Molly B. Posted January 24, 2019 at 04:29 PM Share Posted January 24, 2019 at 04:29 PM https://www.galesburg.com/news/20190123/passenger-in-truck-crash-testifies-in-love-murder-trial Love told him he left his residence to check on the crash, grabbed a gun on the way out the door and was approached by an individual in an “aggressive manner” who he told to stop.Love then reportedly told Cates he fired a round into the roadway, then a second into the ground while back-pedaling, was then struck in the face by Hartman and fired the third shot at close range. Three law enforcement officials testified Wednesday morning along with brief testimony from Melissa Kelly, Hartman’s mother, and Colyn Glisan, who was in Hartman’s truck at the time of the crash.Glisan said he left work at about 5 or 6 p.m. June 18, 2018, to go fishing and drinking near a lake. Hartman would later arrive at the same party, where they continued to drink. The two later went on a beer run, returned to the party and continued to drink.At one point Glisan wanted to leave but felt too intoxicated to drive, so he asked Hartman to drive him back to his Galva home, as Hartman was “in better shape” than Glisan, who had to work the next day, according to Glisan’s testimony Wednesday.Hartman lost control of his truck and it rolled onto its side along a rural road near Love’s residence. The two tried to jump on the side of the truck to get it to flip back over when a man asked them their names and then turned and walked with them to a house, Love’s home. Glisan and Love were walking side-by-side while Hartman was behind them. Hartman asked Love why he wouldn’t help them and Love reportedly said he was goint to call the police, Glisan said.At that point, there was a scuffle between Love and Hartman, and Glisan, who previously worked at Springfield Armory assembling guns, and owns firearms himself, heard a slide being racked, or a round being chambered, in a pistol.“I was thinking, ‘why would there be a gun?’ I jumped in the ditch and heard a gunshot,” Glisan said Wednesday.After that first shot, he heard Love yell, “damn it, keep your hands off me,” Glisan said.After hearing the shot, he stood up out and took off running through a field. Before that, he saw Hartman and Love with their hands on each other, almost in a wrestling stance. He heard the second shot as he was running away.“I didn’t know if I was being shot at. After that one, I heard, ‘damn it, I told you to stop’,” Glisan said. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
soylentgreen Posted January 24, 2019 at 05:36 PM Share Posted January 24, 2019 at 05:36 PM I honestly can't say what I think. It appears to me that Love went out to help. He took his gun. So what? I wear my gun when I take out the garbage. Love was then attacked by the person he was attempting to help? So, he shot him. The "victim's" vehicle was on its side in the ditch? He sustained some injuries during the accident itself. Has it been determined that had he not been shot in the thigh that he likely wouldn't have died anyway?Was the "victim" in shock? On drugs?I'll tell you what...it sortof makes you not want to help anyone. Why get involved? I'm trained in CPR and I'd like to think that if I witnessed an accident that I'd help as much as I can...knowing that seconds often make the difference between survival and death when there's been a serious injury. But stuff like this makes me think twice. What if the injured person doesn't want help? What if they attack me for no reason? What if I'm forced to defend myself? Sigh...humans... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Glock23 Posted January 24, 2019 at 05:53 PM Share Posted January 24, 2019 at 05:53 PM So basically, the victim had been drinking as well, but was more sober than the passenger, and didn't want the cops called, because he knew he'd get a DUI. Is dead better than a DUI? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lawman Posted January 24, 2019 at 06:07 PM Share Posted January 24, 2019 at 06:07 PM Sounds like Love was attempting to walk away from the scene and the "victim" when he was attacked. He then fired two warning shots in a effort to get the "victim" to leave him alone. Was Love in fear for his life? If yes, I don't know what more he could have done. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ChicagoRonin70 Posted January 24, 2019 at 10:04 PM Share Posted January 24, 2019 at 10:04 PM How is this even a matter for trial? The Good Samaritan was attacked by someone who was under the influence of alcohol and likely guilty of causing a crash while DUI, and in response to the attack tried to get the attacker to back off not once, but twice, before shooting in self-defense after being struck by the attacker—apparently with the attacker coming at him at least initially from behind as the victim was walking away. This is a pretty clear case of malicious prosecution by the DA. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mal2531 Posted January 24, 2019 at 10:28 PM Share Posted January 24, 2019 at 10:28 PM I really hope he gets off he was assualted he had a right to defend himself Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
