HankT
State Researcher
imported post
"The factor [the defense attorney] believes may have worked against his client the most was that Mosier was not armed."
Duh-uh!
Once again, as haseverbeen true before, HankT's Postulate of Civilian Self-Defense (HPCSD)is affirmed.HPCSD's wisdom, validity and accuracy are not even questioned anymore. We simply see the all too frequent corroborations of its logic. Here it is for any who may somehow have not been made aware of it, even though it has diffused widely throughout this land:
It is a bad strategy to shoot an unarmed person.
Remember, HPCSD ALWAYS applies.
This postulate has never been refuted in all the years of its existence. It is an amazingand universally applicable construction. The instant case of the Yalanda Parrishisbutthe most recentexemplar of HPCSD.
Too bad I did not get to her in time.
August 01, 2009
Road rage shooter found guilty
By MATT THACKER
A Clark County jury on Friday found Yalanda Parrish, 39, guilty on one count of class B felony aggravated battery and one count of class C felony criminal recklessness for shooting a Corydon man in the chest after what police described as a June 2008 road-rage incident.
Wesley Mosier Jr., 54, got off his motorcycle at a red light at 10th Street and Allison Lane and approached Parrish’s sports utility vehicle, where she shot him once.
Mosier fought through tears leaving the courtroom as he said the conviction vindicated him.
“I just thank God,” Mosier said. “I’m tremendously thrilled this happened.”
Mosier said he has been called a liar and a racist and felt the defense team tried to humiliate him throughout the trial. He added that he would take a polygraph test to prove he was telling the truth on the stand.
“It happened just the way I said it happened,” Mosier said.
The families of Mosier and Parrish had no reaction as the verdict was read. Parrish’s attorney, Brian Butler, said his client remained stoic and only turned to hug family members.
Circuit Court Judge Dan Moore ordered Parrish immediately to the Michael L. Becher Adult Corrections Complex, where she will be held without bond until sentencing Aug. 18 at 10 a.m. She faces six to 20 years in prison.
A judgment of conviction was only entered for the class B felony because the two charges are considered different levels of the same offense. Indiana guidelines call for a minimum sentence of six years with a maximum of 20 years. The advisory sentence is 10 years.
The jury — comprised of eight white women, three white men and a black man — deliberated for less than three and a half hours.
Prosecutor Steve Stewart said he had anticipated a guilty verdict from the outset.
“Had this verdict not been a guilty verdict, I would have been very worried about what the future would hold for this community,” Stewart said.
Darryl Mosier, 48, said he had not talked to his brother in seven years before the shooting. He said the one silver lining in the incident was that the two have become closer in the last year.
“Justice has been served in my book,” he said after the verdict was read, adding that he hopes Parrish has learned the proper way to use a firearm.
Butler said Parrish continues to believe she was justified in shooting Mosier, but said the jury’s verdict shows the people of Clark County disagree. The factor he believes may have worked against his client the most was that Mosier was not armed.
CLARK COUNTY NOT
THE ‘WILD WEST’
Stewart asked that the jury be the conscience of the community.
“This is not the Wild, Wild West, but even if this was Dodge City, you wouldn’t be able to walk away claiming self-defense after shooting an unarmed man,” Stewart said as he began his closing statements to the jury Friday morning.
Stewart said the jury would have to decide if Parrish truly believed it was necessary to use deadly force and if a reasonable person would believe the amount of force she used was reasonable. He also argued that Parrish had many other options, such as driving away to avoid Mosier or locking her doors.
Butler asked the jury to put themselves in Parrish’s position.
“It’s awfully easy for us to sit back 14 months later and say she shouldn’t have shot Wesley Mosier,” Butler said.
The focus of Butler’s closing arguments was on the reliability of Mosier’s testimony that he only went back to Parrish’s SUV to ask if he had done something wrong.
“He’s telling these lies because he knew what his intention was,” Butler said. “He knew what he was going to do when he got back to that SUV. ... He was going back there, and he meant business.”
Even Stewart admitted that Mosier was not innocent as the two drove down East 10th Street. Witnesses described both vehicles as driving erratically, although Mosier and Parrish have placed the blame solely on the other.
“I’m not sure either one [Mosier or Parrish] is telling the complete truth about what happened between Sportsman Drive and Allison Lane,” Stewart said.
“There is no question Mr. Mosier is not without fault, but did he deserve to die?” Stewart asked.
Stewart pointed to Parrish’s focus on herself as she testified to the grand jury in July 2008.
“I’m so sorry I had to go through this. This has been hard on me,” Parrish was heard saying on an audio tape played in court.
Butler downplayed the importance of those tapes and newly released 911 tapes from the Clark County Sheriff’s Department, when Parrish called 911 to report she had shot someone. In the audio, Parrish can be heard yelling at someone to never run up on her car.
