Posted on Tue, 04/29/2008 - 22:58 — by vjb50
The jury knew that Christopher Hollis was not guilty in the murder of his best friend Meleia Willis-Starbuck. As mentioned several times before, Mr. Hollis went there to protect his friend as he was called there to the scene, that night three years ago, July 2005. The decision of manslaughter was handed down by the jury, they had agreed that Christopher Hollis did not intentionally murder Ms. Meleia Willis-Starbuck. However, the sentence does not change what occurred on that unfaithful night, nor does it give Ms. Willis-Starbuck back to her family, this may be a lesson to many other young people. These situations involve more than one person, it involve several other individual's and many lives are never the same. The choices a person decides to make, one must live with forever. When a person's life is taken away, you cannot replace that lost, for nothing in this world, all is left are the what ifs.
|
Home |
Classifieds |
Real Estate |
Jobs |
Cars |
Place An Ad |
Advertise |
Subscriber Services |
RSS © 2000- Bay Area News Group | Privacy Policy | Contact Us | Help |
 |
| MediaNews Group - Northern California Network |
Joined: Apr 2008
Posts: 1
Report ptrichmondmike
Let's see...
Hollis is called by his friend to bring a gun to a street altercation.
When he arrives, he doesn't see her in a crowd of young people.
He fires the gun anyway, as a "warning," DIRECTLY INTO the crowd. (How did he know this was the right group to "warn" if he couldn't see his friend?).
How is this not second degree murder? What is with juries these days?
Joined: Mar 2008
Posts: 472
Report The Trouble I See
Go suck on a egg!!!!!!!!!!
Joined: Mar 2008
Posts: 472
Report The Trouble I See
Mr.Hollis is no hard core killer, he had alot of stress on his mind from those phone calls! Justice was served at it's finest cant wait for him to come home! I think he has learned his lesson and beleive you me we wont have to worry about him anymore.
Joined: Jan 2008
Posts: 282
Report jif
Hey, ptrichmond, you hit the nail on the head! If there is any solace in this story it is that if you ever decide to turn to a life of crime you can count on an Alameda jury to go easy on you. I guess Hans Reiser just got the wrong jury, maybe he should ask for another trial with this jury. Don't concern yourself with Trouble he is a walking, talking bag of contradictions. On another thread he is screaming and crying about the woman who was killed when a stray bullet hit her in the head while she slept. Guess what Trouble, the guy who killed her can use the same defense as your "Mr. Hollis" if he is ever caught. I hope it isn't anyone you know - another good boy who made a mistake and now he feels sad because he killed the mother of a one-year old. Fear not, he will have his own entourage of supporters all talking about how he had a lot of stress on his mind because someone looked at him funny-style and he had to shoot because....blah, blah, blah!
Joined: Mar 2008
Posts: 472
Report The Trouble I See
The gloves come off now!!!!! I reference Mr.Hollis because I know him and have known him and his family for years. As for the stray bullet that is like comparing apples and oranges!!! If someone you love calls you and you hear arguing in the back ground then they say bring a gun,Im sure he did not know what to do! The world of the streets and the world of getting up going to work are two different worlds if you don't understand them you wont understand them!!!!!!!!!! Cant use the same logic it does not apply a disgruntle boss and a disgruntle man on drugs with a gun you do the bargaining. You tell me what to say to a gun professor.
Joined: Apr 2008
Posts: 68
Report vjb50
Let me ask you this Ms. "Purdue" seems that you have a answer for all things. You speak as if you have never made an contradiction, and I find it not to be factual.....but otherwise...back to the subject...There is a difference between Hans Reiser and Christopher Hollis's defense team. First of all, in case you do not know, Christopher Hollis has a Public Defender by the name of Greg Syren and the lawyer that is representing Hans Reiser is a private attorney. Do you understand the reason why, they have two entirely different representatives? Hopefully, you can figure it out. The victim's of the these three cases were not victim's of your so-called slang terminology "funny style!" That is ignorant language. Do I need to define the nature of these murder's? Perhaps, I should...Shaniece Davis was a victim of a drive-by. The nature behind Miss Davis's murder, we do not know. It is an unfortunate murder, to have happen to this young woman and mother. All your going by is an assumption, and that is not good enough. Come with the facts! Meleia Willis-Starbuck is a victim by a bullet fired from the weapon of her friend Christopher Hollis, yes I did say friend, who had fired into the air the night of July 25, 2005. See, what you do not recognize the jury believed Christopher's public defender, that he , Christopher Hollis did not intend to harm any person. If you are unhappy with the decision, go and talk with the jury. Mrs. Nina Reiser was a victim of murder by her husband, Hans Reiser. Does that help to clarify the nature of the said crime? There was not nothing surrounding any of these three murder's on the bases of "funny style!" Now if it makes you feel better, how about taking a number and stand in line to become a the next prospective juror in the murder trial of Alameda country. I am certain you'll convict every person who appears to be guilty or even look guilty in your eyes, correct?
