Guilty verdicts in 2008 Brass Rail sidewalk shooting

[Aardvark154]

Edward Paredes has been found guilty of second-degree murder and Awet Zekarias of manslaughter in the January 12, 2008 shooting death of by-passer John O'Keefe during an argument with bouncers at the Brass Rail.

Witnesses testified that Mr. Paredes 'racked' his semi-automatic pistol and then began to walk away but they returned when the bouncers called to him about a cellphone left behind. Paredes testified that he ”lost it,” turned around, racked his weapon again and raised it in view of the bouncers, who retreated to safety in the bar's vestibule.

So had Paredes taken the shell out of the chamber, dropped and reloaded the clip or did he just bounce a round out onto the sidewalk when he 'racked' the gun a second time. Not an important case fact, but certainly left hanging in the article. It does go to his competence with firearms but then again of course we all know how well firearms and drinking go together and how responsible people normally mix them.

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news...outside-brass-rail-strip-club/article1520256/

 

[The Oracle]

Mr. Paredes claimed he meant only to scare the bouncers when he pulled the trigger. He said he deliberately fired wide of where they had stood and did not notice Mr. O’Keefe as he walked, his back to the shooter, into the bullet’s path.

Yeah sure I believe that one.

Never occurred to the imbecile to fire straight up in the air I guess.

Not that he should be carrying a gun in the first place.

 

[oldjones]

Mr. Paredes claimed he meant only to scare the bouncers when he pulled the trigger. He said he deliberately fired wide of where they had stood and did not notice Mr. O’Keefe as he walked, his back to the shooter, into the bullet’s path.

Yeah sure I believe that one.

Never occurred to the imbecile to fire straight up in the air I guess.

Not that he should be carrying a gun in the first place.

A trauma center in LA treated 116 people wounded by falling bullets, 38 died. Shooting anywhere is dangerous. It's meant to be. Like climbing into the driver's seat after you've had a drink, the stupid thing was carrying in the first place. In both cases the fool believes he can handle his dangerous weapon.

The only difference is the driver might have some useful purpose in mind. A guy who packs doesn't have enough mind to form a purpose at all.

 

[JohnLarue]

A trauma center in LA treated 116 people wounded by falling bullets, 38 died. Shooting anywhere is dangerous. It's meant to be. Like climbing into the driver's seat after you've had a drink, the stupid thing was carrying in the first place. In both cases the fool believes he can handle his dangerous weapon.

The only difference is the driver might have some useful purpose in mind. A guy who packs doesn't have enough mind to form a purpose at all.

Its not the same thing at all
No-one should drink and drive.
Statistically speaking the number of death or serious injury events that occur when someone drinks (a couple of beers) & drives is exceedingly low.
Most people over the age of 45 probably have at one point in their life's driven when they have had too many (ie back in the 1970s)
Most of the same people did not cause a death or serious injury.
Society has made it very clear such behavior is unacceptable
Thats good, but the legal limit is too low because of uncompromising zealots in MADD, who have absolute zero as thier agenda

The number of deaths or serious injuries that occur when someone fires a hand gun is exceedingly high

Not a good comparison at all, it so happens to fit into an arguement of what you feel is right and acceptable by you, therefore it should be what is acceptable for society

 

[S.C. Joe]

I am glad his friend did not get convicted of murder. That was a freaking lie I bet him saying shoot--shoot. Just cause your with some dude who has a gun and that jerk goes firing it and killing somebody doesn't mean your are a murderer!

I do think the bouncers did as his lawyer Robert Tomovski (put it) argued Paredes’ treatment at the hands of the bouncers had “set his passions aflame” and made him “snap and lose it.”

I don't think for one minute either of those guys--punks--went out to looking kill anybody that night. Sure he should had left his gun at home--why I am against most anybody carrying a gun in public.

Last summer as I was leaving the Vapor Lounge around 10 pm one night last July, a bunch of cops were hauling some guy out of the Brass Rail. I over hear the police telling the guy as 2 cops were hauling his butt in to a cop car "you just got a little too" was all I could make out. I then seen a tall bouncer laughing his face off saying "he put up a good fight at first" and some cop laughing with the bouncer.

I wanted to tell them they should just be happy nobody got killed this time but thought being were I was just at and being a tourist thought I better keep my mouth shut and sadly wimped out and kept on walking to the Bloor subway station.

