From the New Braunfels Herald-Zeitung:
Charges dropped in 2008 shooting
By Scott Sticker
Published March 20, 2009
A family is left looking for options after a grand jury dropped charges in a 2008 shooting death.
Keegan Koy Armke — who gunned down Kenneth “Chipper” Pittman in front of his home on Fair Lane during the early hours of Sept. 21 — was no billed by the grand jury on March 4 in the Sept. 21, 2008, shooting death of Kenneth “Chipper” Pittman.
Pittman’s aunt, Deborah Sanders, said the family is disappointed with the results and will remain vigilant in gathering information to look for the next step.
“We were floored,” Sanders said. “It sends a message that you can come to Comal County and shoot someone in the back five times over a verbal altercation and just walk away.”
Local attorney Matt Kyle was hired to represent Armke. He said Armke gave a two-hour testimony in front of the grand jury that could have solidified its decision.
“I don’t know what the grand jury considered before his testimony,” Kyle said. “That afternoon they elected to decide the case that day and returned with a no bill.”
Kyle’s office put together its own investigation on the case, he said. He could not share the specific information he found, but he said “Armke’s defense was corroborated by witnesses.”
“Armke testified he acted in self-defense,” Kyle said. “He was always transparent. He called 911, waited for police and then gave a statement.”
The situation is still mind-boggling to Pittman’s family, Sanders said.
“Keegan called 911 after Chipper was shot,” Sanders said. “Why couldn’t he have called before? He had the wherewithal to go inside his house and get a gun, but not to go inside, lock his door and call 911? I just don’t get it.”
She said the self-defense argument is not convincing.
“How can you shoot someone who was walking away and unarmed and call it ‘self-defense?’” she said. “We’re all just floored by this decision.”
Sanders said she was devastated by the decision, but not surprised.
“The DA’s Office handled this case very poorly,” she said. “The case was passed around three times in their office. There were no witnesses called for my nephew during the trial. We had to call them to get any information. They never contacted us, even after repeated calls and messages left.”
Comal County District Attorney Geoffrey Barr declined to comment other than saying he sympathizes with Pittman’s family.
“Our thoughts and prayers go out to Ms. Sanders and her family,” Barr said. “The grand jury did their job and these were the results after the process.”
The family is unsure of what is the next step, but Sanders said action will be taken.
“We’re looking at our options and what to do next,” she said. “I don’t think this is over. I do feel like God will take care of it.”
Kyle said the grand jury’s ruling could stand strong.
“We have ample evidence to support the grand jury’s decision,” Kyle said. “That evidence will be there to support any claims against my client.”
Pittman’s aunt said it is still hard to cope with the loss.
“I still hear songs on the radio that remind me of him,” Sanders said. “It’s a long process to grieve. I saw a foreign film last night with a son dancing with his grandmother. It brought a vivid memory of Chipper dancing with his grandma.”
Search found 2 matches
Return to “CHL shooting in new braunsfels?”
- Sat Mar 21, 2009 10:56 am
- Forum: General Gun, Shooting & Equipment Discussion
- Topic: CHL shooting in new braunsfels?
- Replies: 5
- Views: 3051
- Fri Sep 26, 2008 12:19 pm
- Forum: General Gun, Shooting & Equipment Discussion
- Topic: CHL shooting in new braunsfels?
- Replies: 5
- Views: 3051
Re: CHL shooting in new braunsfels?
Well, according to the Zeitung, Armke is out on $50,000 bail.
From the NBPD detective: "Penshorn said he was not aware of Armke, 36, having to wear any type of monitoring device, or if he had any type of travel restriction. "
Seems strange to me. Something must have been amiss, else he would not have been arrested. I suppose we will see what the grand jury will say.
From the NBPD detective: "Penshorn said he was not aware of Armke, 36, having to wear any type of monitoring device, or if he had any type of travel restriction. "
Seems strange to me. Something must have been amiss, else he would not have been arrested. I suppose we will see what the grand jury will say.