Jurors Find Donald Hayes Not Guilty In ‘Road Rage’ Murder Trial

Bob Irwin dissects the latest self defense and other shootings of the week. What went wrong, what went right and what we can learn from defense with a gun.

Jurors Find Donald Hayes Not Guilty In 'Road Rage' Murder Trial
Jurors Find Donald Hayes Not Guilty In ‘Road Rage’ Murder Trial
Bob Irwin
Bob Irwin

Las Vegas, NV –-(Ammoland.com)- WDRB-TV 41 in Louisville, Kentucky reports this week (5/19/2016) a 67 year old man was charged with murder for shooting another during a road rage incident in June of 2014.

It started when the defendant and a 57 year old man allegedly cut each other off in traffic on the Watterson Expressway. When they exited onto Poplar Level Road, that’s when things escalated. The defendant testified that he shot in self-defense after the other driver smashed his driver’s window with a baseball bat.

The 57 year old died as a result of his wounds. After deliberating for about two hours, the defendant was found not guilty.

In a statement to the media the defense attorney said, “He (our client) is doing very well. It’s a huge relief for all of us. It’s a huge relief. Our condolences still go out to the 57 year olds family. But we are very satisfied with the results.”

The Head of the LMPD Homicide Unit commented “From knowing the case as well as we did, we thought (it) was more of a road rage case than self-defense. Self-defense became a factor in the courtroom, but when it happened, it was road rage on both sides and the road rage ultimately ended up as shots being fired and the victim (?) being killed.”

Evidence of a prior road rage incident by the 57 year old was excluded by the court but the baseball bat he used to smash the defendants windshield was not.

WDRB 41 Louisville News

Comment:

A very close case as both sides claimed the other guy should have withdrawn. I’d have to agree that‘s true but that takes both parties to stop the fight. If you withdraw and the other side continues, the fight has not ended. You still must defend yourself.

The defense brought in the baseball bat as an exhibit. Juror interviews after the verdict indicated viewing the baseball bat hit that smashed the defendants’ windshield was the deciding factor. It let them think about that bat coming through their own windshield.

Juries love physical evidence! A smart defense lawyer!

Bob Irwin, The Gun Store, Las Vegas

About Bob Irwin

The writer is the owner of The Gun Store in Las Vegas and has a gun talk radio show “Fired Up with Bob Irwin” Firedup is now on KSHP 1400 am radio from 5 to 6 pm on Thursdays and at the same time also on YouTube “Fired Up with Bob Irwin“.

Subscribe
Notify of
16 Comments
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
Responsible Carry Is a Right and an Obligation
Responsible Carry Is a Right and an Obligation
5 years ago

The “legal reality” in the last sentence is based on several defense attorneys holding seminars for CCW holders in the hopes of giving us a few facts that might just keep our opinionated and sorry butts out of jail. It really shouldn’t be a surprise that court cases get tabulated, shared, dissected etc. by the legal profession or that they publish their findings or that those of them who carry (more than you might suspect) feel a kinship to those us who also carry but aren’t lawyers. For instance: https://www.lewrockwell.com/2016/02/marc-j-victor/carry-gun-america/ Not the best by any means, but quick and immediately… Read more »

Brian
Brian
5 years ago

Never bring a baseball bat to a gun fight.

yaba
yaba
5 years ago

GD government prick should be ashamed of themselves for dragging this guy through this and taking all his money to boot.

But they aren’t! They think they did the right thing, and always will! Which is why we hate them so much, and always will.

Responsible Carry Is a Right and an Obligation
Responsible Carry Is a Right and an Obligation
5 years ago

In most CCW classes the instructor tells the students that they must not contribute to an altercation. Specifically: If someone insults you (“disses”) you don’t brandish or shoot. You do not drink alcohol or take drugs (prescription or not) and carry at the same time. You leave every situation you safely can (whether you are required by law to or not). You do not engage in road rage when armed. You do not start any altercation or fight including verbal rants while armed. (the list is kept short for this email) Both of these morons engaged in a road rage… Read more »

Barry Sandinureyes
Barry Sandinureyes
5 years ago

Instructors have no legal authority. Where is the legal reality that you state in your last sentence?

Don Bailey
Don Bailey
5 years ago

@Doszap Saninureyes, – I believe Responsible Carry has made many valid comments in in his post and furthermore, is not stating that instructors have legal authority to, but responsible instructors will educate people of the inherent liability of carrying a weapon. I believe everything he said is valid. If you pull/draw your weapon for any reason, be ready to justify your actions to law enforcement should they become involved. You do not even need to fire your weapon to find yourself in trouble. Should you fire your weapon, you best make sure that none of those examples apply to your… Read more »

throwedoff
throwedoff
5 years ago

It was not the windshield that was struck. It was the driver’s side window that was smashed putting the 67 year old Hayes in a defensive position. The next swing could have dealt a lethal or extremely damaging blow to his body or head.

Dave
Dave
5 years ago

Testimony given in court reported here states the shooted did NOT exit his vehicle.

Dave
Dave
5 years ago

Where is the “fact” that the shooter got out of his vehicle? Why would the batter have smashed out the driver’s window if the driver was not still in the car?

SuperG
SuperG
5 years ago

The fact that they both pulled over and got out of their vehicles shows stupidity on both sides. The fact that the dead man had a prior road rage incident indicates that he had anger management issue at a minimum, and should have been given a psyche-eval at that time. But we don’t want to address mental health in this country, as it is too expensive. We’d rather wait for them to run amok and then let the legal system take over.

Cea
Cea
5 years ago
Reply to  SuperG

Well maybe the defendant (the shooter) took the exit that he wanted or needed. Maybe he just went to where he started to go at the beginning. Maybe the loony with the prior and the bat (was he going to, or coming home from a game?) followed him…possible?

Tionico
Tionico
5 years ago
Reply to  Cea

if that were the case, the Bat Boy would have had no cause to stop when Commuter did. Any more shallow excuses?

Cea
Cea
5 years ago
Reply to  Tionico

You, are obviously missing something! What that is, I don’t know. But something for sure! Shallow excuses, huh? So in every case of road rage, it is your opinion (I’m asking, not saying) that neither party wants it to end? Bat Boy could have been so mad, that he was going to follow the old guy for any distance. At least til he cooled down anyway. But maybe the old guy was close to his destination when it all occurred. Maybe the old guy needed to stop and gather himself. Maybe stop and call the cops. But no, you assume… Read more »

KSM
KSM
5 years ago
Reply to  SuperG

While I was reading this story I read nothing of the 67 yr old getting out of his car and neither did you !!! So you better re think you’re statement .

TEX
TEX
5 years ago

The 67 year old should had never been prosecuted for killing the 57 year old in the first place. Malicious prosecution in a clear case of self defense.