Oh I understand these punks knew they should not be out with a lgun and sure they are punks and might have caused their own trouble but the Brass Rail bouncers and maybe some dancers are not like victims but trouble makers themselves. The was no reason to throw the guy out--they THREW him on to the sidewalk. The bouncers were caught on tape and had to admit it..no reason to be that rough.

Those punks also said they spent alot of cash at the strip club and I believe it...Brass Rail seemed to have no problem with them until their money ran out.

Brass Rail refuses to search any customers for a weapon even thou they been told by the police it might be a good idea. I followed this the best I could reading on line the past few weeks.

After what I seen first hand how the bouncer and the one cop were laughing back in July and what came out in court about this shooting, I will never visit the Brass Rail...I don't care how hot those dancers might be. That club isn't getting a dime of my money.

 

[The Finisher]

A combination of alcohol and testosterone are usually what fuels the obnoxiousness and arrogance in some men.
Add immaturity, a sense of 'badass' mentality and trouble will soon start whether it's at a bar, club, restaurant or any public venue.

I highly doubt the bouncers and dancers goaded these 2 fine gentlemen into acting the way they did that day as I'm sure the rest of the patrons in the Brass Rail would have been thrown out too?! * insert sarcasm *

Besides, how many people bring a loaded gun tucked inside the waist of their pants?

Anyhow, an innocent bystander's life was lost and a 1st degree murder should have been convicted for both these LOSERS!!
It's sad to see that these 2 convicted killers are now crying about how they didn't mean to kill anyone as the shooter initially to plea bargain his case to manslaughter.
It's a good thing the prosecution refused to accept the defense.

If the shooter and his accomplice had successfully shot and killed the bouncer, I bet you dollars to cents that these LOSERS would be bragging.
I seriously doubt that these LOSERS have any remorse for their victim nor rationalized the consequences of their ill-fated decision to return back to the Brass Rail to settle the score.

Again, these LOSERS in life should deserve a much harsher fate than their victim......but I digress.

Yes, let's blame the bouncers for instigating and taunting these convicted men for propelling them to take a gun out and shoot in the direction of the bouncers.

Enuff said...... Edward Paredes (Convicted of 2nd degree murder) and Awet Zekarias (convicted of reduced charge of manslaughter) are both SCUMBAG killers regardless of the degree decreed by the criminal court system!!

RIP John O'Keefe

 

[fuji]

I am glad his friend did not get convicted of murder. That was a freaking lie I bet him saying shoot--shoot. Just cause your with some dude who has a gun and that jerk goes firing it and killing somebody doesn't mean your are a murderer!

Apparently buddy was the one who brought the gun to the club, and handed it to the shooter. That makes him an accessory--but it sounds like people believe his story that he didn't know his friend was going to kill anyone with it, so they got him for the lesser charge of manslaughter instead.

I do think the bouncers did as his lawyer Robert Tomovski (put it) argued Paredes’ treatment at the hands of the bouncers had “set his passions aflame” and made him “snap and lose it.”

Of this I have no doubt whatsoever--the bouncers at the Rail are famous for being assholes and appear to enjoy creating confrontational situations.

That said, normal people simply walk away shaking their heads and calling them assholes--regular folks don't return with a gun and start shooting up the place.

 

[oldjones]

Its not the same thing at all
No-one should drink and drive.
Statistically speaking the number of death or serious injury events that occur when someone drinks (a couple of beers) & drives is exceedingly low.
Most people over the age of 45 probably have at one point in their life's driven when they have had too many (ie back in the 1970s)
Most of the same people did not cause a death or serious injury.
Society has made it very clear such behavior is unacceptable
Thats good, but the legal limit is too low because of uncompromising zealots in MADD, who have absolute zero as thier agenda

The number of deaths or serious injuries that occur when someone fires a hand gun is exceedingly high

Not a good comparison at all, it so happens to fit into an arguement of what you feel is right and acceptable by you, therefore it should be what is acceptable for society

Anyone who judges he's safe to drive after his judgement's fuddled by alcohol is as stupid as the person who imagines they can safely use the gun they're carrying for protection. And vice-versa.

There's a reason why it's called dumb luck. Nothing to do with stats John.

 

[JohnLarue]

Anyone who judges he's safe to drive after his judgement's fuddled by alcohol is as stupid as the person who imagines they can safely use the gun they're carrying for protection. And vice-versa.

There's a reason why it's called dumb luck. Nothing to do with stats John.

