Charge dropped, reinstated against 17-year-old in shooting

[WhiteFeather]

With judges like this, now you see why people Philly need more gun control!

There is a much longer version of this outrages story out there that is even better, with wounded police officer statements such as "what is it going to take? Does it take for him to go shoot somebody who is not a police officer with an assualt rifle?" plus several other points "this is why crime is out of control. He'll be shooting someone else to pay for this crime soon". Lots of others as well. Also in article the judge that droped charges is a convicted FELON and lied on her application to become a judge.

If some can find it please post link, could really use it for April 7 harrisburg lobbying event. Would like to give a copy to all the Philly gun control Reps.

http://www.examiner.com/a-1299890~Ch..._shooting.html

Mar 25, 2008

17-year-old again faces an attempted murder charge in the shooting of a Philadelphia Housing Authority officer who was wounded last month.

The charge against Zahir Boddy-Johnson was dismissed by a municipal judge Monday but was quickly refiled.

Defense attorney Michael Coard says Boddy-Johnson only intended to rob Officer Craig Kelley of his laptop and gun when he shot him on Feb. 17. Kelley was staffing a security booth in an apartment lobby. Judge Deborah Griffin agreed the shooting was reckless rather than deliberate.

But the District Attorney's Office immediately reinstated the attempted murder charge. Prosecutors also successfully appealed a reduction of Boddy-Johnson's $5 million bail.

[gnbrotz]

Longer story with sought after "What does it take?" quote here.

Charge briefly dropped for Phila. teen

By Dwight Ott
Inquirer Staff Writer

A Municipal Court judge dropped an attempted-murder charge yesterday against a 17-year-old defendant accused of wounding a Philadelphia Housing Authority police officer in a robbery attempt last month, but the charge was later reinstated.

"He shot, but what makes it malicious instead of stupid or inexperienced?" Judge Deborah Griffin asked rhetorically during the hearing for Zahir Boddy-Johnson of the 2300 block of North Diamond Street.

Griffin's decision to drop the charge and lower bail for Boddy-Johnson from $5 million to $75,000 brought an angry response from the officer whom the teen shot. The District Attorney's Office immediately refiled the attempted-murder charge and successfully appealed the reduction in bail.

Prosecutor Erica Wilson had objected at the hearing to any reduction in the charges and bail.

The wounded officer, Craig Kelley, 49, registered his own objection afterward.

"What does it take? Does it take for him to go out and shoot somebody who is not a police officer with an assault rifle?" asked Kelley, a 17-year veteran of the Housing Authority police. He added: "I'm still in pain. The bullet made a large hole that is still healing."

The shooting happened while Kelley was staffing the security booth in the Queen Lane Apartments.

According to testimony from homicide Detective Patrick Mangold, Boddy-Johnson tried to hold up the Housing Authority officer on Feb. 17 to raise money to pay off restitution to the courts for a previous crime.

After the hearing, Kelley's wife, Patricia, found that allegation cause for even more outrage: "This is why crime is out of control. He'll be shooting someone else to pay for this crime soon."

During the hearing, Boddy-Johnson's attorney, Michael Coard, said his client had not intended to kill Kelley, just to rob him of his laptop and gun to sell.

Griffin agreed, saying the District Attorney's Office had not made an effective enough case for attempted murder and that Boddy-Johnson's actions were not deliberate but the actions of a reckless and unthinking youth.

"I don't know what the hell he was doing with a gun in the first place, and trying to rob an officer is real dumb," Griffin said.

Griffin is currently under scrutiny herself. The Pennsylvania Supreme Court is considering whether to remove Griffin from the bench for failing to report to the state bar association that she is a convicted felon.

Griffin was indicted on federal charges in 1984 in Atlanta that she used a false Social Security number to obtain credit cards. She pleaded guilty and was ordered to serve three years on probation.

According to the Office of Disciplinary Counsel, which is composed of lawyers and monitors the conduct of attorneys, she denied on her 1988 application to the Pennsylvania bar that she had been arrested or prosecuted for a crime.

Contact staff writer Dwight Ott at 215-854-2797 or dott@phillynews.com.

[LittleRedToyota]

the gun made him do it...and her too...

[bogey1]

this story speaks for the politics in philly..if i ever turn to living the life of crime, philly is where i'll be..

[PisnNapalm]

Amazing... and I mean that in a completely bad "it's totally f***ed up" kind of way.

[Philadelphia]

Griffin is currently under scrutiny herself. The Pennsylvania Supreme Court is considering whether to remove Griffin from the bench for failing to report to the state bar association that she is a convicted felon.

So what's the problem here? A convicted felon is allowed not only to practice law but to be a judge. Said convicted felon is soft on felons. Isn't that what would be expected of a convicted felon?

Judge was elected by a population comprised of numerous felons and their family members, along with the usual gaggle of liberal fools. Who else would they elect?

Liberals should not be allowed to vote (or felons either).

[Brown-Bear]

Maybe this is just me but I don't see this an anti-gun story, nor do I see the quotes as anti-gun. The "whats it gonna take....." to me says whats it gonna take to actually charge this urbanite and lock his ass down for his crimes. Same for the " this is why crime is outta control..." Sounds to me like she's pissed cuz dude never got locked up for a crime he committed earlier and now is back committing more crimes to pay the restituion which he never should have had the option to do.

When are these clowns learn that criminals cannot be rehabilitated and let back inot society?

When will they learn that no matter how many gun laws are passed that the criminal element will still be able to get there hands on them?

I'm gonna post an E-Mail I recieved today in a new thread about this very issue, as I do not want to hi_jack this one.

BB

[crlovel]

Liberals should not be allowed to vote (or felons either).

This comment is interesting. I wonder what kind of politics we would have today if only landowners were permitted to vote in elections, and to do so, you had to pass some sort of simple test to prove you actually know who the candidates are, and their stance on issues that they are pushing, in order to vote. Just a "what if," but I think it's a "what if" that would benefit the country greatly.

By the way, I rent an apartment, so I guess I would be disqualifying myself from the election. But I could live with that, knowing that my vote wouldn't be cancelled out by some mindless drone that was following Oprah's "educated endorsement."

[Philadelphia]

This comment is interesting. I wonder what kind of politics we would have today if only landowners were permitted to vote in elections, and to do so, you had to pass some sort of simple test to prove you actually know who the candidates are, and their stance on issues that they are pushing, in order to vote. Just a "what if," but I think it's a "what if" that would benefit the country greatly.

By the way, I rent an apartment, so I guess I would be disqualifying myself from the election. But I could live with that, knowing that my vote wouldn't be cancelled out by some mindless drone that was following Oprah's "educated endorsement."

Well, to put a finer point on it, people who disagree with me should not be permitted to vote, and those who do should. Just kidding.

You bring up good points about laws of unintended consequences, however. Taking the issue of allowing released felons to vote, a lot of people think once they've served their "debt to society" (as if it could ever be repaid), they should be allowed to vote. They generally would be in favor of prisoner's "rights" and soft judges.

A better policy might be to require a showing of true rehabilitation. Those who are willing to rejoin society as upstanding, honest, productive members of it have their rights restored. Those who don't, don't.

Qualifications for voting by the general public get a little tricky in terms of a right so fundamental to our republic, but thinking about some of the people who end up getting elected, it does make one wonder. . . .

[LittleRedToyota]

Maybe this is just me but I don't see this an anti-gun story, nor do I see the quotes as anti-gun.

i don't either.

but, the events described in it show the ridiculousness of the philly politician's (and at least some of the media) blaming philly's crime problems on guns.

that's what i was getting at with my post.