Advertisement

NORTH HOLLYWOOD : Shooting Case Jury to Start Deliberating

Share

A Superior Court jury will begin deliberations today in the attempted murder and rape trial of a Los Angeles man who shot two people when he stormed a North Hollywood apartment.

Closing arguments began Tuesday in the case of Troyal (Troy) Lee Sims, a city parking enforcement officer who faces three life prison terms if convicted in the Aug. 30 crime spree that he claims was prompted by concern for his girlfriend.

Sims admitted he shot two people in an apartment on the 11000 block of Hesby Street.

The reasons for the shooting will be decided by the jury, as will the issue of whether Sims later abducted his girlfriend at gunpoint and raped her.

Advertisement

“This is not a case, ladies and gentlemen, about any rescue,” Deputy Dist. Atty. Linda Acaldo told the jury.

“This is not a case about self-defense. This is a case about an angry, spurned Troy Sims trying to get back at (his girlfriend).”

While admitting that Sims’ girlfriend had become involved with several people operating a criminal enterprise, Acaldo stressed that society does not condone vigilantism and every person--even criminals--deserves to be protected while in his or her own home.

Acaldo disputed Sims’ claim of self-defense and reminded the jury that he admitted kicking down the front door to the apartment.

In his closing argument, defense attorney John E. Sweeney laboriously detailed the issue of reasonable doubt and said Acaldo had not met this legal burden.

Sweeney examined testimony that differed between the trial and prior court hearings.

But at the center of the case is Sims’ right to fire at the individuals in the apartment because he thought he was defending his girlfriend and he was also being threatened by the occupants, according to Sweeney.

Advertisement

However, Superior Court Judge Kathryne Ann Stoltz ruled Monday that the jury will not be able to consider his self-defense or defense of others theory.

Sweeney said Tuesday that he “vehemently” objected to the ruling and it may serve as the basis for an appeal.

Advertisement