Joined: Mar 2008
Posts: 472
Report The Trouble I See
I am certain you'll convict every person who appears to be guilty or even look guilty in your eyes, correct? Because of people like(lets change its name to SUPER MS.PURDUE) MY COUSIN AND FRIEND WERE SENTENCED TO TWENTY FIVE TO LIFE AND ENDED UP SERVING FIFTHTEEN YEARS FOR A CRIME THEY DID'NT COMMIT ON TOP OF THAT THEY WERE NOT EVEN PRESENT AND HAD NO KNOWLEDGE OF, AND THEY HAD THE GUY THAT DID IT ON T.V ADMITTING TO DOING THE CRIME PRIOR TO THE CONVICTION!!!!! I WISH THEY STILL WORE BED SHEETS!!!!!!!!!!!!
Joined: Jan 2008
Posts: 282
Report jif
Trouble you say he heard arguing in the background and he did not know what to do - so he brought a gun! Good choice, enough said! And vjb, I think I can read between the very fine lines of your post - is the difference their race and financial status? I'm just guessing, but I hope I got it right. No s*** sherlock! I am not comparing the Reiser and Hollis crimes, I was trying to make a point. Guess what, Reiser is guilty and everyone knew it and so is Hollis. Reiser should rot in jail for what he did. You see, I don't have a problem with putting folks in prison, regardless of race or opportunity. Can you say the same? I can see that you had no trouble putting whitey away based solely on circumstantial evidence, but you have trouble putting Hollis away with a confession. Reiser is not a threat to anyone now that he has eliminated his wife, so why so harsh? I will tell you why the harsh punishment, it is supposed to be a payment to society when you take the life of another. Time for both of them to pay, but since Reiser is not a poor, down trodden kid from the projects you think he needs to do some real hard time? Go on, admit it! Come on, I saw the smile on your face from here - you like the idea of getting even with a system that was admittedly unjust in times past and you hope Reiser is put in a cell with the sandwich killer to teach the pale-faced hill dweller a lesson. Additionally, I hope you do not honestly believe that any defense attorney (paid for by either private or public funds) is not going to raise the same defense in the Davis murder as was raised in the Willis murder. My only true prejudice is against lawyers, and I can tell you that each one of those sharks would bring the same defense for Davis' murderer and sleep like a baby at night! Too bad for the family, I'm just doing my job is what they say as they count leaping dollar bills as they drift off to sleep.
Joined: Mar 2008
Posts: 472
Report The Trouble I See
Jif the difference between Reiser and Hollis is he admitted to his wrong doing as a man and believe it or not that counts for something!!! Reiser's crime was premeditated I bet my bottom dollar Hollis would have rather still been at that party rather he got away or not!!! He was called when he woke up that day he didn't think he would have killed someone before the next day let alone his sister but I also bet Reiser DID!!!!
Joined: Jan 2008
Posts: 282
Report jif
He admitted his deed only after he knew his compatriot told on him. Big man indeed!
Joined: May 2008
Posts: 1
Report Observer
oo I knew Meleia, I respected her, and I loved her.
oo That is not why I believe, though, that Hollis committed murder and not voluntary manslaughter. I believe that Hollis IS guilty of murder because he fired a gun directly into a group of people who were unarmed and were not provoking him in any way. "pritchmondmike" nails it when he writes "How is this not second degree murder?"
oo Hollis was not a close friend of Meleia, let alone her best friend. At most, he was a high school friend whom she spent time with the summer she came back to Berkeley. All sorts of people call one another “brother” and “sister.” Those of us who really knew Meleia know that those terms were merely a figure of speech.
oo At Hollis' preliminary hearing, one of the people who was a-c-t-u-a-l-l-y close to Meleia – in fact, held her as she lay dying -- testified that a few weeks before Hollis killed Meleia, the three of them were in her apartment together. The witness said that Meleia discovered that Hollis had a gun on him, got upset, and told him to get rid of it in no uncertain terms. Anyone who really knew Meleia knew that she was opposed to guns. There is n-o w-a-y that she would have told Hollis to bring a gun -- and Hollis has never, ever said that she did! Whoever testified that he heard Meleia tell Hollis to bring a gun on the night she died either misheard her or was lying to protect his own sorry [bleep].
oo I find it insulting to hear "The Trouble I See" assert that "... Hollis is no hard core killer..." That is p-r-e-c-i-s-e-l-y what he is, along with being a loose canon. He shot a [bleep]' gun into a crowd of people. Not once but several times. Are you honestly going to sit there and try to convince me that Hollis didn't think anything bad would happen? What, was he firing with blanks? Did he think that he was such a poor shot that a gun that he fired over and over again wouldn't have its intended effect on s-o-m-e-o-n-e? Please, don't insult me! And don't you dare talk to me about stress. Stress. You don't know what stress is unless you've lost a precious friend in a senseless murder and watched her mother sob in grief.
oo TTIS – don't you dare talk to me about "the streets" and Hollis coming to Meleia's aid. There was no street action going on that night, except in Hollis’ head. More to the point, if Hollis was trying to protect Meleia, why didn't he look for her? Why didn't he remove her from the men who were giving her and her friends a hard time? There's really only one answer to that: Hollis’ primary concern wasn’t Meleia. He was playing some self-involved game with himself: one that resulted in him killing Meleia.
oo I agree with "JIF" about Hollis' "admission." He only admitted a part of what he had done when he was caught a-n-d he knew that the other Chiris had agreed to testify against him.
