Crime and Cask News
The case against Ryan Jordan Lindler Sr., 52, and his son Ryan Lindler Jr., 26, of Lexington County, SC has captivated the local community and sparked a complex legal battle over self-defense, property rights, and the tragic death of their neighbor, Kevin Lester Newhouse. What began as a dispute over alleged trespassing has escalated into a high-profile case that pits two starkly different narratives against each other.
The Incident
On December 6, 2023, in rural South Carolina, a confrontation between the Lindlers and their neighbor, Kevin Newhouse, ended in violence. According to the Lindlers, who operate Lindler Farms, they were defending their property when Newhouse, armed with a machete, allegedly threatened them. The elder Lindler claims to have disarmed Newhouse, only to then instruct his son to shoot in self-defense. Ryan Jr. allegedly fired three to four rounds from a Glock pistol, hitting Newhouse in the head and killing him.
However, the Newhouse family, represented by South Carolina attorney Lori Murry, offers a starkly different account. Murry argues that it was the Lindlers who were trespassing on Kevin Newhouse’s property and that they initiated the violent encounter. She points out that Kevin, who often carried a machete for clearing brush on his overgrown property, was unarmed with any other weapon when the fatal shots were fired. Murry describes the shooting as a “murder” rather than an act of self-defense.
Ryan Lindler Sr and Ryan Lindler Jr. Photo: Lexington County
The Legal Battle
The Lindlers were granted bond shortly after their arrest, with their attorney expressing relief at the court’s decision to allow them to remain free while awaiting trial. The attorney emphasized the Lindlers’ deep roots in the community and their previously unblemished criminal records, noting that both men are well-known and respected in the area.
The case is expected to center on the concept of self-defense and the right to protect property. The Lindlers’ defense will likely hinge on the claim that they were within their rights to defend themselves against what they perceived as a lethal threat from Newhouse. The fact that the elder Lindler reportedly disarmed Newhouse before the shooting could complicate this defense, as it raises questions about whether the threat was still imminent when the shots were fired.
On the other hand, Murry argues that Kevin Newhouse was the one who had the legal right to stand his ground on his own property. She highlights that Kevin was unarmed when he was shot, making the Lindlers’ actions not justifiable under the stand-your-ground law. Murry also disputes the severity of the injuries that the Lindlers claim to have sustained from the machete, suggesting they were minor and did not justify the use of deadly force.
Kevin’s mother, Joanie Newhouse, who witnessed the incident, is expected to be a key witness in the trial. According to Murry, Joanie will testify that her son was unarmed and trying to retreat to his house when he was attacked by the Lindlers. Her testimony could be crucial in undermining the Lindlers’ self-defense claim.
Community Division and Upcoming Trial
The case has sharply divided the local community. At the bond hearing, over 500 supporters of the Lindlers packed the courtroom, reflecting the strong local support for the father and son. Meanwhile, the Newhouse family continues to seek justice for Kevin, arguing that his death was a senseless act of violence rather than a justified use of force.
As the case progresses, it is expected to test the boundaries of South Carolina’s stand-your-ground law and could set a significant legal precedent. The upcoming stand-your-ground hearing will be a pivotal moment in the case, as the court will determine whether the Lindlers can legally claim that they were defending themselves on Kevin Newhouse’s property.
South Carolina’s Stand Your Ground law allows individuals to use deadly force in self-defense without the duty to retreat when they are in a place they have a legal right to be. The law applies if a person reasonably believes they are at imminent risk of death, serious bodily injury, or a violent crime. It extends beyond the home to any location where the individual has a right to be, providing legal protection against prosecution or civil suits if the use of force is deemed justified under these circumstances.
In the meantime, both families are preparing for a trial that promises to be emotionally charged and legally complex. The Lindlers, who were preparing for a wedding in the family before the incident, now face the grim reality of a murder trial. On the other side, the Newhouse family is mourning the loss of a son and seeking accountability for what they believe was an unjust killing.
This case underscores the complexities of self-defense laws and the tragic consequences that can arise when neighbors’ disputes escalate into violence. Crime and Cask will continue to follow this case closely as it develops.