soundguy Posted January 25, 2019 at 12:59 AM Share Posted January 25, 2019 at 12:59 AM Good golly... is there something we don't know about this one? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lawman Posted January 25, 2019 at 03:28 AM Share Posted January 25, 2019 at 03:28 AM TTAG has a few more details. Not a lot, but some https://www.thetruthaboutguns.com/2019/01/john-boch/illinois-george-zimmerman-trayvon-martin-2-0-self-defense-trial-underway/ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Molly B. Posted January 25, 2019 at 03:39 AM Author Share Posted January 25, 2019 at 03:39 AM Richard Love testified in his own defense today: Love said he was concerned that the truck was partially in the road, and therefore a hazard, so he got out his phone to call the police.“I touched the phone app and I believe I was hit ... it felt like a baseball bat,” he said.He was spun around after the blow and he dialed his wife, Sharon, as that was the last call he had made. Love said he was bleeding at this time. Within seconds Love asked his wife to call police, she hung up, he drew his gun, racked the slide to load a round in the chamber and disengaged the safety.“I heard from my left, ‘he’s got a gun.’ Immediately I seen Xaiver come towards me,” Love said.“I fired a round to my right and there was no one to my right. I felt that was safe,” he said of the first warning shot.Hartman kept advancing as Love backpedaled while Hartman tried to strike him in the face, Love testified, so he fired another round, this time at Hartman’s feet or the ground.As Hartman closed the gap between the two, Love, putting up his arms with his forearms about a foot apart in front of his chest, said he was pushing into Hartman but preventing him from landing any blows.“I could hear his fists coming by my ears,” he said.Love then was able to push Hartman, gain a space, and took off running into his bean field, but was chased by Hartman. “I was bloody. I was exhausted. I’d been hit in the face ... I had to stop,” Love said, fearing for his life at that point.“I never intended to harm anyone or fire.”Love also said he was thinking at the time, “He was going to get me down and get my gun and use it against me.”Kerr repeatedly questioned Love about why he took a gun to a car crash, why he didn’t take a medical kit with him, and other points he has previously focused on in other hearings.“It’s not until after you pull your gun out and chamber a round that you see him come at you?” Kerr asked.“Yes, after I was hit,” Love responded.He then said he took the gun with him “for in case there would be a need for self-protection” and because “it was the middle of the night and dark.” When Kerr hammered Love on why he didn’t provide aid to Hartman and Glisan if he had previously helped those in crashes near his home on two prior occasions, such as pulling them out of the ditch, Love said no one asked him for help.“I didn’t ever want to. I’ve never wanted to fire at a person,” he said. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Molly B. Posted January 25, 2019 at 03:53 AM Author Share Posted January 25, 2019 at 03:53 AM I don't think the prosecution's star witness helped them any. . . Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lawman Posted January 25, 2019 at 05:15 AM Share Posted January 25, 2019 at 05:15 AM Thanks for the update Molly. I'm very interested in seeing how this plays out. I'm going out on a limb and predicting an acquittal. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CILhunter Posted January 25, 2019 at 12:43 PM Share Posted January 25, 2019 at 12:43 PM How is this even a matter for trial? The Good Samaritan was attacked by someone who was under the influence of alcohol and likely guilty of causing a crash while DUI, and in response to the attack tried to get the attacker to back off not once, but twice, before shooting in self-defense after being struck by the attacker—apparently with the attacker coming at him at least initially from behind as the victim was walking away. This is a pretty clear case of malicious prosecution by the DA. 100% This is a case where the Grand Jury refused to indict, but the anti-2A Assistant State's Attorney filed charges anyway. Trying to win brownie points with the leftist base to run for State's Attorney when his boss retires next year. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Keith44 Posted January 25, 2019 at 08:22 PM Share Posted January 25, 2019 at 08:22 PM Jury finds James Love NOT guilty.https://www.galesburg.com/news/20190125/update-galva-man-james-love-not-guilty-of-murder-Keith. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Glock23 Posted January 25, 2019 at 08:36 PM Share Posted January 25, 2019 at 08:36 PM Outstanding! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tricolor Posted January 25, 2019 at 08:57 PM Share Posted January 25, 2019 at 08:57 PM Good news for once. I am glad the jurors saw through the overzealous prosecutor's BS. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kingcreek Posted January 25, 2019 at 10:13 PM Share Posted January 25, 2019 at 10:13 PM This happened just inside the Knox county line from Henry county and the Knox SA was out to make a name for himself. Also, the mother of the deceased has had a very active social media campaign seeking justice or revenge depending on your view point.The young man has had a history of troubles and was going to have to serve time if he violated terms of probation, which DUI and a truck in the ditch would probably get him.Love is known locally as a regular guy, traditional upstanding citizen and the kind of people you would want as a neighbor.Glad it was innocent on all counts. But he will be lucky if he still has his family farm and a normal life after this. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fxdpntc Posted January 25, 2019 at 10:52 PM Share Posted January 25, 2019 at 10:52 PM The jury coming back with not guilty in 75 minutes, is a figurative slap across ASA Kerrs face. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
