SO shoots Southern University fan

[Mr. Security]

That this is an unjustified shooting is not being questioned. What I AM questioning is that the victim didn't do anything but get out of his parked vehicle before he was shot. Does that add up to you? His family said that he wasn't confrontational, so why did he park in a no parking area and then get out of his vehicle instead of moving it?

[EMTGuard]

Family sues SO, Service, client

SOURCE- http://wafb.com/Global/story.asp?S=5557830

Family of Man Killed at Southern Game Sues Security Guard

Oct 18, 2006 04:07 PM CDT




BATON ROUGE, La. (AP) - Family members of a man killed while trying to help a friend park at a Southern University football game last month have sued the security guard accused of firing the shot, the guard's employer and the credit union that paid for the security.

Lynette Adams and Brian Byrd, the children of 59-year-old Freddie Jackson, who died from a single gunshot wound to his stomach, filed the lawsuit in Baton Rouge state court.

Named as defendants are security guard Curtis Lilly, Baton Rouge Security Guards and Southern Teachers and Parents Federal Credit Union.

Lilly is in East Baton Rouge Parish Prison after being indicted on a count of second-degree murder in the September ninth slaying of Jackson.

A credit union official, Richard Turnley, has said Lilly was sent over by the security guard company it hired to protect cars parked in its lot during Southern's game against Mississippi Valley State. The credit union is across from A-W Mumford Stadium.

In the lawsuit, Jackson's children are seeking to recover damages for medical assistance their father received, his pain and suffering and loss of wages. They are also seeking to recover damages for loss of affection, funeral expenses and their own medical expenses.

[FDG06]

This is just bad all the way around...further establishing the general public opinion, that SO's / SG's are all a bunch of undertrained, bumbling tin star's.

It doesnt matter how uncooperative this person was, he clearly didnt deserve to be shot...a good SG, heck any dumb SG would have done a million things different, including towing the car at owners expense once he left it to go to the game, but we are not dealing with a good trained SG..hell, not even an SG since 04, just a man with a gun & bad stress management skills....

The jerk we all should hold most responsable & up for public crucifixtion, is the supposed 'security company' owner, whose long list of abuses & general disregard for state law, placed an untrained person in prison, another in the grave & ruined at least 3 families!
Yoda

[EMTGuard]

SO pleads insanity in shooting

http://wafb.com/Global/story.asp?S=6237235

Guard Charged in Killing Man after SU Game Changes Plea

March 16, 2007 11:07 AM CDT


The security guard accused of killing a man during a Southern University football game will now be pleading insanity.

Curtis Lilly of Baton Rouge was protecting a parking lot last year when he allegedly killed 59-year-old Freddie Jackson of Port Allen.

The unlicensed security guard has changed his 'not guilty' plea to 'not guilty by reason of insanity.'

A state district judge has ordered that Lilly be evaluated by both a psychiatrist and a psychologist.

Lilly has been indicted on one count of second-degree murder.

[Mr. Security]

Sounds like the financial institution compliance officer screwed up. You're FIRED!!!

[SecTrainer]

Sounds like the financial institution compliance officer screwed up. You're FIRED!!!

The security arrangement seems to have been handled very badly in terms of due diligence, for sure. At least one of the articles implies that it was done by a phone call at the last minute, although we don't know that for sure. What does seem obvious is that no one checked the company's (or the officer's) licenses, let alone insurance (the company would have had none, I'm sure), experience, reputation, etc.

This property has been in proximity to the university for years, one would assume, and no doubt the university has football games and other events every year, with their associated parking issues. As such, the need for security and parking control during such events would have been completely foreseeable by the credit union. There would have been ample opportunity for the credit union to set up a contract with a properly licensed, insured security company that was thoroughly checked out.

Finally, in the law of negligence there's a well-recognized duty for those who contract with others for many kinds of services (construction, transportation, security, etc.) - especially when the service relates to public safety - to exercise reasonable care to verify the contractor's licensing, bonding, insurance, training, experience, capability to perform the service, etc. The final elements - proximal cause and harm - won't be hard to show, of course.

A possible avenue of defense for the credit union might be that the officer was acting outside the scope of his contractual duties, that they did not request an armed officer, etc., but such defenses don't fare nearly as well in court as they once did, especially under a more recent theory of negligence - inadequate supervision. Nor can the credit union show that meeting it's duty would have been extraordinarily burdensome because a simple phone call and/or Internet inquiry to the state board would have been all it took to eliminate this "security company" from consideration.

So...you've got all the elements: a duty to perform with foreseeability, opportunity and no undue burden to do so, proximal causation and measurable harm. KA-CHING!

