Arguments in the trial of Christopher Hollis for the alleged murder of Meleia Willis-Starbuck '07 came to a close Thursday morning after nearly three years of delays. Hollis is being tried in Alameda County Superior Court for fatally shooting Willis-Starbuck in Berkeley, Calif. in July 2005. Willis-Starbuck had been interning in Berkeley, her hometown, during her sophomore summer when the incident occurred.
The killing occurred following a phone call Willis-Starbuck made to Hollis, a close friend since high school, asking for assistance with an altercation she and a group of women had had with members of the University of California, Berkeley football team. Hollis shot Willis-Starbuck as he fired into the crowd from a vehicle driven by his friend. He then left the scene.
Hollis does not dispute shooting Willis-Starbuck, but maintains that he acted to defend his friend from perceived imminent danger.
Deputy district attorney Elgin Lowe contends Hollis was retaliating against what Hollis perceived as the football players' disrespectful actions.
Lowe said in an interview with The Dartmouth that Hollis, who is now 24, deserves to be found guilty of a minimum of second-degree murder because there were no mitigating circumstances. The jury would have to believe that Hollis was convinced Willis-Starbuck was about to be killed or gravely injured, Lowe said, to convict Hollis of the lesser charge of manslaughter, as Hollis's attorney recommends. This was not the case, Lowe said.
"At the time of the gunfire, he clearly didn't see her," Lowe said. "And that's wrong. You can't just shoot because a crowd of people disrespected a friend."
Assistant public defender Greg Syren, the attorney representing Hollis, insisted in his arguments that Hollis acted to protect Willis-Starbuck and intended to scare the football players away by shooting above their heads, not to physically hurt anybody.
Lowe told The Dartmouth that he disagrees with that account of events, but conceded that it is possible.
"If the jury sees it as manslaughter, I can respect that," Lowe said.
Deliberations began early Thursday afternoon. Lowe said he cannot estimate when a verdict will be returned because the jury, which is not in session on Friday, will not return until Monday.
Lowe joined the case in the spring of 2006, after preliminary investigations had been completed. He never spoke to Willis-Starbuck's mother, who now lives in Georgia, but did contact Willis-Starbuck's stepfather.
Lowe said he believes the Willis-Starbuck family is sympathetic towards Hollis, as family members participated in a restorative justice program, which encourages people to express their feelings to allow them to accept the past. Lowe added that the family is still angry about Hollis's actions, but has come to understand the "tragic nature" of the situation.
"He's a person," Lowe said. "He just made a big, stupid mistake."
Calls placed to Hollis's attorney, assistant public defender Greg Syren, were not returned by press time.
