Man acquitted in shooting is 'happy to be free', but now is homeless

Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you:

No adverts like this in the forums anymore.
Times and dates in your local timezone.
Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance.
Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely.
Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net.

If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

**Lordhat**

http://www.desmoinesregister.com/article/20120222/NEWS01/302220033/Man-acquitted-in-shooting-is-happy-to-be-free-

Editor's note/update to this story: Jay Rodney Lewis (read about him below) spent Tuesday night in his car because there were no beds available at the YMCA.

He likely will do the same tonight, then seek a spot in a homeless shelter on Thursday. This will give him place to sleep and shower for the time being while working. He plans to spend this weekend in Kansas with family.

112 days in jail
The first thing Jay Rodney Lewis did after being acquitted this month was “go to Fuddruckers and get me a burger. Because that jail food was horrible.”

While he ate, the 49-year-old Lewis nervously watched out the window for police. “I was so scared that somebody was going to come in and say, ‘OK, that’s it. You’re coming with us,’ ” he said.

One couldn’t blame him. Lewis had just finished 112 days in jail because he didn’t have the cash to make bail. When jurors finally freed him on Feb. 9, Lewis walked out homeless, unemployed and minus most of his possessions.

The average prisoner spends 20 days in the Polk County Jail, officials there say. Most make bail and carry on with their lives while awaiting trial. But for Lewis, one thing after another went wrong.

Lewis’ story, a lawyer for the Iowa chapter of the American Civil Liberties Union said, is “not an unusual constellation of problems for a person in jail to have.”

“I think it’s pretty typical,” said the ACLU’s Randall Wilson. “I think the statistics show that people suffer these types of hardships when people remain in jail.”

Troubles began in late October
Lewis, a Kansas native, moved to West Des Moines in fall 2010 to take a job in an Internal Revenue Service call center.

A former security guard and law enforcement officer, Lewis also is a hunter and gun collector and came to Iowa with a permit to carry a concealed weapon.

Police reports and court records say Lewis’ troubles began shortly before midnight on Oct. 29. Lewis was headed home in his blue Ford Mustang, south on 11th Street toward Regency Woods Apartments in West Des Moines, when he came upon a Ford Taurus driven by James Scott Ludwick, 35.

Ludwick, a former soldier and convicted felon, was driving four people home from a Halloween party. Documents say Ludwick slowed; Lewis passed him. Ludwick sped up, and the cars raced down 11th Street until they came to Regency Woods. They collided when Lewis, in front and on the right, started to turn left.

Lewis said Ludwick and a passenger, Justin Lossner, got out of the Taurus and began punching the Mustang’s windows.

They backed off when Lewis pulled out his .380-caliber pistol. But they came back.

Lewis said he was outside his car, evaluating its damage, when he caught Ludwick and Lossner trying to sneak up on him from two different directions.

The recording of a 911 call made by Lewis begins with Lewis yelling at the two to “just stay where you are. Get back! Get back! I’m going to start shooting!”

There are exchanges of profanities while Lewis explains the situation to a police dispatcher. Then, “Get away from me. Get away from me!” And a bang.

911 call: Jay Rodney Lewis reports assault, shooting attacker

Ludwick was shot, Lewis said, when Ludwick turned away as if to retreat, then spun back and charged. Records say the bullet hit Ludwick in his chest above the right pectoral muscle, then tore through his right bicep.

Jurors found Lewis’ actions entirely appropriate.

“He gave them fair warning,” jury forewoman Nancy Alberts said. “Normally, anybody that would pull a gun on someone, you would think that they would stop. ... That wasn’t the case here. You could clearly hear on the 911 call where he warned Mr. Ludwick.”

Ludwick, who had a blood-alcohol level of 0.189 when tested at the hospital that night, did not return phone calls requesting comment. Court records show his history includes multiple convictions for felony theft.

West Des Moines police arrested Lewis for failing to back off and avoid the gunplay. He was charged with two counts of intimidation with a dangerous weapon and one of going armed with intent.

The initial bail asked Lewis to post $225,000 cash.

Lewis, who made $32,359 a year at the IRS, didn’t have the money. So he sat in jail.

Eviction notice posted on door
One week after the shooting, a lawyer for Regency Woods typed up a notice that eventually was posted on the door of Lewis’ apartment. It described Lewis as a “clear and present danger to the health or safety of the other tenants.” As evidence, it cited Lewis’ involvement in “an assault with a weapon within 1,000 feet of the property described above” and the fact that he’d been arrested because of it.

