Charges filed against homeowner accused of shooting Kansas City teenager Ralph Yarl

IN FACT, LET’S GO TO WHAT RIGHT NOW. CLARK COUNTY PROSECUTOR ZACK THOMPSON ADDRESSING REPORTERS. I WANT TO BEGIN BY SAYING THAT MY HEART GOES OUT TO THE CHILD AND FAMILY INVOLVED IN THIS CASE. MY GOAL DURING THIS PROCESS HAS BEEN AND WILL REMAIN TO BE SEEKING JUSTICE FOR HIM. I WISH HIM AND HIS FAMILY STRENGTH AND HEALING MOVING FORWARD. THIS AFTERNOON, MY OFFICE RECEIVED A CRIMINAL REFERRAL FROM THE KANSAS CITY, MISSOURI POLICE DEPARTMENT. AFTER A THOROUGH REVIEW OF THE CASE FILE, THE APPROPRIATE LAWS AND INFORMATION GAINED DURING THE INVESTIGATION PHASE OF THE CASE, I FILED TWO FELONY COUNTS IN COUNT ONE. THE DEFENDANT, ANDREW D LESTER, IS CHARGED WITH THE CLASS A FELONY OF ASSAULT IN THE FIRST DEGREE. IN THAT ON OR ABOUT APRIL 13TH, 2023, IN CLARK COUNTY, MISSOURI, HE KNOWINGLY CAUSED PHYSICAL INJURY TO P BY SHOOTING HIM. THIS IS AN A FELONY. IT CARRIES WITH IT A RANGE OF PUNISHMENT OF UP TO LIFE. IN COUNT TWO, THE DEFENDANT IS CHARGED WITH ARMED CRIMINAL ACTION. THIS IS AN UNCLASSIFIED FELONY AND CARRIES WITH IT A RANGE OF PUNISHMENT BETWEEN 3 TO 15 YEARS. THE STATE IS ALLEGING THE DEFENDANT COMMITTED THE FELONY OF ASSAULT IN THE FIRST DEGREE AS CHARGED IN COUNT ONE BY WITH AND THROUGH THE KNOWING USE ASSISTANCE AND AID OF A DEADLY WEAPON. AS A RESULT OF THESE CHARGES, A WARRANT WAS ISSUED FOR MR. LOESSER’S ARREST AND BOND WAS SET AT $200,000. OUR OFFICE WORKED CLOSELY WITH THE CITY MISSOURI POLICE DEPARTMENT DURING THIS CASE AND WE WOULD NOT BE HERE TODAY. BUT FOR THEIR HARD WORK. WE UNDERSTAND HOW FRUSTRATING THIS HAS BEEN, BUT I CAN ASSURE YOU THAT THE CRIMINAL JUSTICE SYSTEM IS WORKING AND WILL CONTINUE TO WORK. AS WITH ANY SERIOUS CASE, WE APPROACHED THIS ONE IN AN OBJECTIVE AND IMPARTIAL MANNER. WE LOOK FORWARD TO OBTAINING A JUST RESULT. WITH THAT BEING SAID AND UNDERSTANDING, THIS IS A PENDING CRIMINAL MATTER. I WILL DO MY BEST TO ANSWER A FEW QUESTIONS. MR. PRESIDENT, OVER THE PAST FOUR, HOW DO I DO SO QUICKLY? JUST YESTERDAY WE WERE DOING A NEWS CONFERENCE AND SO LITTLE WAS KNOWN. NOW THE CASE FILES FRONT OF OUR CASE TODAY. AND WE’RE HERE JUST A COUPLE OF HOURS LATER. A CHARGING DECISION WAS NOT MADE UNTIL A THOROUGH REVIEW OF THE FILE OCCURRED. WE WORK CLOSELY WITH THE KANSAS CITY, MISSOURI POLICE DEPARTMENT DURING THE COURSE OF THE INVESTIGATION AND USE INFORMATION FROM THAT INVESTIGATION IN MAKING OUR DECISION. WHAT