Real damages might not be all that high because the victim was 59 (limiting the calculations of lost earnings, etc.)...but he had emergency surgery and intensive care (figure $100,000, minimum). Toss in emotional distress, loss of companionship, and don't forget those those punitive damages! Just sit down now and write out a couple of checks totalling $million at least. (You can make those out to the law firm of Dewey, Cheatham and Howe for $999,999 and to the victim's family for $1.)

[Mr. Security]

Insanity Defense

This isn't going to fly. Further complicating this ex-guard’s defense is that the public dislikes security guards and they will put themselves in the victim's shoes, especially since illegal parking is a commonplace event.

I don't know if this guy had an offer to plea to a lesser offense or not. If he did, he may have been better off cutting his losses and staying out of court.

[SecTrainer]

This isn't going to fly. Further complicating this ex-guard’s defense is that the public dislikes security guards and they will put themselves in the victim's shoes, especially since illegal parking is a commonplace event.

I don't know if this guy had an offer to plea to a lesser offense or not. If he did, he may have been better off cutting his losses and staying out of court.

Of course, he might be receiving legal advice that if he pleads out to any criminal charge it will be brought into the civil lawsuit and that he has at least some slim chance of beating the criminal charge - perhaps on some theory of self-defense, etc. We have to admit that the stories have been slanted in terms of the actual confrontation (they make it sound like the vic was a lovable old choirboy who did absolutely nothing - which is unlikely, or he would have simply complied with the officer's request). We don't know for sure that the vic didn't pull a knife, grab a tire iron or make some other move that was equally threatening. Plus, the vic was "helping his friend park" as one story goes, and yet nothing whatsoever has been mentioned about what the friend's actions were in the incident.

So - his attorney might have something to work with, especially if he thinks the officer has been "over-charged" with 2nd homicide. It's easier to beat over-charged cases simply because all of the elements can't be shown, especially in court systems where juries are not permitted to find defendants guilty of lesser charges. In that case, it's "all or nothing" with respect to the specific charges laid against the defendant.

Over-charging is basically what happened in the Duke lacrosse rape case.

[Mr. Security]

Of course, he might be receiving legal advice that if he pleads out to any criminal charge it will be brought into the civil lawsuit and that he has at least some slim chance of beating the criminal charge - perhaps on some theory of self-defense, etc. We have to admit that the stories have been slanted in terms of the actual confrontation (they make it sound like the vic was a lovable old choirboy who did absolutely nothing - which is unlikely, or he would have simply complied with the officer's request). We don't know for sure that the vic didn't pull a knife, grab a tire iron or make some other move that was equally threatening. Plus, the vic was "helping his friend park" as one story goes, and yet nothing whatsoever has been mentioned about what the friend's actions were in the incident.

So - his attorney might have something to work with, especially if he thinks the officer has been "over-charged" with 2nd homicide. It's easier to beat over-charged cases simply because all of the elements can't be shown, especially in court systems where juries are not permitted to find defendants guilty of lesser charges. In that case, it's "all or nothing" with respect to the specific charges laid against the defendant.

Over-charging is basically what happened in the Duke lacrosse rape case.

Makes sense, except that he changed his plea which indicates that self-defense isn't a sound defense for his case. I don't know all the details, but his plea of not guilty by reason of insanity seems like a last resort.

[SecTrainer]

Makes sense, except that he changed his plea which indicates that self-defense isn't a sound defense for his case. I don't know all the details, but his plea of not guilty by reason of insanity seems like a last resort.

Oh, sorry - I missed that information as I was coming up to speed on this thread. I agree - insanity is almost always a "desperation" plea. If he should prevail in that defense, it will be even worse news for the credit union defendant in the civil case.

[EMTGuard]

Is He Crazy???

Source- http://www.2theadvocate.com/news/829...?showAll=y&c=y

Man’s mental health questioned

By ADRIAN ANGELETTE
Advocate staff writer
Published: Jul 3, 2007 - Page: 4B

The former security guard accused of killing a Southern University football fan prior to a game in the fall began having psychological problems when he was in basic military training years ago, a lawyer said Monday.

Curtis Lilly, 42, of Baton Rouge has raised insanity as a possible defense in the Sept. 9 shooting death of Freddie Jackson, 59, of Port Allen.

Lilly has been indicted on a count of second-degree murder in Jackson’s death.

In court Monday, Lilly’s attorneys told state District Judge Todd Hernandez about Lilly’s mental condition and said they are still waiting for information from the military and Our Lady of the Lake Regional Medical Center.

