See screen shots attached
Video needed https://www.facebook.com/RichNyeWTHR13/videos/561033674679958/
Indiana gunhttps://www.gunstocarry.com/gun-laws-state/indiana-gun-laws/ law link
Right to sell link
https://public.courts.in.gov/mycase/#/vw/SearchResults/eyJ2Ijp7Ik1vZGUiOiJCeVBhcnR5IiwiQ2FzZU51bSI6bnVsbCwiQ2l0ZU51bSI6bnVsbCwiQ3Jvc3NSZWZOdW0iOm51bGwsIkZpcnN0IjoiZ2xvcmlhIiwiTWlkZGxlIjpudWxsLCJMYXN0IjoicmlnaHRzZWxsIiwiQnVzaW5lc3MiOm51bGwsIkRvQlN0YXJ0IjpudWxsLCJEb0JFbmQiOm51bGwsIk9BTnVtIjpudWxsLCJCYXJOdW0iOm51bGwsIlNvdW5kRXgiOmZhbHNlLCJDb3VydEl0ZW1JRCI6OTIsIkNhdGVnb3JpZXMiOm51bGwsIkxpbWl0cyI6bnVsbCwiQWR2YW5jZWQiOmZhbHNlLCJBY3RpdmVGbGFnIjoiQWxsIiwiRmlsZVN0YXJ0IjpudWxsLCJGaWxlRW5kIjpudWxsLCJDb3VudHlDb2RlIjpudWxsfX0

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Was the Prosecutor correct in his assessment of the incident? What area(s) needed more in-depth questioning/probing?

After an in-depth analysis of the case study, it is evident that there is incongruence in the probing and investigation of Mr. Organ’s case vs. the state.  However, the prosecutor was correct to summon Mr. Organ in a court of law to prove his innocence. The prosecutor initiated the court case by critically analyzing all the happenings of the fateful day.  Since 2010 the prosecutor’s desk has presided over numerous hearing and the current trial is still pending in court: Gloria Rightsell v.State of Indiana, Indiana State Police (Joseph, 2010).

The first concern is that there is substantial evidence to back up Mr. Organ’s initial encounter since most of the witnesses did not see the shooting. The court should also initiate efforts to address the gaps in the ISP dispatch department, as the officer’s negligence was the primary cause of the accident (WTHR, 2016). Finally, the prosecutor should further probe more on the patrol protocol procedures that negate using the patrol radio while still in the vehicle to inform Mr. the victim of the presence of a law enforcement officer.

There is a ripe study area in the lack of urgency to dial 911 to call for medical help. According to the law enforcement narration of the aftermath of the shooting, there is a lack of urgency to rush the victim to the hospital upon realizing that Mr. Rightsell was severely injured. Another crucial area that requires further investigation is the failure to check on other suspects in the Tahoe and challenger. Initially, Mr. Organ would have summoned any passenger to alight the vehicle. According to the patrol protocols, troopers should scrutinize the area to identify potential dangers before the confrontation and firing as this may trigger other weapon holders to action.

In conclusion, there is substantial evidence lacking that was excluded at trial that would have changed the case’s trajectory.

What do the Indiana gun laws say about the right to carry? Did Glenn Rightsell follow the law?

According to the Indiana Code and Self-Defense, Glenn Rightsell was justified to carry the gun. The code specifically states that as long as the person is of legal age, sane, and is in the rightful possession of the gun, they have the right to use it in the face of danger. In furtherance, Indiana law states that an individual does not have clearance to retreat if the person reasonably believes that the force is necessary to prevent serious bodily injury. The law categorically states that no individual, including law enforcement within its jurisdiction, should be placed in legal jeopardy for protecting the person. However, to assert and justify using a weapon, the claimant must produce reasonable beyond doubt evidence of imminent death or significant bodily injury that can cause serious bodily injury.

Develop a timeline of the case from Trooper Organ’s perspective and actions (as well as responding law enforcement agencies, EMT, and the hospital)

Timeline

 

Time

6:36pm

6:37 p.m.

6:45 p.m.

6:46 p.m.

6:56 p.m.

7:06 p.m.

7:07p.m.

7:10 p.m.

8:02p.m

8:07 p.m.

8:12 p.m.

