ILNews

Lawyer-legislator's attacker on trial

Back to TopE-mailPrintBookmark and Share
Indiana Lawyer Rehearing

The man accused of attacking a lawyer-legislator last year because of a 23-year-old legal dispute is on trial in Hamilton Superior Court, facing multiple felony charges and potentially 100 years or more in prison.

The trial began Sept. 7 for Augustus J. Mendenhall, who was charged following the October 2009 attack on Rep. Edward DeLaney, D-Indianapolis, who is also an attorney. The man used a fake name to meet with DeLaney about a possible real estate deal in Carmel, but when the two met, Mendenhall beat DeLaney and tried to shoot him, according to news reports. A witness called police after seeing DeLaney and Mendenhall acting suspiciously, and believing DeLaney was in danger. When police arrived, they found Mendenhall on top of DeLaney, punching him in the head. DeLaney suffered injuries to his head and face in the attack. Police later learned that the man held a grudge about a legal dispute from the 1980s involving Mendenhall’s father, and that appeared to have led to this attack.

Also an attorney, Mendenhall was admitted to the bar in October 2008 and the Indiana Supreme Court suspended him in July 2010 because of this incident.

Mendenhall was charged with attempted murder, felony robbery resulting in serious bodily injury, felony criminal confinement, and misdemeanor resisting law enforcement. Setting aside 10 days for the trial, Hamilton Superior Judge William J. Hughes heard testimony that included DeLaney.

Mendenhall’s attorney Jack Crawford is presenting an insanity defense, and the court docket shows physicians listed as expert witnesses to testify in the case.
 

Rehearing "It's a dangerous legal world" IL Nov. 25-Dec. 8, 2009

ADVERTISEMENT

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. The sad thing is that no fish were thrown overboard The "greenhorn" who had never fished before those 5 days was interrogated for over 4 hours by 5 officers until his statement was illicited, "I don't want to go to prison....." The truth is that these fish were measured frozen off shore and thawed on shore. The FWC (state) officer did not know fish shrink, so the only reason that these fish could be bigger was a swap. There is no difference between a 19 1/2 fish or 19 3/4 fish, short fish is short fish, the ticket was written. In addition the FWC officer testified at trial, he does not measure fish in accordance with federal law. There was a document prepared by the FWC expert that said yes, fish shrink and if these had been measured correctly they averaged over 20 inches (offshore frozen). This was a smoke and mirror prosecution.

  2. I love this, Dave! Many congrats to you! We've come a long way from studying for the bar together! :)

  3. This outbreak illustrates the absurdity of the extreme positions taken by today's liberalism, specifically individualism and the modern cult of endless personal "freedom." Ebola reminds us that at some point the person's own "freedom" to do this and that comes into contact with the needs of the common good and "freedom" must be curtailed. This is not rocket science, except, today there is nonstop propaganda elevating individual preferences over the common good, so some pundits have a hard time fathoming the obvious necessity of quarantine in some situations....or even NATIONAL BORDERS...propagandists have also amazingly used this as another chance to accuse Western nations of "racism" which is preposterous and offensive. So one the one hand the idolatry of individualism has to stop and on the other hand facts people don't like that intersect with race-- remain facts nonetheless. People who respond to facts over propaganda do better in the long run. We call it Truth. Sometimes it seems hard to find.

  4. It would be hard not to feel the Kramers' anguish. But Catholic Charities, by definition, performed due diligence and held to the statutory standard of care. No good can come from punishing them for doing their duty. Should Indiana wish to change its laws regarding adoption agreements and or putative fathers, the place for that is the legislature and can only apply to future cases. We do not apply new laws to past actions, as the Kramers seem intent on doing, to no helpful end.

  5. I am saddened to hear about the loss of Zeff Weiss. He was an outstanding member of the Indianapolis legal community. My thoughts are with his family.

ADVERTISEMENT