quackersmacker Posted January 25, 2019 at 11:22 PM Share Posted January 25, 2019 at 11:22 PM The jury coming back with not guilty in 75 minutes, is a figurative slap across ASA Kerrs face.And he really needed it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ChicagoRonin70 Posted January 26, 2019 at 02:22 AM Share Posted January 26, 2019 at 02:22 AM And now, they need to go after the prosecutor for malicious prosecution, which is what this was. The jury obviously knew it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Weed Posted January 26, 2019 at 04:22 AM Share Posted January 26, 2019 at 04:22 AM The jury coming back with not guilty in 75 minutes, is a figurative slap across ASA Kerrs face.Wonder what took them so long. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tkroenlein Posted January 26, 2019 at 05:20 AM Share Posted January 26, 2019 at 05:20 AM The jury coming back with not guilty in 75 minutes, is a figurative slap across ASA Kerrs face.Wonder what took them so long.Probably got one more meal on the taxpayer. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tkroenlein Posted January 26, 2019 at 05:24 AM Share Posted January 26, 2019 at 05:24 AM Original thread here. brace for impact, the next Zimmerman case may be in illinoishttp://illinoiscarry.com/forum/index.php?/topic/69652-brace-for-impact%2C-the-next-Zimmerman-case-may-be-in-illinois&share_type=t Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hipshot Percussion Posted January 26, 2019 at 05:45 AM Share Posted January 26, 2019 at 05:45 AM I don't get how it got to trial in the first place. It's legal to carry, so that shouldn't have anything to do with it. What bothered me were two warning shots were fired - even the guys buddy says that - and Hartman still kept coming? If I was on that jury, that's all I would have had to hear. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
soundguy Posted January 26, 2019 at 10:22 AM Share Posted January 26, 2019 at 10:22 AM I don't get how it got to trial in the first place. It's legal to carry, so that shouldn't have anything to do with it. What bothered me were two warning shots were fired - even the guys buddy says that - and Hartman still kept coming? If I was on that jury, that's all I would have had to hear. My guess? The shot from behind theory... “It’s really coming down to was the defendant justified in using that force against Xavier Hartman?” he asked.“If you’re aiming a firearm at someone and pulling the trigger ... you know that shooting someone with a firearm by its very nature is going to kill them or cause great bodily harm.”Stuckart circled back to the arguments on the trajectory of the bullet that struck Hartman and was lodged in the front part of his left lower leg, which was recovered in the autopsy. That trajectory was back-to-front, but could have been an entry made at the side of Hartman’s leg, what defense counsel has argued was a ricochet. “It’s not possible to fire at someone as they’re going towards you and it not be a front-to-back” wound, in that the bullet entered the front and exited the back, Stuckart said.That bullet, recovered from Hartman’s leg, was in “good condition” and Stuckart argued the “only way that could possibly happen is if Xavier, when he was struck in the leg, had his back to him ... what danger are you posing to someone if you’re not looking at them?” Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tkroenlein Posted January 26, 2019 at 04:03 PM Share Posted January 26, 2019 at 04:03 PM Lots of faux forensics in those statements. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
markthesignguy Posted January 27, 2019 at 04:21 AM Share Posted January 27, 2019 at 04:21 AM Kerr should be a hollywood writer - making the impossible seem plausible. He shouldn't even be elected dogcatcher. His career is over. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fxdpntc Posted January 27, 2019 at 04:50 PM Share Posted January 27, 2019 at 04:50 PM I don't get how it got to trial in the first place. It's legal to carry, so that shouldn't have anything to do with it. What bothered me were two warning shots were fired - even the guys buddy says that - and Hartman still kept coming? If I was on that jury, that's all I would have had to hear.I read some background articles on this last summer. And my guess is that part of it is that the wayward yutes mother is politically connected in that area through her father. And she is the definition of daddys little girl. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tchostler Posted January 27, 2019 at 07:12 PM Share Posted January 27, 2019 at 07:12 PM Maybe one reason this dragged on so long was to pressure Love to plea to a lesser charge. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kingcreek Posted January 27, 2019 at 08:19 PM Share Posted January 27, 2019 at 08:19 PM Maybe one reason this dragged on so long was to pressure Love to plea to a lesser charge.There were a couple of delays because the SA was waiting for DNA samples but then he didn’t even use them. It was weird. The defense attorney questioned why they needed the dna and even the judge commented thought it was odd but he allowed the delays. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jsanc Posted January 27, 2019 at 11:38 PM Share Posted January 27, 2019 at 11:38 PM Thanks for the info Molly Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.