08:48pm

Date

28/12/2018

Mr. Organ shoots Mr. Rightsell

Mr. Organ contacted dispatch

Law enforcement officers disarm Mr.  Rightsell, handcuff him and call for medical aid

Law

Emergency medical personnel treat Mr.   Right sell at the scene

Law enforcement  cleared the vehicle after deciding to approach

Deputy from the Montgomery County Sheriff’s Office called off the SWAT.

Mr. Rights ell was admitted to the Franciscan St. Elizabeth Hospital in Crawfordsville, Indiana

Mr. Russell first complained of difficulties with swelling in his throat

Mr. Rightsell again complained of swelling

The medical professionals attempted to intubate Mr. Rightsell but were unsuccessful

The doctor pronounced Mr. Rightsell deceased.

enforcement officers request multijurisdictional SWAT team to clear the vehicles

 

Develop a timeline from the Glenn Rightsell’s perspective and actions

Date/Time	3:54 pm			6:36pm	6:35pm	6:37p.m	6:45p.m	6:56pm	8:02 pm	8:07 pm	8:48 pm
28/12/2018	Mr. Right sell contacts Montgomery County Dispatch	Mr. Right sell proceeds to the disabled Tahoe	Mr. Right sell started attending to his disabled Tahoe	Mr. Right sell pushed his body away from the Tahoe, rolling upon his left hip. Mr. Rightsell brought his right hand back.	Mr. Right sell saw Mt Organ and heard him introduce himself	Mr. Right sell lies on his back with his feet facing South.	Mr. Right sell was disarmed and handcuffed	Emergency medical personnel treated Mr.Rightsell at the scene	Mr.Rightsell complained of difficulties with swelling in his throat.	Mr. Right sell complained  of swelling	Mr. Rightsell passed on.

 

If you were reviewing this case for the Civil Judge, what issues, concerns, or inconsistencies did you notice?

This case lacks an in-depth review of the delays, lack of prosecution of the Montgomery county dispatch team who did not inform Mr. Organ of Mr. Rightsell’s earlier call. Additionally, there is a concerning area of negligence when law enforcement officers from Indiana and Montgomery delayed calling on emergency medical help to attend to Mr. Rightsell. Although the emergency officers were later summoned, it was after time had elapsed.

On the first contact with Mr.Rightsell, Mr. Organ does not assess the Tahoe or the challenger; instead, he proceeds to fire without knowledge of any potential dangers. Even after the arrival of the responding officers Mr. Organ did not alert them to inspect the black challenger which elicits more questions about the than answers on his conduct (Marion Superior Court , 2020). On watching   the dashcam video the Crawfordsville police are uncertain of the status of the black challenger. In furtherance Mr. Organ did not call for any backup from the dispatch center or issue an alert to his colleagues on duty that night; instead, he proceeded to crack down on Mr. Rightsell without any directives. In this case, prosecutors should have raised these concerns on Mr. Organs’ conduct, which warranted further probing to unravel the real intention behind the shooting.  More inconsistencies arise when the trial is dismissed on the grounds of self-defense, without any efforts to evaluate Montgomery’s communication channels.

References

Joseph, B., 2010. Death Investigation of Glenn A. Rightsell. [Online]
Available at: https://s3.amazonaws.com/edufiles.org/031772258_support_rightsell_case-1_sDjWeOOTogwTwzn.pdf?response-content-disposition=filename%3Drightsell_case-1.pdf&X-Amz-Content-Sha256=UNSIGNED-PAYLOAD&X-Amz-Algorithm=AWS4-HMAC-SHA256&X-Amz-Credential=AKIAJSBH2MC2J

Marion Superior Court , 2020. Gloria Rightsell v. State of Indiana, Indiana State Police. [Online]
Available at: https://public.courts.in.gov/mycase/#/vw/SearchResults/eyJ2Ijp7Ik1vZGUiOiJCeVBhcnR5IiwiQ2FzZU51bSI6bnVsbCwiQ2l0ZU51bSI6bnVsbCwiQ3Jvc3NSZWZOdW0iOm51bGwsIkZpcnN0IjoiZ2xvcmlhIiwiTWlkZGxlIjpudWxsLCJMYXN0IjoicmlnaHRzZWxsIiwiQnVzaW5lc3MiOm51bGwsIkRvQlN0YXJ0Ijpu

WTHR, R. N., 2016. Crawfordsville Police body cam after state trooper shot Glenn Rightsell. [Sound Recording] (Facebook).