Court papers were filed Nov. 14 to have Lewis evicted.

Documents say a process server tried twice the next day to contact Lewis at the apartment. Lawyers also sent him a certified letter. Lewis was never there.

Despite the fact that Regency Woods knew Lewis had been arrested, no one ever contacted him at the jail. Instead, the apartment complex won a default judgment when Lewis failed to appear in court on Nov. 22.

Lewis learned about all this at roughly 7:30 a.m. on Nov. 30. One jail guard led him to another, who was on the phone. The deputy serving the eviction warrant wanted to know if Lewis had any relatives who could get Lewis’ belongings off the 11th Street curb.

“All my relatives are in Kansas,” Lewis said.

The evicting deputy seized four handguns, three rifles, a shotgun and a machete that had been left in the apartment. But all his clothing and furniture disappeared on Nov. 30, along with a laptop containing the only copy of his fourth novel (a western).

“That was several decades of my life that got flushed down the toilet,” Lewis said. “I had a beautiful flat-screen TV. It’s now in somebody else’s living room. … For a while there, every time I turned around it was like, ‘Can it possibly get any worse?’ ”

Joseph Wallace, the lawyer who signed the eviction notice, did not return a call requesting comment.

Matt Sheeley, Lewis’ public defender in the case, said Regency Woods either knew or should have known, thanks to court and jail websites, that Lewis was still locked up.

“There are a lot of things that they could have done that they didn’t, and because of their lack of effort, all of Jay’s personal belongings are now gone,” Sheeley said.

Sheeley learned of the eviction later, when Lewis was rejected by a program that routinely frees first-time offenders based on the theory that people with jobs and a strong support system aren’t flight risks.

The program passed on Lewis because he “had no place to go,” Sheeley said. “Normally, if he had family here in Des Moines, if he had some place other than his apartment to go, he would have been released.”

Lewis’ bond eventually was lowered to $35,000 on Nov. 23. But he still couldn’t come up with the 10 percent, or $3,500, he needed to get out.

The worst part was spending Christmas in jail.

Nobody came to visit, Lewis said. “Frankly, I was too ashamed.”

Jury reaches verdict quickly
Prosecutors eventually dropped most of the charges. Trial on the sole remaining count, reckless use of a firearm causing injury, began on Feb. 6. and ended late on Feb. 8.

It was over early the following morning.

“I just don’t think the state did its job to prove he was guilty,” juror Mary Kinney said. “I think the man felt he was in danger.”

Lewis thinks it should have been obvious to everyone from the beginning that he was in the right.

“I went to jail for one reason and one reason only,” he said. “I’m a black man. James Ludwick is a white man. I think the police had a preconceived notion in their head as to what went on.”

West Des Moines police say that “the arrest of Mr. Lewis was based off of the investigative findings, and race played no part in that decision-making process.”

Police Sgt. Ken O’Brien said in an email that his department “believes in the equitable, fair and impartial application of laws and ordinances without regard to race, color, creed, sex or station in life; treating individuals with tolerance, compassion, empathy and with the dignity we would expect when found in similar circumstances.”

Polk County Attorney John Sarcone said that he accepted the jury’s verdict but that the case deserved to go to trial because Lewis’ actions raised a sufficient number of questions.

“We just don’t allow people to go shoot people,” he said. “Using deadly force is a last resort. It shouldn’t be the first resort.”

Lewis’ case appears to fit the scenario envisioned by House File 573, a bill now working its way through the Legislature. It would expand current law to specify that a potential victim in a violent situation has “no duty to retreat” and has the right to “meet force with force.”

The legislation, which Sarcone argued against before a House subcommittee last month, also says a person cannot be prosecuted for using force against someone perceived to pose a threat, even if that perception is later proved incorrect.

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.”

Lewis, who planned to stay at the YMCA, was able to get his job back and went back for the first time Tuesday.

He’s hoping to get a transfer to Kansas City.

“I’m happy to be free, really happy, to be breathing free air,” Lewis said. “But I don’t feel whole yet.”

I'm not real happy that he played the race card here, it's pretty much a given that if you shoot somebody you're going to go on trial. Even in self defense shooting another person is a crime. The trial is to determine whether the crime was justified or not. I'd have spent the time in jail as well. Bail is outrageous nowadays.

**d-usa**

Actually, self defense shootings don't have to go to trial. The District Attorney will determine if he believes the shooting was justified. If he/she thinks it was not, then it will go to a grand jury/trial.