EMERGES FROM THIS CLUSTER IN CUSTODY? MY UNDERSTANDING IS MR. LESTER IS NOT IN CUSTODY. THE ARREST WARRANT WAS RECENTLY ISSUED. IT’S MY UNDERSTANDING THAT THE APPROPRIATE LAW ENFORCEMENT AGENCIES HAVE THIS INFORMATION AND ARE TAKING APPROPRIATE ACTION. WHILE MURDER CHARGES FOR ATTEMPTED MURDER, SURE, THE DEFENDANT IS CHARGED WITH AN EIGHT FELONY. IT’S THE HIGHEST LEVEL OF OFFENSE IN THE STATE OF MISSOURI. IT CARRIES WITH IT A RANGE OF PUNISHMENT OF 10 TO 30 YEARS OR LIFE IMPRISONMENT. OTHER CHARGES MAY NOT CARRY THAT SAME LEVEL OF RANGE OF PUNISHMENT. CAN YOU SAY ANYTHING ABOUT WHAT HAPPENED. I DON’T WANT TO LITIGATE THIS CASE IN THE PRESS. IT’S BEEN MY GOAL FROM THE VERY BEGINNING TO GET JUSTICE FOR THE CHILD INVOLVED IN THE CASE. AND I DON’T WANT TO JEOPARDIZE THAT BY TALKING ABOUT THE FACTS TO THE MEDIA. OUR POSSIBLE HATE CRIME CHARGES POTENTIALLY HERE. SO IN THE STATE OF MISSOURI, HATE CRIMES CAN BE OR FELONIES WHICH CARRY WITH IT A LOWER RANGE OF PUNISHMENT THAN WHAT THE DEFENDANT IS CURRENTLY CHARGED WITH. BUT THEY CAN STILL BE BROUGHT. I’M NOT SURE I UNDERSTAND. YOU CAN STILL ADD ADDITIONAL CHARGES, AT LEAST AT THAT POINT. YOU WOULD BE TALKING ABOUT DOUBLE, DOUBLE JEOPARDY ISSUES, QUESTIONS THAT PEOPLE HAVE BEEN ASKING WHEN IT’S APPROPRIATE FOR POLICE TO THE FIRST. I KNOW THAT THE MEN AND WOMEN OF THE KANSAS CITY POLICE DEPARTMENT WORKED VERY HARD ON THIS CASE. THERE WERE THINGS THAT HAD TO BE DONE IN ORDER TO BUILD IT ON A SOLID FOUNDATION. THAT MEANS ATTEMPTING TO GET A FORMAL STATEMENT FROM THE WITNESS IN THE CASE. THAT MEANS WAITING FOR FORENSIC LABORATORY RESULTS TO BE PROCESSED. WORK STARTS TOMORROW. I DON’T HAVE THAT INFORMATION. WAS THERE A RACIAL COMPONENT TO THIS CASE? AS THE PROSECUTOR, CLAY COUNTY, I CAN TELL YOU THERE WAS A RACIAL COMPONENT TO THE CASE. CAN YOU EVER. I’M NOT SURE I’D BE. WHAT? WHAT DO YOU MEAN? WAS THERE WAS ANYTHING SAID THAT MADE ME BELIEVE THAT THIS WAS A RACIALLY MOTIVATED SHOOTING? SURE. EVERYONE HERE, WE’VE MADE COPIES OF THE PROBABLE CAUSE STATEMENT TO HAND OUT TO MEMBERS OF THE PRESS. THERE IS NO INDICATION OF ANYTHING LIKE THAT WITHIN THE PROBABLE CAUSE STATEMENT. WHAT’S THE RESULT OF THE STAND YOUR GROUND COUNCIL DOCTRINE? ALL THAT. PEOPLE WERE ASKING WHETHER I WOULD BE BACK IN. SURE. SELF-DEFENSE IN THE STATE OF MISSOURI IS CONTROLLED BY. SECTION 565031 IN STATES SUBJECT TO THE PROVISIONS CONTAINED IN THE STATUTE THAT A PERSON MAY USE PHYSICAL FORCE UPON ANOTHER