Joined: Jan 2008
Posts: 282
Report jif
Thank you Observer. I can only imagine how diificult it is for you, a true friend, to read these lies about your friend's death. I wish there was something I could say that would change that, but I am a realist. My only hope is that you not pay any attention to Trouble and vjb, and their criminal apologist comments. I did not know Ms. Starbuck and I am offended by their suggestions that this is just one big misunderstanding. I apologize for anything I may have said in these forums about your friend that was disparaging. I, too, fell into the trap of thinking that there was a greater connection between Hollis and Ms. Starbuck. I should have known better.
Joined: Mar 2008
Posts: 472
Report The Trouble I See
It was enough connection for her to call him in a time of need! So she let anybody in her house? And where have you been why are you just now saying something?
Joined: Mar 2008
Posts: 472
Report The Trouble I See
She brought fourth her own demise, she should have left when she had the chance! Hollis was somewhere else doing something else! She called him he did not just happen on that site! He was confused, a harden criminal would have walked in the middle of that crowd and got busy! You cant count that one to my thousand professor! I wish I had only lost one dear friend my brother is dead!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! And he didn't call anyone to come do harm to somebody else if she didn't care about him why did she put his life in danger? Why didn't she just keep walking like everybody else?
Joined: Jan 2008
Posts: 282
Report jif
Way to go Trouble, blame the victim! I think I've heard something like that before. Oh yeah, it goes like this: She was asking for it! So Hollis is the victim (the victim who shot into a crowd of living human beings with no regard for their lives!) and Starbuck is to be blamed for getting in the way of one of those bullets and ruining this good boy's life. OK, I think I understand!
Joined: Mar 2008
Posts: 472
Report The Trouble I See
THEY BOTH WERE WRONG NOT BLAME ONE AND DONT BLAME THE OTHER! LOOK AT WHAT HAPPENED, SHE CALLED HIM TO DO HARM TO SOMEONE ELSE, (GOD DONT LIKE UGLY) IF SHE HAD JUST KEPT WALKING GOT IN THE CAR AND WENT ON WITH HER NIGHT, WE WOULD BE TALKING ABOUT SOMETHING ELSE WOULD'NT YOU SAY? IM NOT TRYING TO BE NASTY BECAUSE THIS WAS A LOOSE, LOOSE CITUATION NO ONE WON! FOR EVRY ACTION THERE IS A REACTION WOULD'NT YOU SAY!
Joined: Jan 2008
Posts: 282
Report jif
I would say that if one of my friends called me to the scene of a disagreement and asked me to bring a gun (I have one!) I would say, "Hell no!" I would then ask that they explain what is going on and give them advice based on what they said. I would never respond with guns a-blazing and ask questions later. Do you see the difference?!
Joined: Mar 2008
Posts: 472
Report The Trouble I See
HAVE YOU EVER BEEN PUT IN THAT PERDICAMENT? SO YOU DONT KNOW WHAT YOU WOULD SAY OR DO, YOU KNOW WHAT YOU MIGHT SAY OR DO!
Joined: Jan 2008
Posts: 282
Report jif
No I have not had to make that choice, but there is no question in my mind about what I would do. I can guarantee that I would not bring a gun to an argument and I would not shoot a gun into a crowd of people. I know I wouldn't do these things because they go against everything I believe. I would have given a great deal of critical thought to the request and refused because the gun would not solve the problem. Please do not apply ghetto thinking to everything. Regular, decent people can tell you, in no uncertain terms, what they would and would not do given certain circumstances. People with the mentality of which you speak will not act predictably because they do not care about the consequences of their actions. They care about the here and now, and what they do can do to make themselves feel better. They care about the drama of perceived wrongs, not about the appropriate way to address those wrongs. Stop making excuses!
Joined: Mar 2008
Posts: 472
Report The Trouble I See
BUT THESE ARE NOT REGULAR PEOPLE OR REGULAR CIRCUMSTANCES, WOULD'NT YOU SAY?HOW CAN WE EXPECT YOU TO THINK RIGHT BEING NORMAL IN A NORMAL CITUATION AND THEM TO THINK RIGHT NOT BEING NORMAL? TO THEM ALL WAS NORMAL
Joined: Jan 2008
Posts: 282
Report jif
Finally, you and I agree! There is nothing normal about these people or their brains. Therefore, anybody who believes their nonsensical defenses is suspect in my mind.