Roger Garfield Released From Prison and Granted New Trial Based on Change in Self-Defense Law; (AZ)

phoenixnewtimes.com ^ | 17 January, 2012 | Ray Stern

[marktwain]

Roger Garfield, the former antiques dealer who shot and killed an unarmed homeless man in 2006, has been released from prison and granted a new trial based on a change in self-defense laws.

As we explained in our March 11, 2010 article, Shoot to Kill, the prosecution of Garfield for the 2006 shooting in an antique store he once owned turned into a legal odyssey of court rulings and new statutes.

He's been jailed, then released, then jailed, then sent to prison -- and now he's out again. He was in court with his wife last week as a free man, dressed in a short-sleeved shirt and slacks.

His latest brush with freedom may or may not last. He'll stay out of the hoosegow at last until the start of his new trial, which is scheduled for April 24, and possibly longer than that, if the trial's delayed, (always a good bet at the busy Maricopa County Superior Court).

But County Attorney Bill Montgomery is moving ahead with the new prosecution, meaning Garfield will likely face another jury -- and possibly another sentencing hearing, if the new jury makes the same decision as the previous one.

The saga is tough to boil down, but it's a fascinating case for aficionados of self-defense arguments. We'll give you the nutshell version, but for the full back story, read our 2010 feature article.

Garfield had been an insurance man for 25 years before achieving his lifelong dream in 2006 of opening his own antique store. The place he bought on the southeast corner of Seventh Avenue and McDowell, interestingly enough, was part of a property owned by state Attorney General Tom Horne that Horne is now in the process of redeveloping.

[marktwain]

I do not know enough about this case to make an informed comment. However, at the time, Arizona was only one of two states in which someone who claimed self-defense had to prove that they were acting in self defense. Arizon has since changed its law back to what it had been previously, when the state, as has been customary in nearly all the nation, had to prove that an act was *not* self defense, or as we like to say, the person was innocent until proved guilty.

[rellimpank]

—good to see the end of the Harold Fish “case” mentioned—I had lost track of that one—

[Tubac414]

Glad they changed it -

[husky ed]

I tell my mom. “Empty the gun into them and reload. When the cops show up tell them you were and still are scared for your life.”

Make em prove otherwise.

Sorry for this guy that he has a crappy attorney.

Ed

[Harley]

I tell my mom. “Empty the gun into them and reload.

Here's what happened to a pharmacist In Oklahoma that went to get another gun to finish off a robber. Bang

[husky ed]

That’s not what I said.

But, if you can prove there is a continuing threat then yes dump another 15 rounds into the ahole.

As my Mom is 86 with only one leg and were to be attacked, I think she could convince a jury.

Ed

p.s. Turn off the damn cameras or make sure they don’t work if you did something you should not have done.

[Harley]

Find a defense attorney that specializes in gun self defense cases. If you have a CWC permit, attach his card to it. That’s what I learned in my class because no matter how right you are or how bad the perp needed it the ACLU will be coming for you. Even if the courts absolve you of criminal charges his relatives will becoming after you in civil court. You will be another stepping stone to their goal of banning guns. Do not make any statements to anybody, don’t display bumper stickers that say stuff like “Keep Honking, I’m reloading” and don’t use your own custom reloaded ammunition. All these type of things will be used against you in court to say you were gunning for somebody. Serious advice about a serious subject.

[husky ed]

I do not advertise that I carry. And I do not make or post threats against people for doing annoying things (Stupid bumper stickers).

I do know the legal requirements for use of force both "Necessary" and "Deadly force".

Now when I say "empty the mag and reload". I don't mean to say dump another 15 rounds into the loser or losers. What I am saying is to Reload so that you do not have a empty weapon encase there are further threats.

Also not every gun holds 15 rounds. It's just a saying I use.

Ed