Posted on 02/16/2017 12:53:41 PM PST by simpson96
COLUMBUS, Ohio — An 82-year-old man who was indicted, but never prosecuted, in the nonfatal shooting of an Ohio police officer almost 45 years ago cannot be tried now, a judge ruled Thursday.
The case against Charles Hays fell through the cracks, and prosecutors acknowledged the state neglected the case. But they said he never demanded a speedy trial.
Franklin County Judge Guy Reece dismissed the case Thursday, saying Ohio had at least two opportunities over the past four decades to bring Hays back for trial.
Those came when Hays was in jail in Kentucky and in prison in Connecticut on charges unrelated to the 1972 shooting of Columbus officer Niki "Nick" Cooper.
A speedy trial is a constitutional right, the judge said as he announced his decision.
"Not only is it important for the defendant, but it's also important for society as a whole to have a criminal case resolved in a timely manner," Reece said.
Cooper was shot in the left arm in March 1972 when he and his partner interrupted a burglary. Cooper never regained full use of the injured limb, and he died just over three years ago at 71.
Hays was shot twice by Cooper and left a paraplegic, according to court records.
(Excerpt) Read more at msn.com ...
I don't believe that matters. You have the RIGHT to a speedy trial. The accused doesn't have to actually ask for it. Just like you don't have to actually ASK for the right to free speech.
True, I have to side with the perp on this one. Big Gov blew it.
Statue of limitations might have run out on this...
Fair statement.
If he had killed the cop, it would be different.
But I got to go with the perp on this one.
The two lead pills he got would seem to be punishment enough.
To wait and try to prosecute a guy who’s 82 years old after forty years is wrong. I am a strong supporter of law enforcement officers, when it is justified, or condemnation isn’t fully justified, but this is beyond the pale.
An 82 year old guy isn’t capable of fully defending himself against charges dating back 40 years.
I’d also like to point out that Hays (the 82 year old perp), was left a paraplegic, which in and of itself is a terrible penalty to pay for his actions.
I am sorry the officer sustained this type of injury, and that Hays was not prosecuted in the day.
I’m pretty sure why he wasn’t. He was probably severely compromised and it would have been very hard for him to attend trial. Further, had he been convicted at that point, it would have been a real burden on the state to incarcerate and care for him.
One further point.
The likelihood of Hay’s committing other crimes?
Zero.
From the incident, he was out of commission.
He chose his own punishment in a way.
That was the cop that got "the two lead pills". Cooper was the cop, and it was he that got shot.
Whoops, never mind. Hays got shot also. Sorry.
And what’s the objective, to lock up an 82 year old paraplegic and give him free medical care for his remaining days?
Both the cop and the perp got shot.
Agreed. I touched on that just below.
The statute of limitations runs from commission of the crime until indictment. After that, it's the speedy trial clause of the Constitution, or the Speedy Trial Act (in federal court, and in some states that have them) which governs.
“Those came when Hays was in jail in Kentucky and in prison in Connecticut on charges unrelated to the 1972 shooting of Columbus officer ...”
The guy gets around for being a paraplegic.
Hmm...
Yes, can you take me to the nearest bank and help me back into my wheel chair? Oh, and keep the motor running...
If the wounds left him a paraplegic, how did he manage to end up behind bars twice more?
Just curious.
I’m rather curious about that myself.
The only thing I can think of, is that perhaps he was convicted of things he had done earlier, before he was injured so seriously.
Different prison hospitals?
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.