PERSON TO THE EXTENT HE OR SHE REASONABLY BELIEVES SUCH TO BE NECESSARY TO DEFEND HIMSELF OR HERSELF OR A THIRD PERSON FROM WHAT HE OR SHE REASONABLY BELIEVES TO BE THE USE OF IMMINENT USE OR UNLAWFUL FORCE. BEYOND THAT, I DON’T WANT TO COMMENT SPECIFICS ON THE CASE IN ORDER TO PROTECT THE INTEGRITY OF THE PROCESS. DO YOU KNOW WHEN THERE WAS ONLY HOPE FOR ABOUT AN HOUR AS THE POLICE DEPARTMENT? SO IN MISSOURI, THE CHARGES HAVE TO BE FILED WITHIN 24 HOURS OF ARREST OR THE DEFENDANT OR SUSPECT IS RELEASED. IN THIS CASE, IT WAS CLEAR THAT ADDITIONAL INVESTIGATION NEEDED TO BE DONE SO THAT THE CASE COULD BE BUILT ON A SOLID FOUNDATION. DO YOU BELIEVE HE’S STILL IN THE AREA? I DON’T HAVE ANY INFORMATION REGARDING HIS SPECIFIC WHEREABOUTS, BUT IT’S MY UNDERSTANDING LAW ENFORCEMENT IS AWARE OF THE SITUATION AND TAKING ALL APPROPRIATE ACTION. THIS HE HAS A CRIMINAL HISTORY TO KNOW AND AND THIS IS I HATE TO SOUND REPEAT MYSELF, BUT I WOULD NOT THINK IT’S APPROPRIATE TO COMMENT ON ANYONE’S CRIMINAL HISTORY TO THE MEDIA. AND THAT’S THE REASON I’M DOING THAT, IS BECAUSE I WANT TO ACHIEVE JUSTICE FOR THE VICTIM IN THE CASE. AND I DON’T WANT TO JEOPARDIZE THAT BY LITIGATING THE CASE IN THE MEDIA. YOU DON’T THE AUDIENCE FEEL THIS WAY? THIS THE DEFENDANT? I’M SORRY. YES, I. HE’S 85 YEARS OLD. 85. AND A WHITE MALE. BLACK. HE’S A WHITE MALE. AND HOW MANY TIMES DID MR. LESTER SHOOT THE YOUNG MAN? THE PROBABLE CAUSE STATEMENT INDICATES THAT HE SHOT TWICE IN WHICH AREA OF THE BODY, THE HEAD AND ARM. WHERE MR. LESTER WAS. BUT HE SHOT INSIDE THE HOUSE. IT DOES CONTAIN INFORMATION ABOUT THE WHEREABOUTS OF MR. LESTER WHEN HE DISCHARGES FIREARMS. DID YOU SHOOT THROUGH A GLASS DOOR OR WINDOW? THE PROBABLE CAUSE STATEMENT INDICATES THAT ROUNDS WERE FIRED THROUGH A GLASS DOOR AND THE YOUNG MAN NEVER ENTERED THE HOME IN ANY WAY. THEY WERE ON THE FRONT DOORSTEP, PRESUMABLY. THE PROBABLE CAUSE STATEMENT INDICATES THAT THE VICTIM IN THE CASE DID NOT CROSS THE THRESHOLD TO BE KNOCK ON THE DOOR RINGING THE BELL. THAT SO THOSE FACTS MAY BE IN DISPUTE. SO I’M NOT GOING TO COMMENT ON THAT. AND IT’S STILL YOUR OPINION OR THE BELIEF THAT THEY WERE THERE. SPEAKING OF SIBLINGS AND THEY WERE THERE BY THE STATE, THAT’S THAT’S THE EVIDENCE WE HAVE IN THE PROBABLE CAUSE STATEMENT. SO DO THESE CHARGES MEAN, IN YOUR JUDGMENT, MR. LESTER DID NOT ACT REASONABLY. AFTER A THOROUGH REVIEW OF THE CASE, THE FACTS OF THE CASE, I BELIEVE THAT A FELONY ASSAULT CHARGES