Man aquitted in SD shooting after spending 112 days in jail

In reference to the Sand your ground law:

What Lewis’ case shows is that current law works, Sarcone said: “I don’t know why people are afraid of jury trials. I’m not.”
Click to expand...

Lewis spent 112 days in jail, lost his home and everything he owned, couldn't fight the evicition.

Geee why would Lewis or anyone else be afraid of a jury trial.

Its not the Jury that bothers me, its the people who get you to that point.

Everyone that carries should think about Concealed Carry Insurance.

My pensions come whether I'm in jail or not, my wife wont be hurting, but I don't want to miss my granddaughters ball games because I spent 112 days in jail waiting for a jury to free me.
 
Sounds to me like the city and the apt complex and DA just made this fella a soon to be millionaire after he sues the crap out of em and I would. No one should have to go through that ever.
 
tnxdshooter said:
Sounds to me like the city and the apt complex and DA just made this fella a soon to be millionaire after he sues the crap out of em...
Click to expand...
Probably not. Such lawsuits are very rare, in part because they very seldom get anywhere. The applicable legal standards would support recovery only in the most extraordinary cases.
 
To add to the list of interesting cases, there was an article yesterday about a trial beginning for a Philly police officer, who shot a man while he was off-duty.

The officer had been assaulted by one or two males in a group of seven or eight; as the crowd acted more threatening he drew; when one of the group said "he won't shoot," the officer shot him.

A Philly DA named Barry said that since the officer only had some facial bruising, it was obvious he wasn't really threatened, and he should have gone inside and called 911.

This assumes, of course, that the officer could have safely retreated through the crowd, and that disparity of force was not a legitimate concern....
 
It is sickening to see a person have to endure the red tape that he did.

All said he has a chance in small claims court against the apartment company. They knew for a fact that he was in jail. That is exactly why they were evicting him. Secondly it was unlawful for them file eviction against him before he had his time in court. He may be able to recover some of the value of his belingings, and his deposit. What the apartment company did definately violated his rights. Even though the county did cary it out. His rights as a renter were violated.
 
It sounds like there are a lot of legal ways for him to get his life back in financial order, but

I like WA law best. Prosecuted for SD and found NOT guilty in WA state, the governmental entity that prosecuted you has to anti up your lawyers fees, your lost wages and any other monetary damages and interest incured because you were being procecuted for a legal SD situation...no extra court time needed...Not Guilty...the judge awards it right there and then. It's state law.

Believe me, the local prosecuters look long and hard before they charge anyone they know will plead SD. IT doesn't mean they charge no-one, it only means they charge only those that have really questionable SD defences.
 
Philly officer . . .

A Philly DA named Barry said that since the officer only had some facial bruising, it was obvious he wasn't really threatened, and he should have gone inside and called 911.
Click to expand...
I don't know this particular case, but that is a fundamentally flawed analysis of how one assesses reasonable fear of loss of life or limb. Must we also wait to be shot before returning fire? Ridiculous.

If anything, the facial bruising combined with the disparity of force (multiple attackers) is corroborative to reasonable fear. Where must one attend law school to get a job in Philly?
 
It's too late for the victim in this case, but maybe his situation will spur the Iowa house and senate to pass the pending "stand your ground" bill. This makes a permit to carry mute, if you can't defend yourself when attacked by two felons. Some of the local politicos bring up the tired "wild west" catch phrase and state that everyone will just shoot first in every encounter if this bill passes. Well, a multitude of other states have enacted similar laws without an ensuing bloodbath. Also pending is the constitutional carry bill and a bill that would stop cities from enacting concealed carry restrictions on city land and buildings tougher that the state law. The next few weeks will be interesting.
 
This is exactly why the classic forum ninja statement "if BG does such and such I'll just draw and drop him in his tracks" is so bothersome to me. You can be perfectly within your rights to defend yourself and the government can be perfectly within the law taking 112 days to decide that your defense is valid. And keeping you in jail while doing it.

The threat to your life, health and property is not over when the BG is neutralized. If you carry or if you keep a gun at home for defense you owe it to yourself to have a plan for what to do in the aftermath of a defense shooting. Identify a lawyer. Know how to get in touch. Know your state laws. Have money ready.

We spend hours at the range and thousands on guns and ammo, but how many of us have identified which attorney we'll call and how we'll pay for him?

The defendant here was an employee of the Federal Government and a former law enforcement officer. His record appears to have been squeaky clean. I suspect that a few thousand in cash would've either bought him a lawyer good enough to get this case tossed long before this disaster happened, or got him out on bail awaiting trial. The fact he had a public defender ( and if google is right, a REALLY bad one) is why he lost everything.
 
The fact he had a public defender ( and if google is right, a REALLY bad one) is why he lost everything.
Click to expand...
Didn't that public defender get an acquittal? I believe the public defender may be the only person in this story besides the defendant who did everything right.
 
Yes, the public defender got an acquittal. But his client sat in jail for 112 days. A guy with that background in a situation with those facts shouldn't spend a day in jail and the case should never go to trial.
 
It's a shame his family members back home didn't post his bail. Maybe he didin't call them. Maybe he knew they wouldn't. There's a lot about this story we don't know.
 
Lots of additional information over there

1. Mr. Lewis is an IRS official AND writer of three books.
2. The stolen laptop contained his fourth book.
3. His mother from KS contacted the landlord and assured him that she'd be happy to pay rent while her son was in jail.
4. The landlord did not inform Mr. Lewis that he still would be evicted.
5. The landlord evicted Mr. Lewis because of the charges against him that were pending at the time of his eviction.
6. His weapons have been returned.
7. He was able to return to work.
8. There is at least one lawsuit pending at this time (Lewis vs. landlord).

Please spread the news, consider to donate / send postcard [contact: pastor Scott; address see link below] and contact your representative if you're from Iowa ASAP!

I thought you might be interested in additional information and scenarios that were discussed over there without having to rehash them here. The thread below has been closed already after 75 replies and almost 2,500 views.

http://www.thehighroad.org/showthread.php?t=645814

Please OP, I don't mean to hijack your thread / violate any forum rules , just trying to share background information. Feel free to contact me if that's not ok! Thank you very much!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top