Having viewed the testimony of all witnesses the state called in the trial centered in a shooting death at the Ace of Clubs Tavern in Hoquiam last September, the jury has recessed to deliberate the verdict.
The jury will reconvene in the trial of Michael Robert Moore, 58, on Tuesday morning to continue their deliberations.
Both the defense and prosecution made their closing arguments on Friday, with the prosecution, led by Jason Walker, asking jurors who, exactly — Moore or if the victim, Steven Button — was defending themself when Moore drew a revolver and killed Button with a single point blank shot in a parking lot behind the bar.
“Was the killing — was the assault, the defendant using his firearm against Steve button — justified?” Walker asked the jury in a strident address in the county courthouse on Friday afternoon. “If you are the first aggressor and you start the fight, you don’t get to cry self-defense.”
Walker’s argument was that Moore created the circumstances that led to the fight, taking the first acts of aggression in every case.
“You know the firearm is a deadly weapon. You know the defendant used his weapon to shoot Steve Button,” Walker said. “He went into that bar with an attitude, and a gun, and a bottle of whiskey. He said horrible things to the bartender, flipped off the patrons.”
Walker highlighted the actions of the pair, replaying video of the two scrapping in the parking lot, being particularly keen to point to a moment where Button, then breaking off from the engagement, reengages as Moore appears to reach for something in the grainy security footage. Moore could have been reaching for a fallen weapon — his handgun, or perhaps a broken liquor bottle, Walker said, something that prompted Button to bore back in on Moore, seconds before he was shot.
“The defendant has gotten himself up and is reaching toward the ground,” Walker said. “It doesn’t matter if he was going for the black spot or the bottle. Steve Button is entitled to act”
Ruth Rivas, making the closing statements for the defense, immediately addressed the notion that Moore was any sort of good person, but pointed out that being a bad person doesn’t preclude the right to protect one’s self.
“You see him behave in a way you might find inappropriate,” Rivas said. “Being a jerk and behaving in a way you shouldn’t does not deprive you of your right to defend yourself.”
Rivas pointed towards Button’s actions as dangerously escalating the conflict, and that while Moore was certainly cursing at the bartender and patrons, he never threatened anybody.
“We know from all the witnesses that Mr. Moore made no threats to anybody,” Rivas said. “He didn’t say I’m going to hit you, I’m going to shoot you.”
Button actively ratcheted up tensions as he spoke, then followed, and last fought Moore, Rivas said, pointing out Button’s much larger size in the situation, which took only minutes, or seconds.
“We’ve all seen people out in public acting like jerks,” Button said. “Typically, you just let them walk away, and they do that.”
While Button did appear to walk away, Rivas said, could Moore have been sure that the fight which, to that point, had been fairly one-sided, was over and that Button wasn’t intent on inflicting more injury on Moore than shoving him and striking him with a pool stick, which left marks detailed by testifying police officers.
“Mr. Button had already inflicted very serious injury on Mr. Moore,” Rivas said. “Mr. Moore, was he reasonable to believe more injury was coming?”
Moore’s use of a firearm was a lawful use of force in self-defense, Rivas said.
Following Walker’s rebuttal, the jury began their closeted deliberations on the verdict of the trial. The jury could have a verdict as early as Tuesday morning.
Contact Senior Reporter Michael S. Lockett at 757-621-1197 or mlockett@thedailyworld.com.