Anyone who judges he can draw parallels between two completely different and unrelated acts and call them equal :
a) is using sensationalism to drive his agenda of what he feels should be societies norms
b) lacks the ability to apply reasonable judgment and compromise. A glass of wine or two beer with a dinner is not the same thing a pulling a trigger on a crowded street corner. In your strange world it is the same thing
c) is far to self assured that he knows best.

It has a whole lot to do with Stats
Numbers do not lie, while people attach emotion and preconceived ideals when making self-righteous proclamation's such as one you just made

 

[blackrock13]

Anyone who judges he's safe to drive after his judgement's fuddled by alcohol is as stupid as the person who imagines they can safely use the gun they're carrying for protection. And vice-versa.

There's a reason why it's called dumb luck. Nothing to do with stats John.

I'm not quite sure how this drinking and driving angle fits in, but I believe your points are weak. I'm not big on drinking and driving and I'm often the one to drive others home because of it. The over zealousness of some to make drinking any amount illegal is just wrong. The people in power know that to push for this would be political suicide, so they don't, but this .05 standard is just to slim and just nuts. The numbers are arbitrary as shown by the fact that the BAL for a charge are different in a lot of jurisdictions in Canada. Does that mean that drivers in one province are better drinkers than in other provinces. I don't think so. I've been stopped so many times, often without cause but for the fact that I came out of a bar, and tested, I can't count them. I've never been charged. By the letter of the law I could have been on three occasions but was not at the decression of the officer. I"m a nice guy with no preconceived ideas of being better than them and showing it.

Having said my bit, back to the thread. I find it a dumb argument for anyone to use I/he was drunk for doing anything bad. If you're a dumb/stupid/angry/ugly drunk, too bad. Your action were in you at the start, the booze just allowed it to surface, tough titty kitty. I'm glad someone got what they deserved and will do some time for this brain fart. Now let's deal with the Jane Creba case fast before these guys start getting their OAS.

 

[blackrock13]

Anyone who judges he can draw parallels between two completely different and unrelated acts and call them equal :
a) is using sensationalism to drive his agenda of what he feels should be societies norms
b) lacks the ability to apply reasonable judgment and compromise. A glass of wine or two beer with a dinner is not the same thing a pulling a trigger on a crowded street corner. In your strange world it is the same thing
c) is far to self assured that he knows best.

It has a whole lot to do with Stats
Numbers do not lie, while people attach emotion and preconceived ideals when making self-righteous proclamation's such as one you just made

On this we agree JL.

 

[nottyboi]

I think they both got convicted of the correct crimes. Clearly the shooter decided to pull the trigger, and even if he was just trying to "scare the bouncers" that would have been assault with a deadly weapon. In committing said crime, someone was killed, which makes it 2nd degree murder. (no premeditation or motive). I think the bouncers should be charged with aggravated assault though. Their actions were grossly excessive, amounted to physical assault and really triggered the escalation of violence. Of course that is no excuse for the killers, but behaviour of bouncers should be reviewed. Abusing drunk people can rapidly lead to a spiral of violence. The way they acted was foolish, unprofessional and criminal. If I were the relatives of the dead man I would sue the Brass Rail big time for triggering the clash.

 

[mandrill]

I think the bouncers should be charged with aggravated assault though. Their actions were grossly excessive, amounted to physical assault and really triggered the escalation of violence. Of course that is no excuse for the killers, but behaviour of bouncers should be reviewed. Abusing drunk people can rapidly lead to a spiral of violence. The way they acted was foolish, unprofessional and criminal. If I were the relatives of the dead man I would sue the Brass Rail big time for triggering the clash.

Probably are doing just that. No point suing the 2 convicts who no longer have $$ and never will. The Brass has brass and should pay something.

Bet you most judges would have no sympathy with it either.

 

[The Oracle]

. I think the bouncers should be charged with aggravated assault though. Their actions were grossly excessive, amounted to physical assault and really triggered the escalation of violence. Of course that is no excuse for the killers, but behaviour of bouncers should be reviewed. Abusing drunk people can rapidly lead to a spiral of violence. The way they acted was foolish, unprofessional and criminal. If I were the relatives of the dead man I would sue the Brass Rail big time for triggering the clash.

Why in gods name would you want the bouncers charged with assault?

Their reaction to the situation both inside the club and outside was never questioned and nor should it have been.

What would you have had them do diffferent exactly?

 

[fuji]

What would you have had them do diffferent exactly?

