ILNews

Attorney who staged own shooting pleads to misdemeanor

Dave Stafford
September 25, 2013
Back to TopCommentsE-mailPrintBookmark and Share

A southern Indiana lawyer who rigged a shotgun at a state park that he used to shoot himself in the back has pleaded guilty to a misdemeanor and will receive a suspended sentence while avoiding a felony conviction.

Peter Raventos, 44, who practiced in Spencer, entered a plea of guilty to a count of Class B misdemeanor false reporting Tuesday in Owen Circuit Court, according to his attorney, Paul J. Watts of Spencer. Prosecutors dropped a Class D felony charge of obstruction of justice as part of the plea deal.

Watts said Raventos will undergo counseling and must make restitution and provide a small amount of community service. But why Raventos staged his own shooting at McCormick’s Creek State Park near Spencer is still a mystery.

“The prosecuting attorney was reasonable and fair in evaluating the case. Mr. Raventos was going through a very bad time,” Watts said, calling the disposition appropriate in light of the facts of the case.

Owen County Prosecutor Donald VanDerMoere II said Raventos’ sentence orders that he be assessed and complete any mental-health and substance abuse counseling ordered and that he serve probation for one year. Raventos also is ordered to stay out of Indiana State Parks during the period of his probation, VanDerMoere said.

VanDerMoere said Raventos never provided investigators with a motive, but the prosecutor said Raventos did provide Department of Natural Resources investigators statements that allayed their fears. VanDerMoere said Raventos told investigators that he staged the shooting only aimed at himself, and that he didn’t stage the shooting with the intent of pursuing financial gain.

Raventos called 911 at 10:05 p.m. June 25, 2012, and told conservation officers he had been shot in the back by an unknown gunman. Conservation officers said evidence collected at the scene, in subsequent searches of Raventos’ car and his home suggested he staged the event to portray himself as the victim of a random shooting.

Raventos was taken to IU Health Methodist Hospital in Indianapolis where he was treated for wounds inflicted by more than 20 shotgun pellets.

Authorities said Raventos’ claim of an assailant in the park quickly began to unravel.  From witness interviews and evidence, conservation officers concluded that Raventos rigged a shotgun so he could fire it at himself from some distance.

Witness statements led conservation officers to an area of the park where the shooting was believed to have occurred, DNR said. There officers found evidence including bungee cords, fishing line, a spent shotgun shell, an unspent shotgun shell and a small piece of plywood embedded with shotgun pellets, likely indicating a practice firing.

Conservation officer scuba divers searched the nearby White River and located a 20-gauge shotgun that was later linked to Raventos.

Raventos was admitted to practice law in October 1995. He was among more than 300 attorneys suspended in June under a blanket order of the Indiana Surpeme Court for CLE, fee and IOLTA violations.

Raventos could not be reached for comment.




 

ADVERTISEMENT

Post a comment to this story

COMMENTS POLICY
We reserve the right to remove any post that we feel is obscene, profane, vulgar, racist, sexually explicit, abusive, or hateful.
 
You are legally responsible for what you post and your anonymity is not guaranteed.
 
Posts that insult, defame, threaten, harass or abuse other readers or people mentioned in Indiana Lawyer editorial content are also subject to removal. Please respect the privacy of individuals and refrain from posting personal information.
 
No solicitations, spamming or advertisements are allowed. Readers may post links to other informational websites that are relevant to the topic at hand, but please do not link to objectionable material.
 
We may remove messages that are unrelated to the topic, encourage illegal activity, use all capital letters or are unreadable.
 

Messages that are flagged by readers as objectionable will be reviewed and may or may not be removed. Please do not flag a post simply because you disagree with it.

Sponsored by

facebook - twitter on Facebook & Twitter

Indiana State Bar Association

Indianapolis Bar Association

Evansville Bar Association

Allen County Bar Association

Indiana Lawyer on Facebook

facebook
ADVERTISEMENT
Subscribe to Indiana Lawyer
  1. Such things are no more elections than those in the late, unlamented Soviet Union.

  2. It appears the police and prosecutors are allowed to change the rules halfway through the game to suit themselves. I am surprised that the congress has not yet eliminated the right to a trial in cases involving any type of forensic evidence. That would suit their foolish law and order police state views. I say we eliminate the statute of limitations for crimes committed by members of congress and other government employees. Of course they would never do that. They are all corrupt cowards!!!

  3. Poor Judge Brown probably thought that by slavishly serving the godz of the age her violations of 18th century concepts like due process and the rule of law would be overlooked. Mayhaps she was merely a Judge ahead of her time?

  4. in a lawyer discipline case Judge Brown, now removed, was presiding over a hearing about a lawyer accused of the supposedly heinous ethical violation of saying the words "Illegal immigrant." (IN re Barker) http://www.in.gov/judiciary/files/order-discipline-2013-55S00-1008-DI-429.pdf .... I wonder if when we compare the egregious violations of due process by Judge Brown, to her chiding of another lawyer for politically incorrectness, if there are any conclusions to be drawn about what kind of person, what kind of judge, what kind of apparatchik, is busy implementing the agenda of political correctness and making off-limits legit advocacy about an adverse party in a suit whose illegal alien status is relevant? I am just asking the question, the reader can make own conclsuion. Oh wait-- did I use the wrong adjective-- let me rephrase that, um undocumented alien?

  5. of course the bigger questions of whether or not the people want to pay for ANY bussing is off limits, due to the Supreme Court protecting the people from DEMOCRACY. Several decades hence from desegregation and bussing plans and we STILL need to be taking all this taxpayer money to combat mostly-imagined "discrimination" in the most obviously failed social program of the postwar period.

ADVERTISEMENT