![[Greene County Daily World]](http://gcdailyworld.com/images/nameplate-small.png){kind=small}
RSS
Print
Email link
Respond to editor
Read comments (19)Neibrugge was found not guilty on three other counts he faced in Greene Superior Court.
The jury found Neibrugge guilty on the charge of criminal recklessness with a deadly weapon, a class C felony, and also guilty on the charge of residential entry, a class D felony.
He was acquitted on a class A felony charge of burglary; intimidation with a deadly weapon -- a class C felony; and pointing a firearm -- a class D felony.
After the verdicts were read, Greene Superior Judge J. David Holt ordered a pre-sentence investigation be completed by the probation department and set May 12 as the date of the sentencing hearing.
Neibrugge will remain free on bond until his sentencing.
He was arrested July 13, 2007 and originally faced 10 felony and misdemeanor charges. Five of the counts were dismissed on a pre-trial motion by the prosecution on April 18.
Niebrugge, who owns the N Zone bar on Vincennes Street in Linton, is alleged to have broken into the residence of Susan Pritchard on West Vincennes Street in Linton, gaining entry by breaking glass in a door, according to the probable cause affidavit.
Niebrugge was also accused of firing shots with a .9 mm handgun through the door and pointing the gun at a male subject and threatening his life. In addition, Niebrugge is alleged to have battered two women at the residence, grabbing them by the hair and banging their heads together, according to court records.
The trial started on Tuesday morning when 12 jurors and two alternates were seated. Testimony began Tuesday afternoon and continued through Wednesday and Thursday. Some witnesses were re-called to the stand on Thursday afternoon for rebuttal questioning before the court recessed at 2 p.m.
Following the recess, Judge Holt allowed 45 minutes for both the prosecution and the defense to present their closing arguments.
Defense attorney Jacob Fish appealed to the jury to find the defendant not guilty and stressed that the prosecution had not proven its case. Fish pointed to numerous inconsistencies in the testimony and the evidence.
"The stories don't match up. They don't. And that's a reasonable doubt," said Fish.
Fish pointed out that witnesses who were present during the incident did not see him point a weapon and they saw no weapon inside the home. Fish also argued that there was no mention of a gun in any of the written statements taken from those present within a couple of hours after the incident even though an officer had asked them to give as many details as possible.
Prosecutor Cheryl Stone asked the jury to find Neibrugge guilty.
"I ask you to hold him accountable for the violent actions he took that day due to his anger," said the deputy prosecutor.
Shortly before 5:30 p.m., the jury entered their deliberations. They returned to the courtroom at 8:20 p.m. and the verdicts were read.
america, they could call you up for jury duty. Would all juries still be 'dumb as a box of rocks' if you were on one?
there was reasonable doubt and they still found him guilty .... what fraud. juries are dumb as a box of rocks. they just do what the prosecuters want. There is no justice in america.
I do not believe that he was the only one to blame. Having known the so called victim i would have to say they are two peas in a pod.
Hmmm......did it occur to any of you that Judge Holt may be a little smarter than the average bear? Tony has already served over 50 days in jail...but you guys may have forgotten that. Did it
occur to anyone that maybe the incident didn't happen as reported? For all of you that are passing judgement, maybe you should have attended the hearing before you made your comments. FREE TONY!
It is unclear to me, gccitizen, why you find it ironic that any citizen would be engaging in free speech supporting the candidate of their choice.
That being said, the justice system may not always be perfect. However, each of us involved in the system have our own role to play. A prosecutor's job is to put all of the legally admissible evidence before a jury of the defendant's peers. The jurors, in turn, determine whether the prosecution has proven each element of the crime charged beyond a reasonable doubt. It is the job of the defense attorney to hold the prosecution to that standard. In the event of a conviction, the Court determines the possible penalties from a wide range of possibilities.
To state a concern over what may occur if "certain people running for judge" are elected indicates you do not fully understand the roles set forth above. If someone was acquitted of a charge, then perhaps the State did meet their burden. If someone did not get alot of time on a prior case that allows them to be in a position to hold up signs, perhaps their attorney pointed out some issues with the case. Either way, "that person" was doing their job, and doing it well. Greene County would be lucky to have such a person as a Judge.
You can't place the blame for someone losing his temper on being driven to it by others! Every one needs to be accountable for their OWN actions and if they don't like something - then change it or get away from it.
I for one am sick and tired of hearing about people getting upset and killing others, their own kids and then themselves.
This guy sounds like he was heading that way!
Faith in the justice system in Greene Co.? That is beyond laughable at best. I know of several multiple conviction drug offenders that still have done no time outside of a few months if that in Greene Co. jail. some were close to schools and parks and children were present when the arrests happened and little to nothing was done.
I am affraid to see where it goes if certain people running get to be judge.... it was ironic to be at the court house square a while ago and see two drug offenders walking across the grass holding signs for a certain person running for judge that had in the past couple years been their attorney in drug cases where the charges resulted in house arrest and little consequences.
How many cases will be moved or thrown out if some of these attorneys running get to sit on the bench due to conflicts of interest with repeat offenders they have gotten off????
I was being nice, she's not easiest person to talk, deal, or anything else with.
My understanding was the child was not there luckily but what if he had been? And I think the woman is still his ex if not then should they have a child in such a violent relationship?
what a rude thing to say! The woman needs her head banged ..again? Wow! But again we all have our own opinions. And YES a great BIG HUMM on BOTH cases! Not a shock this one. Wait and see I bet he will do NO time in any jail! And again..some were afraid to speak up. Wonder why?
HOW ANYONE CAN ENDANGER THEIR CHILD IS BEYOND ME. WHY WAS NOTHING DONE ABOUT THE ENDANGERMENT OF HIS CHILD, WAS THE CHILD THERE AT THE TIME?????
My thoughts exactly "GoGreeneCounty". Found guilty and free on bond... A Great Big HMMMMMM????!!!!!
What does this case have to do with the Lehman case? Two completely different issues in my opinion.
It's true no one is supposed to be above the law....it will be interesting to see how the Lehman issue develops...word is that he will walk away from it
I think you're seeing what you want to see. The JURY found him guilty or not guilty on the specific charges. No single person made the decision. Regardless of what you choose to believe, the fact is no special privileges were given. Nothing was done that isn't within the guidelines of the LAW and the discretion of the Judge. I'm not debating his innocence or guilt, I'm simply stating I have a little more faith in our justice system than you and I suspect no outside influence was able to dictate the outcome of the trial.
Coda you wrote:I don't see any of the "good ole' boy" system going on with this so let's not start pointing fingers.
I say everyone has a right to their opinions. It is evident that this guy has had a dangerous hot temper for a long time and getting by with things others sure couldn't. It was a miracle no one was seriously hurt or killed. He made the decision to use a gun to intimidate two women (one the mother of his child) and a man. And most frightening of all at the home of his child.Yet he is still allowed to see this child. And run a business? Lots of people know about this man's temper that has been out of control for many years. Now why do you suppose this is allowed? How many would still be able to have their child after doing something like this? This isn't the first time this man has showed this anger problem. If he is not stopped who might be his next victim? All those charges dropped and "He was acquitted on a class A felony charge of burglary; intimidation with a deadly weapon -- a class C felony; and pointing a firearm -- a class D felony. "
Seems very odd to a lot of us but then again most are afraid to speak up because oh yes
the "good ole' boy" system is still alive and well and fingers will be pointing like it or not.
The justice system is the justice system. I don't see any of the "good ole' boy" system going on with this so let's not start pointing fingers.
"FREE ON BOND"?
Found guilty & free on bond. Hmmm
I think he should serve time, no one is above the law!