**Stormrider**

d-usa wrote:Actually, self defense shootings don't have to go to trial. The District Attorney will determine if he believes the shooting was justified. If he/she thinks it was not, then it will go to a grand jury/trial.

Depends on state laws & statutes. Some states require a trial in order to prove self-defense.

**sebster**

What happened to that guy really sucked.

I think it's important not to get too caught up the case in question, but to look at what happens to someone when they're charged with a crime. $220k in bail is just ridiculous, and $35k is not much better. That means anyone who isn't very wealthy is stuck spending all the time until their trial in prison - and I think this guy can count himself lucky that took only 112 days.

The guy held a job, he had no criminal record, and the crime was of a one-off nature, it's ridiculous to think of him as a flight risk. He should have been released, and left to get on with his life as best he could up until the trial.

**Ouze**

Lordhat wrote:I'm not real happy that he played the race card here

Especially when the very first google result for "Iowa self defense shooting" is a white guy who shot another guy in self defense with no priors and got $250k bail.

I think prosecutorial discretion should have been better employed in the OP's case, but of course I neither heard the tape nor am familiar with Iowa's statutes regarding such shootings, for all I know you need a trial no matter how obviously righteous the shooting was.

**Melissia**

"You could clearly hear on the 911 call where he warned Mr. Ludwick.”

Completely justified. HE did more than what likely would have been required in Texas anyway.

sebster wrote:The guy held a job, he had no criminal record, and the crime was of a one-off nature, it's ridiculous to think of him as a flight risk. He should have been released, and left to get on with his life as best he could up until the trial.

Indeed, it's an utter travesty that it's ended up this way...

**Ouze**

Melissia wrote:HE did more than what likely would have been required in Texas anyway.

But, as I understand it, Texas has unusually strong protections for shooters, is that not so? Iowa is not a castle doctrine state.

**Melissia**

Texas has strong protection for self defense rights, not shooting in general. But a gun is an acceptable means by which you can defend yourself in Texas.

**Ouze**

That isn't quite the case in Iowa, yet, although it's been in the works for a while. There have been concerns that even non-violent burglars may be killed, which in my opinion is sort of an occupational hazard of being a burglar. But eh.

**deathholydeath**

This in an absolute travesty. It makes me happy I live in a state with castle laws. Good luck to Mr. Lewis.

**Frazzled**

Melissia wrote:
"You could clearly hear on the 911 call where he warned Mr. Ludwick.”
Completely justified. HE did more than what likely would have been required in Texas anyway.
sebster wrote:The guy held a job, he had no criminal record, and the crime was of a one-off nature, it's ridiculous to think of him as a flight risk. He should have been released, and left to get on with his life as best he could up until the trial.
Indeed, it's an utter travesty that it's ended up this way...

He likely would have been no billed, much less a trial.

**WarOne**

I really think this is a shame on two levels:

One- the man was a former police officer and it seems no criminal background. By that right, the courts should of seen this man as capable of making decisions as he had to do in the heat of the moment and not lose his cool.

Two- As much as race is said not to be apart of the decision-
it is a city with only a 10.89% African American composition. Such a small population breeds indifference if not suspicion and isolation from the large ethnic majority of the citizens of the city.

Case in point-

http://www.city-data.com/forum/des-moines/341855-race-des-moines-5.html

lindsay26 wrote:I don't wanna seem mean or tick anyone off, but this is not a very diverse city in comparison with others. The fact is that sure, we have some minorities, but we are an overwhelming white city. Are there problems? Yes, but I don't think any greater than anywhere else. But I do think that people tend to ignore the problem here. Try and cover it up with political correctness. I graduated from Roosevelt High School, which has a large minority population. The teachers would always praise the school for its great diversity, but there was just one problem; the different racial and ethnic groups did not really hang out together, and many times conflict arose between different groups. I recall one of the hallways being referred to as the "black hallway". If you were white, it just wasn't the best place to be. It wasn't like you would have gotten beaten, but you had to expect a little verbal harassment from time to time for entering the hallway. There was even a "black lot", where African-American students parked their cars, and everyone else left it alone for the most part. This is just the reality of the situation. I am not trying to be a racist, but it happens here just like everywhere else. I think alot of people in this town try to sound pious and non-racist, but I think in the privacy of their own homes, they are secretly muttering what they really think.

**Orlanth**

The loss of the laptop will be the kicker, because of his data, especially his book and the loss of his personal effects.