“One person can hear panic. Another person can hear remorse,” Butler said.
Butler said Parrish has been praying for Mosier since the incident.
RACE AN ISSUE DURING
CLOSING ARGUMENTS
During closing arguments, Butler also brought up race for the first time during the trial. He said during closing statements that just like some white people are nervous passing a group of black men, race may have played a part in Parrish’s reaction.
“You have an angry man, who happens to be white [and] who’s driving a motorcycle,” Butler said. “We’re all kidding ourselves if we don’t think that created extra apprehension.”
Butler defended his decision to bring up race by saying it is only one of many factors that went into explaining why Parrish was scared for her safety. Butler said it is not his job to be politically correct.
The attorney said after the verdict was read that he did not believe the jury’s racial makeup had an effect on the outcome.
BOTH SIDES PREPARE FOR SENTENCING LATER THIS MONTH
Butler said he believes there will be no aggravating factors and several major mitigating factors that could lead to a lighter sentence. Parrish had never previously been charged with a crime, and Butler said the judge can take into consideration that other factors led to the situation.
Butler also noted that, by virtue of her felony conviction, Parrish will not be allowed to purchase another firearm.
“We don’t need to put Yalanda Parrish in jail to protect the community,” Butler said.
Stewart said there may be some additional evidence that was left out of the trial that may be considered at sentencing.
Stewart said earlier in the day that he was disappointed that all of the evidence was not allowed into evidence.
The evidence ruled inadmissible in court included Mosier’s criminal history, Parrish’s previous alleged road-rage incident and frequent 911 calls, and witness testimony that Parrish’s 15-year-old son kicked and cursed at Mosier after the shooting.
“Anytime the truth is kept from the jury, I have a hard time swallowing it,” Stewart said. “You’re basically saying the jury is too stupid to understand.”
Stewart said he will argue for a “substantial amount of jail time” at sentencing.
“It’s only by an act of God we’re not here on murder charges,” Stewart said.
Mosier said there had been an agreement between both parties Thursday that likely would have resulted in much less jail time. Butler confirmed his client rejected the offer, but the terms of that informal agreement were not released.
Butler said he could not comment on a possible appeal because he does not handle the appeals process.
The court staff said that none of the jurors — known only throughout the trial by numbers assigned to them — wanted to speak to the media.
[url]http://www.newsandtribune.com/local/local_story_213025027.html[/url]
"The factor [the defense attorney] believes may have worked against his client the most was that Mosier was not armed."
Duh-uh!
Once again, as haseverbeen true before, HankT's Postulate of Civilian Self-Defense (HPCSD)is affirmed.HPCSD's wisdom, validity and accuracy are not even questioned anymore. We simply see the all too frequent corroborations of its logic. Here it is for any who may somehow have not been made aware of it, even though it has diffused widely throughout this land:
It is a bad strategy to shoot an unarmed person.
Remember, HPCSD ALWAYS applies.
This postulate has never been refuted in all the years of its existence. It is an amazingand universally applicable construction. The instant case of the Yalanda Parrishisbutthe most recentexemplar of HPCSD.
Too bad I did not get to her in time.
August 01, 2009
Road rage shooter found guilty
By MATT THACKER
A Clark County jury on Friday found Yalanda Parrish, 39, guilty on one count of class B felony aggravated battery and one count of class C felony criminal recklessness for shooting a Corydon man in the chest after what police described as a June 2008 road-rage incident.
Wesley Mosier Jr., 54, got off his motorcycle at a red light at 10th Street and Allison Lane and approached Parrish’s sports utility vehicle, where she shot him once.
Mosier fought through tears leaving the courtroom as he said the conviction vindicated him.
“I just thank God,” Mosier said. “I’m tremendously thrilled this happened.”
Mosier said he has been called a liar and a racist and felt the defense team tried to humiliate him throughout the trial. He added that he would take a polygraph test to prove he was telling the truth on the stand.
“It happened just the way I said it happened,” Mosier said.
The families of Mosier and Parrish had no reaction as the verdict was read. Parrish’s attorney, Brian Butler, said his client remained stoic and only turned to hug family members.
Circuit Court Judge Dan Moore ordered Parrish immediately to the Michael L. Becher Adult Corrections Complex, where she will be held without bond until sentencing Aug. 18 at 10 a.m. She faces six to 20 years in prison.
A judgment of conviction was only entered for the class B felony because the two charges are considered different levels of the same offense. Indiana guidelines call for a minimum sentence of six years with a maximum of 20 years. The advisory sentence is 10 years.
The jury — comprised of eight white women, three white men and a black man — deliberated for less than three and a half hours.
Prosecutor Steve Stewart said he had anticipated a guilty verdict from the outset.
