Latest News

The McShane Firm Press Release re: Commonwealth v. Curtis Williams

March 10, 2011

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE

Statement of Justin McShane, Esquire (counsel for Curtis Williams)
Additional Questions: Please call (ask for Jessica Brehm)

Re: Commonwealth v. Curtis Williams

The result in this case would have been wildly different if the Jury had been permitted to know the truth, which was that the rather large man who stepped out of his rather large SUV who was yelling and approaching Curtis and his kids was in fact very drunk (0.15 BAC as determined by the medical records from his treatment).

Had the legislature enacted the popular “Castle Doctrine” today’s unfortunate verdict would not have occurred. It is doubtful that Curtis would have even been charged. By all accounts, Curtis is a great father who was licensed to carry a firearm. He has enjoyed this constitutional right to do so for over 10 years. He has no prior record whatsoever. He acted in self-defense of his kids when a rather large man (6’ tall and 275 pounds) who was stranger to him driving a rather large SUV jumped out of that SUV twice approaching his small car with his kids in it.

The result in this case would have been wildly different if the Jury had been permitted to know the truth, which was that the rather large man who stepped out of his rather large SUV who was yelling and approaching Curtis and his kids was in fact very drunk (0.15 BAC as determined by the medical records from his treatment). The District Attorney has declined to prosecute this aggressive drunk driver at all.

One cannot help to wonder if there was any sort of justice rendered from all of this.

Curtis now faces, at the very minimum 5-10 years away from his kids that he was trying to protect. In fact, the state sentencing guidelines suggest a sentence that is closer to ten years as a minimum time. They will be grown men by the time he gets out. This sort of unjustly harsh sentence is not in the hands of the Judge because of the Pennsylvania legislature’s cookie-cutter one-size-fits-all mandatory minimum scheme. The decision to insist upon such a harsh sentence is solely in the hands of the District Attorney. He can, if he wants to, ask the court to deviate from such a harsh and unjust sentence. We implore District Attorney Marsico, who is well known as being fair and wise, to examine in his heart of heart everything about this case and not force the Court to render such a drastic sentence.

##

‹ Back to News