The TV etc he will get back when he sues and the state plus firms involved in the eviction are forced to settle out of court for a very large sum. This story if it goes viral will result in a major cash award. So far its only in the Des Moines Register.

He may havwe no cash, but a he could get a barracuda in a flash suit to take up this case pro bono real easy.

How much is an unpublished novel worth, and how do you evaluate the time investment. mental cruelty, incompetence its all there. Just leave raced out of it without good evidence.
A nasty lawyer can make a real deal of this.

I bet the company who evicted him have a pucker factor already.

**KingCracker**

d-usa wrote:Actually, self defense shootings don't have to go to trial. The District Attorney will determine if he believes the shooting was justified. If he/she thinks it was not, then it will go to a grand jury/trial.

No this is pretty much right. My oldest brother was involved in a shooting, he has a CCW and a guy tried to car jack him at gun point, my brother got out as the man asked, and then he positioned himself so he could then draw and shoot the guy. The police took his statement, passed it on to the DA, and he saw it as a rightful shooting. Nuff said.

I too think the race card is a bit of a worn out argument. Honestly, I think the guy just had gak luck TBH

**WarOne**

KingCracker wrote:I too think the race card is a bit of a worn out argument. Honestly, I think the guy just had gak luck TBH

Regardless, the man did suggest in statement-

“I went to jail for one reason and one reason only,” he said. “I’m a black man. James Ludwick is a white man. I think the police had a preconceived notion in their head as to what went on.”

It will become an issue at some point if he decides to take legal action.

Suffice to say, he does not seem like that kind of person. More likely, his story will garner him some sympathy and charity to help him get back on his feet.

**KingCracker**

Im all for it though, from that story, it did indeed sound like he was completely in the right, alcohol or not, he clearly told that guy to back off, numerous times. Hopefully he gets that charity and gets his life back

**WarOne**

KingCracker wrote:Im all for it though, from that story, it did indeed sound like he was completely in the right, alcohol or not, he clearly told that guy to back off, numerous times. Hopefully he gets that charity and gets his life back

I looked at the story and then around the webs and it doesn't seem like a significant story to garner much attention. As such, his story is barely beating out the Chicken McNugget that looks like George Washington Story on the newspaper's website.

**daedalus**

WarOne wrote:
KingCracker wrote:I too think the race card is a bit of a worn out argument. Honestly, I think the guy just had gak luck TBH

Regardless, the man did suggest in statement-

“I went to jail for one reason and one reason only,” he said. “I’m a black man. James Ludwick is a white man. I think the police had a preconceived notion in their head as to what went on.”

It will become an issue at some point if he decides to take legal action.

Suffice to say, he does not seem like that kind of person. More likely, his story will garner him some sympathy and charity to help him get back on his feet.

I'm no fan of the race card either, but it's the same tactic that the police will use against people, innocent or otherwise: throw every last thing you can against them in the hopes that, even if what you actually got them on doesn't stick, maybe something else will. The racial element is just the last resort, assuming he can't get anywhere on any of his legit claims.

gak luck shouldn't have anything to do with this. Justice and dealing with law enforcement shouldn't be a roulette wheel. It too often seems to be.

**WarOne**

Also, it appears the prosecuting attorney is not well loved in the community just by going through the story's comments on the website.

Someone even accuses him of setting up these evictions in order to make a profit.

**hotsauceman1**

Orlanth wrote:The loss of the laptop will be the kicker, because of his data, especially his book and the loss of his personal effects.

The TV etc he will get back when he sues and the state plus firms involved in the eviction are forced to settle out of court for a very large sum. This story if it goes viral will result in a major cash award. So far its only in the Des Moines Register.

He may havwe no cash, but a he could get a barracuda in a flash suit to take up this case pro bono real easy.

How much is an unpublished novel worth, and how do you evaluate the time investment. mental cruelty, incompetence its all there. Just leave raced out of it without good evidence.
A nasty lawyer can make a real deal of this.

I bet the company who evicted him have a pucker factor already.

Hopefully the ACLU will fight a case for him.
But yeah, this is an utter travesty. And we say jails work. ll ail did for this man is turn him into someone MORE liekly to commit a crime.

**Frazzled**

Sorry but he has an action against the apartment/apartment attorney potentially, but I don't see anything against the city.

**KingCracker**

WarOne wrote:Also, it appears the prosecuting attorney is not well loved in the community just by going through the story's comments on the website.

Someone even accuses him of setting up these evictions in order to make a profit.

