Judge indicted in White Castle scuffle that led to his own shooting

In early May, a thoroughly bizarre and tragic story came out of Indianapolis. Two Indiana state judges, in town for a statewide judicial conference, had been shot outside a White Castle restaurant in the wee hours of the morning. Both men survived the shooting, and police concluded early on that they had not been targeted because they were judges, but the incident left the entire state judiciary shaken.

Now another strange turn: one of the injured judges, Andrew Adams, has been indicted by a grand jury for his role in the incident. He faces seven counts of low-level felony and misdemeanor charges.

The prosecutor has been very careful to stress the complicated nature of the investigation, which involved two grand juries and everyone claiming self defense. In the meantime, the Indiana Supreme Court has suspended Adams without pay, pending the outcome of the criminal charges and any related disciplinary proceeding.

I did not post about the shooting when it happened because the facts seemed so uncertain. But moving forward, the story certainly bears watching.

One thought on “Judge indicted in White Castle scuffle that led to his own shooting”

  1. Really interesting and bizarre it seems. Just worth to note ( among others ) that :

    The assumption it seems, is that they weren’t targeted because of their occupation as judges or clerks. This can be based upon that description, that the shooters, first reached the place, and attempted first to get into the White castle, only to find the doors locked. Then the incident erupted abruptly. So, if they were the target at first place, should have occurred before attempting to get into the White castle one may assume.

    Also, Two grand juries have been set up, and immunity granted for testimonies It seems, here I quote from one of the related articles:

    ” Having separate grand juries enabled prosecutors to offer immunity to the alleged victims in each grand jury, Curry said, which was designed to help prosecutors overcome any hesitancy to testify by the men involved. Any of four could have declined to speak by asserting their constitutional rights against self-incrimination, Curry said.Under Indiana law, Curry said, if a person is granted immunity then it means his or her testimony cannot be used against them in a prosecution. It does not mean, he said, that the person is immune to prosecution.”



Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: