April 17, 2009 in City

Spokane shooting case rests with jury

South Hill gunman claims self-defense
Thomas Clouse Staff writer
 

Jurors will continue this morning deliberating on whether a Spokane man was justified for twice shooting another man during a 2007 dispute – or if he should go to prison for murder.

Prosecutors charged Allan L. Turnipseed, 51, with second-degree murder in the June 14, 2007, shooting death of Joshua A. Smith at Eighth Avenue and Ferrall Street, outside Turnipseed’s lower South Hill home.

The trial started last week before Superior Court Judge Greg Sypolt.

Deputy Prosecutor Steve Garvin told jurors in his closing argument Thursday that they should rely on the forensic evidence, which indicates that Turnipseed pressed a gun against Smith’s back before firing the second shot. Garvin said that second shot could not be considered self-defense.

The shooting was the culmination of two encounters in successive days between Turnipseed and Smith, who twice threatened to use a tire iron to assault Turnipseed following shouting matches, according to court testimony.

“At the end of the day … Joshua Smith tried to leave. He put away his tire iron. He told Mr. Turnipseed that he wanted to leave,” Garvin said. “But Mr. Turnipseed took his gun … and shot him not once, but twice. Ladies and gentlemen, that’s murder. That is the intentional killing of another.”

Defense attorney Senit Lutgen said the prosecution relied too heavily on forensic tests. He told the jury to discard eyewitness testimony that supported Turnipseed’s contention that he fired only after Smith had struck him with a car.

“Undoubtedly, there are decisions made by both parties that we don’t agree with. It may not have been smart to stand in front of a car driven by a guy who gets that angry. Stupid is not a crime, of that I assure you,” Lutgen said.

He said that on June 14, Smith approached Turnipseed with the tire iron and goaded him to shoot.

“There wouldn’t be a trial if (Turnipseed) shot right then. That’s classic self-defense,” Lutgen said. “My biggest fear is the credibility that you give the forensics test, because it is not there. Science is wrong sometimes.”

The prosecution said testing showed that Turnipseed was running alongside Smith’s car and shot him as he tried to drive away. But other witnesses testified that they saw Smith bump into Turnipseed with the car before he peeled out with Turnipseed on the hood.

“They want you to believe a 50-year-old man with an injured knee spun and then runs like an Olympic track star,” Lutgen said. “How did they test that?”

Lutgen asked the jury to consider the fear Turnipseed must have felt on the hood of the car.

“There is no way to find this man guilty. You don’t have to like him. But you have to do the right thing,” he said.

Garvin said the right thing to do would be to hold Turnipseed accountable for taking the law into his own hands.

“Mr. Smith is the person who disarmed himself first. He put his weapon back in his car … and was trying to leave. And there was no need to kill him,” Garvin said. “Whatever crimes he may or may not have committed, it was not Mr. Turnipseed’s job or responsibility or legal right to act as judge, jury and executioner on June 14.”

Get stories like this in a free daily email


Please keep it civil. Don't post comments that are obscene, defamatory, threatening, off-topic, an infringement of copyright or an invasion of privacy. Read our forum standards and community guidelines.

You must be logged in to post comments. Please log in here or click the comment box below for options.

comments powered by Disqus