard and Gasper were with several other people at the Duck-In, the Smokehouse and Cooler, Rackard testified. At Cooler, the group bumped into Jondahl.
Eventually, Gasper left the group. Broccoletti said Gasper continued bar-hopping on his own. One server testified that she saw Gasper that night wearing a T-shirt with the inscription "All women are whores."
Broccoletti said Gasper called a cab later that evening and saw Jondahl was drunk and having trouble walking. He said Gasper offered to take Jondahl with him, a tradition among SEALs on drinking binges.
A cab driver testified that he took both men to Gasper's home and neither seemed overly intoxicated or angry with each other.
Later, police found Jondahl on the floor of the garage with a bullet wound to the abdomen.
Police Sgt. John J. Kozlowski said Gapser told him that the two SEALs had retired to his house after a night of drinking and that Jondahl was acting up, "so I shot him."
-----
Crazy case.
Oh, btw, its probably not a good idea to wear a t-shirt that says "All women are whores" on a day that you kill someone....kinda hard to explain that one to the jury....
I don't mean to bring any sanity to this...but since Jondahl wasn't a woman, that particular T-Shirt would seem to have little relevence to this aprticular case.
And I'm curious what their theory was, since they were looking for a 1st degree charge as well....
I believe the Judge and the prosecutor, during discovery, or later, would move to make sure that was not admissable as evidence.
Is there a reason that they wouldn't turn this over to UCMJ?
Hard to tell from the story, but I inferred that this was based upon courtroom testimony.
If that is the case, that is too bad. Such testimony, IMHO, should have been disallowed or thrown out. It is very prejudicial and not germaine at all to the case.
They probably will - after the civilian courts get done with it. It is not uncommon for a serviceman to be convicted and sentenced in both civilian and military courts, especially if the crime was serious. Neither venue is considered double jeopardy regarding the other.
The sergeant said that when he asked Gasper what had occurred, he replied, "We were out drinking. We came back here. He started acting f---ed up, so I shot him."
Kozlowski said that when Gasper learned later in the day that Jondahl was in surgery, he said, "He'll live. I only shot him once in the gut."
----
1. If I'm the defense, I'm arguing that my guy is a trained killer, and if he really wanted to kill him, he could have. I'm sure he could have place a shot anywhere he chose.
2. I guess those 9mm's really can stop "a raging bull".
Couldn't this be used as motive? I mean, if he has that much disdain for women, he could have been looking for something he thought he might be able to get from another drunk squid, which set the guy off in the first place. I cold also be stretching things.
I don't think don't ask don't tell would cut it with this group
First the UCMJ only applies on a military reservation - this happened in town it sounds like.
Next, I'm guessing Gasper made a pass at the victim and the victim said no and further said he was gonna kill him and was telling, so Gasper shot him.
I don't think there is a homo angle here guys
I wasn't really saying that this is the case, just saying that the prosecution could use it in the case as possible motive. I haven't been following the case close enough to say.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.