Attorney John Russell told Hernandez about Lilly’s mental condition, but he did not elaborate.

Russell also told Hernandez the information from the hospital and military must be presented to the two mental health experts appointed to evaluate Lilly prior to trial.

Another of Lilly’s attorneys, Steven Moore, urged Hernandez to reschedule the July 16 trial date because the mental health issue has not been resolved.

Moore also told the judge that depending on what the mental health experts find, they could need other hearings.

Prosecutor Aaron Brooks told the judge he is ready to go to trial.

Brooks said it would be premature to delay the trial without hearing from the mental health experts, psychologist Donald Hoppe and psychiatrist Robert Blanche.

Hernandez said he would keep the July 16 trial, but told Moore and Russell he would reconsider that decision after he reads a written motion from them explaining why the trial delay is necessary.

According to authorities, Jackson was shot while he was trying to park on Harding Boulevard prior to Southern’s first home football game of the season.

Lilly was hired to guard a parking lot near campus during the game; authorities said Lilly and Jackson argued over whether Jackson’s car would block the entrance to the lot.

Lilly allegedly pulled out a gun and pointed it at Jackson, who responded by raising his hands over his head, authorities have said.

Lilly allegedly shot Jackson and turned to the crowd of onlookers “asking if anyone else wanted some,” authorities have said.

Lilly maintains Jackson was acting in a rude manner, authorities have said.

Lilly claims he fired the gun only after seeing Jackson reach for something in his right front pocket, authorities have said.

A Baton Rouge police affidavit says Jackson never pulled a weapon.

[EMTGuard]

He's GUILTY

From http://www.2theadvocate.com/news/124...?showAll=y&c=y

Ex-guard guilty in killing

Man shot parking car at SU game

By ADRIAN ANGELETTE
Advocate staff writer
Published: Dec 14, 2007 - Page: 1B

Jurors set aside a former security guard’s claim of self-defense and convicted him Thursday in the shooting death of a Southern University tailgater before the university’s first game of the 2006 season.

Curtis Lilly, 42, was convicted on a count of second-degree murder in the Sept. 9, 2006, shooting death of 59-year-old Freddie Jackson. Jackson was trying to help his girlfriend park her car along Harding Boulevard before a Southern football game when the two men argued and Lilly fired the fatal shot.

Second-degree murder carries a mandatory sentence of life in prison.

“This is a guy who knew the difference between right and wrong,” prosecutor Aaron Brooks said after court. “We got a reliable result.”

Defense attorney John Russell said little after court — only that he was “surprised and obviously disappointed.”

The argument that resulted in the shooting was over whether Jackson’s girlfriend’s car was going to block the entrance to the parking lot that Lilly had been hired to guard.

Brooks told jurors in his closing argument that this was a case about a security guard with a gun who was intent on showing he was in charge.

The best evidence of that were Lilly’s own words, Brooks said, when he told police, “Freddie Jackson just defied me.”

“When someone defied him, instead of taking the least restrictive action, he maxed it out,” Brooks said.

Brooks noted that Jackson was not armed, and Lilly had a can of Mace he could have used to stop Jackson if he felt threatened.

Instead, Brooks said, the trajectory of the bullet indicates Jackson was turning away from Lilly when he was shot and not lunging forward as suggested by Lilly’s attorney, John Russell.

Russell told jurors not to be swayed by Brooks’ use of emotion as a trial tactic.

“This case has always been about emotion for the prosecution because emotion wins cases,” Russell told jurors in his closing argument.

Instead, Russell said, his client was acting in self-defense when Jackson lunged at him during the argument. Lilly was working a security detail for the first time during a Southern football game and the chaotic ordeal with Jackson took only a matter of seconds, Russell said.

The defense attorney also said there was nothing unusual about the way Lilly acted after the shooting, even though some witnesses said Lilly waved his gun in the air after shooting Jackson and shouted, “Does anyone else want some of this.”

“He acted like a regular man with a crowd coming around him,” Russell said. “Curtis Lilly is not guilty because he was acting in self-defense.”

Most of the trial on Thursday was held without Lilly in the courtroom. About noon, Russell told state District Judge Todd Hernandez that Lilly no longer wanted to be in the courtroom.

During the trial, there was testimony that Lilly suffers from schizophrenia and is medicated to control psychotic tendencies.

Lilly had raised an insanity defense. But Russell told jurors during his closing argument not to worry about Lilly knowing the difference between right and wrong when he pulled the trigger.

Russell maintained that Lilly’s actions were the same as any man under the circumstances.

Hernandez scheduled sentencing for Jan. 11.