“Had this verdict not been a guilty verdict, I would have been very worried about what the future would hold for this community,” Stewart said.
Darryl Mosier, 48, said he had not talked to his brother in seven years before the shooting. He said the one silver lining in the incident was that the two have become closer in the last year.
“Justice has been served in my book,” he said after the verdict was read, adding that he hopes Parrish has learned the proper way to use a firearm.
Butler said Parrish continues to believe she was justified in shooting Mosier, but said the jury’s verdict shows the people of Clark County disagree. The factor he believes may have worked against his client the most was that Mosier was not armed.
CLARK COUNTY NOT
THE ‘WILD WEST’
Stewart asked that the jury be the conscience of the community.
“This is not the Wild, Wild West, but even if this was Dodge City, you wouldn’t be able to walk away claiming self-defense after shooting an unarmed man,” Stewart said as he began his closing statements to the jury Friday morning.
Stewart said the jury would have to decide if Parrish truly believed it was necessary to use deadly force and if a reasonable person would believe the amount of force she used was reasonable. He also argued that Parrish had many other options, such as driving away to avoid Mosier or locking her doors.
Butler asked the jury to put themselves in Parrish’s position.
“It’s awfully easy for us to sit back 14 months later and say she shouldn’t have shot Wesley Mosier,” Butler said.
The focus of Butler’s closing arguments was on the reliability of Mosier’s testimony that he only went back to Parrish’s SUV to ask if he had done something wrong.
“He’s telling these lies because he knew what his intention was,” Butler said. “He knew what he was going to do when he got back to that SUV. ... He was going back there, and he meant business.”
Even Stewart admitted that Mosier was not innocent as the two drove down East 10th Street. Witnesses described both vehicles as driving erratically, although Mosier and Parrish have placed the blame solely on the other.
“I’m not sure either one [Mosier or Parrish] is telling the complete truth about what happened between Sportsman Drive and Allison Lane,” Stewart said.
“There is no question Mr. Mosier is not without fault, but did he deserve to die?” Stewart asked.
Stewart pointed to Parrish’s focus on herself as she testified to the grand jury in July 2008.
“I’m so sorry I had to go through this. This has been hard on me,” Parrish was heard saying on an audio tape played in court.
Butler downplayed the importance of those tapes and newly released 911 tapes from the Clark County Sheriff’s Department, when Parrish called 911 to report she had shot someone. In the audio, Parrish can be heard yelling at someone to never run up on her car.
“One person can hear panic. Another person can hear remorse,” Butler said.
Butler said Parrish has been praying for Mosier since the incident.
RACE AN ISSUE DURING
CLOSING ARGUMENTS
During closing arguments, Butler also brought up race for the first time during the trial. He said during closing statements that just like some white people are nervous passing a group of black men, race may have played a part in Parrish’s reaction.
“You have an angry man, who happens to be white [and] who’s driving a motorcycle,” Butler said. “We’re all kidding ourselves if we don’t think that created extra apprehension.”
Butler defended his decision to bring up race by saying it is only one of many factors that went into explaining why Parrish was scared for her safety. Butler said it is not his job to be politically correct.
The attorney said after the verdict was read that he did not believe the jury’s racial makeup had an effect on the outcome.
BOTH SIDES PREPARE FOR SENTENCING LATER THIS MONTH
Butler said he believes there will be no aggravating factors and several major mitigating factors that could lead to a lighter sentence. Parrish had never previously been charged with a crime, and Butler said the judge can take into consideration that other factors led to the situation.
Butler also noted that, by virtue of her felony conviction, Parrish will not be allowed to purchase another firearm.
“We don’t need to put Yalanda Parrish in jail to protect the community,” Butler said.
Stewart said there may be some additional evidence that was left out of the trial that may be considered at sentencing.
Stewart said earlier in the day that he was disappointed that all of the evidence was not allowed into evidence.
The evidence ruled inadmissible in court included Mosier’s criminal history, Parrish’s previous alleged road-rage incident and frequent 911 calls, and witness testimony that Parrish’s 15-year-old son kicked and cursed at Mosier after the shooting.
“Anytime the truth is kept from the jury, I have a hard time swallowing it,” Stewart said. “You’re basically saying the jury is too stupid to understand.”
Stewart said he will argue for a “substantial amount of jail time” at sentencing.
“It’s only by an act of God we’re not here on murder charges,” Stewart said.
Mosier said there had been an agreement between both parties Thursday that likely would have resulted in much less jail time. Butler confirmed his client rejected the offer, but the terms of that informal agreement were not released.
Butler said he could not comment on a possible appeal because he does not handle the appeals process.
The court staff said that none of the jurors — known only throughout the trial by numbers assigned to them — wanted to speak to the media.
[url]http://www.newsandtribune.com/local/local_story_213025027.html[/url]
