November 21st, 2008 | Bookmark Us
Baton Rouge Today
Today's Topics | Forum | Traffic | Weather | Photos | Links | Search | Register  

Comment
 
Article Tools Search this Article Display Modes
Men Involved in DPW Shooting Avoid Prison Time
Men Involved in DPW Shooting Avoid Prison Time
Published by News Bot
May 1st, 2008
Men Involved in DPW Shooting Avoid Prison Time

Two white men accused of yelling racial slurs and firing a shotgun in the direction of two black city-parish workers in 2007 avoided prison time Wednesday after pleading guilty to reduced charges.
The defendants were placed on probation, fined and ordered to apologize to the workers.

Eric Arnaud, 22, 11212 Amite River Road, pleaded guilty to illegal use of a weapon. Christopher Roussel, 17, 11120 Amite River Road, pleaded guilty to attempted illegal use of a weapon.

Both men were originally booked on attempted murder and hate crimes.
They could have received up to two years in prison on the weapons charges. Had they been prosecuted and convicted in the more serious charges, they could have received up to 50 years on attempted murder and up to five years on the hate-crime counts.

Under Louisiana law, prosecutors would have had to prove Arnaud and Roussel intended to kill the men specifically because of their race in order to satisfy the hate-crime charge.

State District Judge Chip Moore sentenced Arnaud to a two-year suspended prison term and ordered him to pay a $300 fine. Moore sentenced Roussel to a one-year suspended prison term and ordered him to pay a $150 fine.
Both men also must complete two years of supervised probation, anger management classes, 100 hours of community service and write letters of apology to the two Department of Public Works employees.
Moore said he will personally review the apology letters to ensure they are satisfactory.

“Sometimes my definition of an apology might be different from yours,” Moore said to Arnaud and Roussel at sentencing.
Moore ordered the men back to court July 11 to gauge if they are meeting the conditions of their sentences.

Standing before the judge, Arnaud and Roussel stared at the ground, while Prosecutor Charles Gray read the allegations to which Arnaud and Roussel pleaded guilty.

The two DPW employees were cutting grass along Kendalwood Road on Aug. 23, 2007, when Arnaud and Roussel drove up in a black pickup.
Roussel hurled racial slurs at the two men while questioning what the men were doing in the area, Gray said.

Arnaud and Roussel then went into a nearby house and returned about a minute later with Arnaud brandishing a shotgun. Arnaud pointed the gun in the direction of the DPW employees and fired several shots, Gray said.
As the DPW employees fled, they saw and heard buckshot hitting nearby tree limbs, Gray said.

After the sentencing, Gray declined to discuss in detail the reasons for reducing the charges. But Gray said Arnaud and Roussel were “charged appropriately based on the facts.”

Outside the courtroom, Roussel’s attorney, Andrew Jackson Hodges IV, said his client admitted yelling racial slurs at the DPW employees, but did not know Arnaud was going to shoot at the men.

“Yelling racial slurs at people is ignorant but does not rise to the level of being a hate crime,” Hodges said. “It’s distasteful but it is free speech.”
After the sentencing, Roussel said he has been hurt by media coverage that has portrayed him as prejudice.

“Everybody was trying to put me out as some kind of skinhead or racist,” he said. “This happened eight months ago. I’ve put it behind me.”
Arnaud’s attorney, Edselle Cunningham Sr., said his client’s actions amounted to poor judgment and not a hate crime because he believes Arnaud did not intend to kill anyone.

“It’s kind of hard to miss someone with a shotgun,” Cunningham said.
Arnaud declined to comment after the sentencing.
Presumably, Arnaud and Roussel will escape jail time if they stay out of trouble for the next two years, but there is a chance they could still face federal charges.

U.S. Attorney David Dugas declined Wednesday evening to comment on the specifics of the case, but said his office can bring federal charges against state court defendants if their crimes amount to federal violations or if a defendant’s sentence does not satisfy federal interests.

While it is unclear whether Arnaud and Roussel’s actions have caught the attention of the U.S. Attorney’s Office, their actions have prompted changes within the Department of Public Works.

DPW Director Peter Newkirk said the department, after the shooting incident, now tends to err on the side of caution and frequently requests that law enforcement officers accompany department employees while working in certain areas.