Hurray, another corrupt official

**hotsauceman1**

KingCracker wrote:
WarOne wrote:Also, it appears the prosecuting attorney is not well loved in the community just by going through the story's comments on the website.

Someone even accuses him of setting up these evictions in order to make a profit.

Hurray, another corrupt official

Sense when is an official no corrupt?

**KingCracker**

It can happen.......I knew a pretty fair and balanced Judge years ago

**Orlanth**

Frazzled wrote:Sorry but he has an action against the apartment/apartment attorney potentially, but I don't see anything against the city.

The city has a duty of care and civic responsibility. Person is incarcerated prior to conviction, so they had a civic duty to bring to attention issues that would infringe the defendants rights or property. Matters were passed in a civic court under the local jurisdiction without any recourse to representation for fault of the state due to incarceration. The bail officer should have taken matters into account.

To add to this the unrealistic bail set for the defendant meant he hasd no recourse. Finally he is liable to compensation in regards to time served and possible additional comepsation depending on what he had to go through in prison, if anything. Which is not unlikely if it got out he was a former law enforcement officer. Ex cops can hacve a hard time inside, and if they dont there is an additional fear factor in the event that the inmates past history got out.
So much a good lawyer can run with.

To a large extent what happened to the mans property is a case that is settleable even if he was convicted.

Automatically Appended Next Post:

hotsauceman1 wrote:
KingCracker wrote:
Hurray, another corrupt official

Sense when is an official not corrupt?

I have met a fair few actually, and some pay the price for their lack of corruption.

Take this man for example:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/scotland/north_east/7139605.stm

Voted with his conscience and paid the price.

**Frazzled**

The city has a duty of care and civic responsibility. Person is incarcerated prior to conviction, so they had a civic duty to bring to attention issues that would infringe the defendants rights or property.
***Please show me the case or statutory law in that location to support that statement. They have a duty of care to the person. They have some minimal duty to protect the property under their direct care.

Everything else however is third party. Absent a prosecutors improper interest in the apartment, they are not going to have duty.

Matters were passed in a civic court under the local jurisdiction without any recourse to representation for fault of the state due to incarceration. The bail officer should have taken matters into account.
***Nope. The state has no duty here. The state has no duty for notice. The state has no duty to help the prisoner with legal counsel. Its all completely separate from the potential criminal action. Again he MIGHT have an action against the apartment and attorney for failure to provide notice, but even that’s tangential as they followed required notice procedures (I’m making that inference due to the specificity of the notice procedures they followed). Again the local jurisdiction may have further specific statutes on this matter that change the situation.

To add to this the unrealistic bail set for the defendant meant he hasd no recourse.
***Its not unrealistic. He shot at least one person. That’s potentially reasonable bail at the outset. Again that depends on the jurisdiction. Life sucks but then you die so it all works out.

Finally he is liable to compensation in regards to time served and possible additional comepsation depending on what he had to go through in prison, if anything. Which is not unlikely if it got out he was a former law enforcement officer. Ex cops can hacve a hard time inside, and if they dont there is an additional fear factor in the event that the inmates past history got out.
So much a good lawyer can run with.

***no, none actually. There’s no statement that the prosecutor/police hid evidence or anything of the sort. He was not illegally found guilty of a crime. He was not illegally held. It sucks but if you can’t make bail you get to stay in jail.

To a large extent what happened to the mans property is a case that is settleable even if he was convicted.
***I wouldn’t settle for gak. I agree with the person and feel for him but no one else has liability here. Again life sucks, then you die.

**purplefood**

Seems he should have some compensation for that...
From someone at any rate...
He should at least be allowed his stuff back...

**Great White**

It's a shame. The man lost everything, had to spend almost four months in jail. All for trying to defend himself. Now the race thing was uncalled for, but it's just sad.

**sebster**

deathholydeath wrote:This in an absolute travesty. It makes me happy I live in a state with castle laws. Good luck to Mr. Lewis.

I think there's a bigger point, though. This doesn't just happen to people accused in shootings, it can happen because someone disingenuously accused you of rape, or countless other situations that might end up with you being exhonerated in a court of law, but your life absolutely screwed anyway.

The point is that setting such stupidly high bail for a person who is of otherwise good standing is forcing people to spend the time up until their trail in prison.

**dogma**

sebster wrote:
The point is that setting such stupidly high bail for a person who is of otherwise good standing is forcing people to spend the time up until their trail in prison.

Yep. It is punishment without conviction.