Advertisement

firehouse pizza banner

Baker found not guilty of assault; guilty of disorderly conduct

Don Baker (a.k.a. Cousin Don) was found guilty on disorderly conduct charges, but not guilty on assault 4th degree late Friday afternoon on charges stemming from a 2010 altercation with Morgantown Police (MPD) Sergeant Andy Gidcumb. For the guilty verdict, Baker was fined $100 and will also be assessed court costs.

The altercation took place on December 1, 2010 outside Baker's residence on Nylas Avenue in Morgantown. According to testimony given during the trial, Baker ordered food from Pizza Zone and made complaints to Dale Willis, owner of Pizza Zone, about the Morgantown Police Department and more particularly Sergeant Gidcumb. Upon leaving the Baker residence, Willis called Gidcumb and passed along the comments that Baker had made during their short conversation. Gidcumb then went over to the Baker residence to talk to Baker about the complaints made to Willis about Gidcumb's job performance, as well as the performance of the MPD. This discussion turned into a heated argument which led to profanity being used by both men with Baker allegedly telling Gidcumb that he was a Marine and he was going to "whoop his Air Force ***" and Gidcumb allegedly called Cousin Don a "chicken ****." A scuffle ensued resulting in Gidcumb receiving several blows to the head from a cordless phone Baker had in his hand. Gidcumb then subdued Baker and had Larry Selvidge, an employee of Baker's and witness to the altercation, call 911. Then, MPD officers and current Sheriff's Deputy Chris Reneer responded to the scene and helped Gidcumb subdue Baker and place him in the back of Reneer's patrol car. Baker was still uncooperative when MPD Chief Billy Phelps arrived on scene and Chief Phelps instructed Officer Reneer to place Baker under arrest for disorderly conduct and assault 4th degree.

Several inconsistencies came out during the course of the testimony by the witnesses. There was differing testimony as to whether Gidcumb removed a jacket and made a menacing pose as he stepped out of his police Tahoe upon arrival at the Baker residence. Selvidge testified that Gidcumb removed his jacket, crossed his arms, and glared at Baker until he ended his phone call while Gidcumb testified that he almost never wears a jacket. Those involved could not agree as to who initiated the scuffle. Baker and Selvidge stated that Gidcumb made the first move, while Gidcumb said Baker did. There were also inconsistencies as to how Baker ended up on the ground. In a statement written shortly after the incident, Gidcumb reported that he used an "academy approved straight arm bar take-down" to subdue Baker, however, during testimony Gidcumb said that Baker stumbled and fell to the ground. Gidcumb initially he reported that he called Baker a "chicken ****" but on the stand he said he merely referred to the whole situation as "chicken ****." Another inconsistency that came out was whether or not Baker was in fact intoxicated. In his report, Gidcumb stated that Baker was intoxicated but while on the stand he said that Baker was merely under the influence of alcohol. Baker admitted to drinking a glass of wine over the course of the day, but nothing more.

After hearing all of the testimony, the jury needed only 40 minutes to find Baker guilty of disorderly conduct, but not guilty of assault 4th degree.

* * *

Story by Katie Kirby, Beech Tree News.

Tags: 

Comments

Ok this is a load of crap when a cop can come to your house and provoke you into an altercation as they call it just because you make a personal opinion statement about them.Lord I hope I don't ever need these cops around here for anything.I'll stick with KSP
Kathy,THANK YOU THE CUZ
Well now that my comments were posted should I look for all the city and county cops to show up at my house because they don;t like it.Well guys if you decide to pay me a visit please bring some yard rakes trash bags etc. and we will have a yard cleaning party instead of an altercation
How does it not matter that this was on his own property? Because Andy's a cop, it's okay for him to show up at his residence for no other reason than a troublemaker called Andy to help instigate an incident? Don getting in any trouble at all is an absurd violation of freedom of speech and the right to property. If the law was truly just, Dale could get in trouble for being a mouth-running troublemaker - I mean, what did he honestly think he was accomplishing by calling Andy and telling him those things if it wasn't to cause some sort of trouble? And Andy wouldn't even be a cop anymore for abusing his position of power and training to try and intimidate ANY citizen ANYWHERE, let alone a citizen twice his age on that person's property.
What about freedom of speech?
This is just crazy!! What about freedom of speech! Its a shame that all a person has to do is make a comment about someone and the police will come to a persons residence and make fools of their selves just cause they do not like what has been said about them!!!!
Karen,THE TRUTH WILL SET YOU FREE BUT IT MAY NOT KEEP YOU FROM GOING TO JAIL....That bread and water i was feed during my 90 minute stay in the BIG HOUSE is something i try not to think about much,It felt like was staring thru them cold cold jail bars for a hour and a half of my life...LMAO.. Thank you and all my kinfolks for your support. Thank you very much,LaCuz
Policemen should not over react to second hand info until it is substanuated. From what I read the decision to give a knee jerk reaction to second hand info compromised the individuals job and ability to interact with the public and make rational decisions concerning the public.


Bookmark and Share

Advertisements