“It’s sad to say, but in certain areas, people just don’t like us,” he said.
As for the DPW employees victimized by Arnaud and Roussel, Newkirk said the two men took a few weeks off after the shooting, but continue to work for the department.

“I’m just feel so sorry for those guys to have had to go through something like that.

Source: The Advocate, KORAN ADDO
  #1 (permalink)  
By Sunny on May 1st, 2008, 09:03 AM
Quote:
Under Louisiana law, prosecutors would have had to prove Arnaud and Roussel intended to kill the men specifically because of their race in order to satisfy the hate-crime charge.
So wait, let me get this straight:

The two guys admitted yelling racial slurs AND shooting at the men and thats not good enough to AT LEAST charge them with attempted murder and hate crime?

Wow.

The judge and prosecutors of this case should be fired immediately.
Last edited by Sunny : May 1st, 2008 at 09:10 AM.
Reply With Quote
  #2 (permalink)  
By BR Today on May 1st, 2008, 09:10 AM
Originally Posted by Sunny View Post

The judges and prosecutors of this case should be fired immediately.
To do that, prosecutors would have to prove that the judge intended to disregard the law by not putting these guys in jail.
Reply With Quote
  #3 (permalink)  
By Sunny on May 1st, 2008, 09:18 AM
Originally Posted by BR Today View Post
To do that, prosecutors would have to prove that the judge intended to disregard the law by not putting these guys in jail.
that they were given probation and a total of $450 in fines proves that.

If somebody fired a shot at the judge you can bet they would be locked up for a loooooooooooooong time.
Reply With Quote
  #4 (permalink)  
By mudbug on May 1st, 2008, 11:26 AM
Originally Posted by Sunny View Post
If somebody fired a shot at the judge you can bet they would be locked up for a loooooooooooooong time.
Except for Judge Don Johnson, he would have slammed the shot down and asked for another before driving off...
Reply With Quote
  #5 (permalink)  
By BR Today on May 1st, 2008, 12:55 PM
Originally Posted by mudbug View Post
Except for Judge Don Johnson, he would have slammed the shot down and asked for another before driving off...
What a crafty (and accurate) response
Reply With Quote
  #6 (permalink)  
By Unregistered on May 2nd, 2008, 10:15 PM
The Judge's "Sentences" were insulting to any notion of justice

It's a sad week in Louisiana: A sitting Judge- who supposed to protect the public-has essentially said, " Yell derogatory racial remarks at people and then shoot at them with a 12 gage shotgun, and you will not be sentenced to any jail time."

Judges have discretion, but discretion in this case has been abused, and common sense has been abandoned. The public's trust, confidence, and respect in the judicial system are undermined by such a glaring error in judgment. If no jail time is imposed in this case, how to we deter such egregious conduct.

Certainly, if those defendants had fired shots at more esteemed members of the community, they would have been dealt with more severely. Moreover, if another ethnic group had engaged in similar conduct against the predominant group, such leniency would not have been granted- and I would not want them to be granted such leniency.

It is real simple, be tough and stand on principle, particularly when dealing with violent crime and acts that endanger the public. The judge missed the opportunity to do what was right and proper in this case. Perhaps, he will admit that mistake and apologize to the community.
Reply With Quote
  #7 (permalink)  
By BrentW on May 3rd, 2008, 10:44 AM
A reasonable sentence would have been four years in prison on a daily work release program. Under the work release program they would be required to work with / for the crew of men they attacked. Any man on the crew would be their supervisor. They would work five days a week and spend nights and weekends in prison. One wrong move at work would send them to prison full time and add another six years to the term.
Reply With Quote
Comment


Article Tools Search this Article
Search this Article:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new articles
You may not post comments
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are Off

» Log in
User Name:

Password:

Register now, its FREE!
» Sponsored Links
» Recent Threads
Title, Username, & Date
Dr. Donald Auzine Pleads Guilty in Federal Court
May 19th, 2008 01:34 PM
Statement tossed out in '04 Waters slaying case
July 12th, 2007 08:53 AM
Powered by vBadvanced CMPS v3.0 RC1


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 05:44 AM.