WERE APPROPRIATE AND ALSO ARMED CRIMINAL ACTION CHARGES. CAN YOU TELL US, PLEASE, BOTH. WHEN THEY INTERACTED THE PROBABLE CAUSE STATEMENT DOES NOT INDICATE THAT ANY WORDS WERE EXCHANGED. ARE YOU AWARE OF THE POTENTIAL SOME OF THOSE FACTS IN DISPUTE AS FAR AS SURVEILLANCE OR POLICE ACTIVITY AS PART OF THE INVESTIGATION? LAW ENFORCEMENT INVESTIGATED THAT POSSIBILITY THAT THE INCIDENT WOULD HAVE BEEN CAUGHT ON CAMERA, ON VIDEO. THAT IS NOT PART OF THE CASE FILE. DID ANYONE ELSE WITNESS THIS. IT’S MY UNDERSTANDING NO. THE PROBABLE CAUSE STATEMENT DOES NOT INDICATE THAT. AND WHEN THERE WAS NO DOORBELL VIDEO. I’M SORRY, WE ALREADY ANSWERED THAT. BUT WERE THERE ANY OTHER VIDEO OF ANY TYPE? SURE. THE PROBABLE CAUSE STATEMENT INDICATES THAT THERE WAS NO VIDEO OF THE INCIDENT. YOU KNOW WHAT KIND OF. IT WAS? A 32 REVOLVER. MR. LESTER HAD A RIGHT TO PRIVACY. I’M SORT OF INTIMATE WITH THAT. THE PEOPLE WERE. I DON’T HAVE ANY INFORMATION IN REGARD TO THAT. WHAT LEVEL? I DON’T. I DON’T THINK YOU’LL BE SPEAKING ON THE CLASS. THEY TOLD ME DURING THE FIRST OR SO. SO THE RANGE OF PUNISHMENT ON THE EIGHT FELONY IS BETWEEN TEN AND 30 YEARS OR LIFE IMPRISONMENT, RANGE OF PUNISHMENT OR CRIMINAL ACTION IS 3 TO 15 YEARS. AND THAT BEING SAID, THAT’S THE RANGE OF PUNISHMENT AVAILABLE IN THE CASE. AS FAR AS TRIAL STRATEGY AND TALKING ABOUT THE CASE AND LITIGATING IN THE CASE IN THE MEDIA. I’M NOT GOING TO DO THAT BECAUSE IT’S IMPORTANT TO ME TO PROTECT THE INTEGRITY OF THE PROCESS AND GET JUSTICE FOR THE VICTIM. THE CONVERSATION’S BEEN LIKE WITH THE FAMILY. WE ARE CONTINUING TO MAKE EFFORTS TO SPEAK WITH THE FAMILY. I VISITED THE HOUSE TODAY AND I LOOK FORWARD TO COMMUNICATING WITH THEM FURTHER. I JUST WANT TO CLARIFY, YOU KNOW, I MADE NO MADE CONTACT WITH LESTER SINCE. I’M SORRY. YOU’RE NOT ME. CONTACT WITH LESTER. I’VE NOT MADE CONTACT WITH THE DEFENDANT. NO. WHAT WOULD BE YOUR MESSAGE TO THE COMMUNITY. MY MESSAGE TO THE COMMUNITY IS THAT IN CLAY COUNTY, WE ENFORCE THE LAWS AND WE FOLLOW THE LAWS. AND THAT DOES NOT MATTER WHERE YOU COME FROM OR WHAT YOU LOOK LIKE OR HOW MUCH MONEY YOU HAVE. EVERYONE IS HELD TO THE SAME STANDARD, AND NOTHING ABOUT THIS PROCESS WAS DIFFERENT THAN ANY OTHER INVESTIGATION. ANYONE. I THINK THE KANSAS CITY POLICE DEPARTMENT WORKED EXTREMELY HARD. LAB RESULTS WERE OBTAINED ON AN EXTREMELY SHORT TIMELINE. THAT’S NOT SOMETHING YOU SEE EVERY DAY. ALL RIGHT. IF THERE ARE NO MORE FURTHER QUESTIONS, I THANK YOU FOR YOUR