Have you been to the Brass Rail? The bouncers are assholes, the guy whose photograph has been in all the articles most especially. He's a complete dick, and seems to seek out confrontations with customers. I have no doubt that he provoked the two guys who were ejected and intentionally did everything he could to piss them off. This does not justify murder, of course, normal people would just give him the finger as they walk out, and take their business elsewhere, not come back with guns and shoot the place up.

Charging him with assault is not right, I doubt his behavior crosses the line into criminal. He's just obnoxious. A better plan would be, as oagre suggested, for the family of the guy who died to sue the Brass Rail into bankruptcy, for unnecessarily provoking a dangerous situation in which their son died. The new owners would presumably then hire better bouncers.

 

[nottyboi]

Why in gods name would you want the bouncers charged with assault?

Their reaction to the situation both inside the club and outside was never questioned and nor should it have been.

What would you have had them do diffferent exactly?

Did you see the video tape? if not I suggest you watch it:


http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news...imself-for-brass-rail-killing/article1502301/

 

[The Oracle]

Have you been to the Brass Rail? The bouncers are assholes, the guy whose photograph has been in all the articles most especially. He's a complete dick, and seems to seek out confrontations with customers.

That said most customers just walk away shaking their heads as to how the place can stay in business with such assholes on staff, they don't come back with guns and shoot the place up.

Charging him with assault is not righte--a better result would be for the family of the guy who died to sue the Brass Rail into bankruptcy, for unnecessarily provoking a dangerous situation in which their son died. The new owners would presumably then hire better bouncers.

Yes I have been to the Rail.

Yes I know the bouncer in question who was named in the article.

Yes I know the G.M. of the Rail.

I've never seen any of these guys ever have a problem with any customer who was minding their P's and Q's.

But I have seen them toss out the trash when needs be.

In my vast experience in nightclubs and bars if a customer causes a disturabance and is subsequently asks to leave and refuses then he is going to leave the hard way.

 

[fuji]

I've never seen any of these guys ever have a problem with any customer who was minding their P's and Q's.

Sure I'll agree that's true. However, when someone does something they shouldn't do--however minor--they overreact, provoke, and appear to enjoy it.

In my vast experience in nightclubs and bars if a customer causes a disturabance and is subsequently asks to leave and refuses then he is going to leave the hard way.

I gather your experience has mostly been with the Brass Rail then. In my experience the bouncers in other clubs, most especially other strip clubs, are generally good at defusing situations without confrontation and it's relatively rare that things escalate to the point of physical violence--everywhere but the Brass Rail.

I saw a guy in the Rail once who had moved his table slightly to get a better view, but he put it into the aisle obstructing the flow of people a little. The bouncer came up and without a single word forcibly moved it back to where it had originally been, physically knocking the guy backwards in the process. The guy had just come in and sat down, no previous history there. You can say he wasn't minding his "P's and Q's" but a far more appropriate response would be a polite, "Excuse me sir, but the table can't be out in the aisle like this, would you mind moving it back a bit?"

I note in the video that nottyboi provided that when the bouncer ejects these guys from the Rail they appear to give him a completely unnecessary violent shove after he is out the door. That's exactly the sort of thing I'm talking about. They didn't need to do that, and it contributed to escalating the situation.

 

[The Oracle]

Did you see the video tape? if not I suggest you watch it:


http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news...imself-for-brass-rail-killing/article1502301/

Thanks for the link to the video

As I have been told there was not any excessive force used.

The customers were asked politely to leave.

They refused even threatened the staff of the bar.

The bouncers attempted to remove them with as little force as necessary.

The customers resisted and escalated the situation.

As a result the force was increased and the one guy was pushed to the sidewalk.

The second guy was taken out in a cross face choke. Can a little painfull but otherwise its a humane way to restrain someone.

So i'll repeat my question.

Why charge the bouncers?

 

[nottyboi]

Thanks for the link to the video

As I have been told there was not any excessive force used.

The customers were asked politely to leave.

They refused even threatened the staff of the bar.

The bouncers attempted to remove them with as little force as necessary.

The customers resisted and escalated the situation.

As a result the force was increased and the one guy was pushed to the sidewalk.

The second guy was taken out in a cross face choke. Can a little painfull but otherwise its a humane way to restrain someone.

So i'll repeat my question.

Why charge the bouncers?

Looked to me like excessive force, they were shoved to to ground even after they were outside the premises. Perhaps the investigation showed that not to be the case. But to me the bouncers only had the right to remove them from the premises. In either case a man was killed, but those two scumbags will have a long time to think about it.