Ríhanna Kelver, a transgender Laramie woman who drew a gun on a man in what she has said was an act of self-defense, isn’t immune from prosecution under Wyoming’s stand your ground laws, a judge ruled Monday.

“While Ms. Kelver did not have a duty to retreat because she was not the initial aggressor, she was not entitled to use deadly force because she was not in danger of imminent death or serious bodily injury and a reasonable person in like circumstance would not have judged her actions necessary to prevent imminent death or serious bodily injury,” Albany County District Judge Misha Westby stated in her ruling. 

Kelver, who is facing felony charges for aggravated assault and possession of a deadly weapon, can still raise self-defense arguments if the case moves to trial, Westby stated. 

The case against Kelver, a vocal trans rights activist, has drawn national attention, with media and observers asking why a trans woman faced criminal charges for her actions in a state with a stand-your-ground law. 

The charges stem from a September 2025 incident in downtown Laramie, when Kelver pulled a gun on a man, Scott Durham, after he had pushed her to the ground. The encounter was recorded by a surveillance camera. 

Accounts differ as to what led to the altercation. According to Kelver’s testimony, Durham had allegedly taunted her as she sat in front of the Crowbar & Grill before a late-night shift, yelling that “the [Crowbar] should be closing you bunch of fags.” Kelver asked him, “What the fuck did you say?” 

Kelver recounted at a hearing last week that Durham allegedly told her: “I’ll fuck you up, faggot,” and “I’ll fucking kill you, you fucking faggot.” According to a Laramie police affidavit, Durham told police that he had yelled “‘fuck the Crowbar because he likes the Buckhorn Bar better,” without using slurs aimed at Kelver.

Kelver began walking toward Durham and his two companions with her right hand near a satchel at her hip, according to video footage and court filings, meeting them in the crosswalk at the intersection of 2nd Street and Ivinson Avenue. The satchel contained Kelver’s firearm. 

Durham then “put both hands” on Kelver’s chest and “forcefully shoved her,” causing her to fall. When she hit the pavement, Kelver pulled a pistol out of her bag, racked the slide and pointed it at Durham, who continued to walk past her. She lowered the pistol and stood when “it became apparent” to her that Durham was “disengaging from the encounter.”

When Laramie police later questioned her, Kelver said she had brandished a knife, not a gun, and that her firearm was in her car, the police affidavit states. She later disclosed that she had a gun in her bag. Officers took the firearm, which had a chambered round.

Called to the witness stand during a hearing last week, Kelver said she had carried a pocket knife as a “defensive item” when she was in town. She was having a “PTSD response” after the incident and couldn’t “clearly at that moment recall the events,” she said. “So I was attempting to operate off the best information I could remember, being told I had pulled a weapon. I believed I had pulled the knife.”

Durham is currently considered the victim in the case. The Laramie Reporter and CU Independent reported he was once a member of Patriot Front, a white supremacist group, and has a history of posting online content targeting minorities. 

Westby stated that evidence doesn’t show Kelver was the initial aggressor, given that Durham was “the first person to make a physical act of aggression” when he shoved Kelver to the ground. Further, the judge elaborates that “no evidence presented” countered that Kelver “had an honest belief that she was in danger of a further attack” when she drew her gun. 

But a “reasonable person in like circumstances” as Kelver wouldn’t “judge her threatened use of deadly force as necessary in that moment to prevent imminent death or [serious] bodily injury,” Westby wrote. By the time Kelver crossed the street, appearing to veer into Durham’s path, there were “only two men in the vicinity,” she explained. After Durham pushed Kelver, he “continued walking” as she fell to the ground, and “did not look” at her again “until she racked the firearm and pointed it at him.” 

“He was walking past her position,” Westby writes. “His hands were visible on the video from the shove and even when he is walking past her.” There was “no evidence” that Durham “possessed or mentioned a weapon of any kind.” 

Meanwhile, the other man in the vicinity “purposefully walked around” Kelver and didn’t “have any interaction or even look at her” until she drew and pointed her gun at Durham, Westy wrote. 

Westby’s decision follows last week’s “John hearing” — named after a 2018 Wyoming self-defense case — to decide whether Kelver could be immune from prosecution under the state’s self-defense laws. 

Arguing that Kelver was not the initial aggressor and that she feared further attack, Kelver’s attorney, Laramie-based Andrew Holcomb, pointed to a study that found transgender people experience violent victimization at a rate of almost five times more than non-LGBTQ people. Holcomb asserted that this context is “relevant to how Ms. Kelver perceived the risk that this verbal hostility could become physical violence.”

In her Monday ruling, Westby acknowledged “the general concerns raised by Ms. Kelver as a transgender woman.” 

While Kelver can raise a self-defense argument at trial, the burden of proof will be higher. 

This is a breaking story and may be updated.

Maya Shimizu Harris covers public safety for WyoFile. She was previously a freelance writer and the state politics reporter for the Casper Star-Tribune.

Join the Conversation

1 Comment

WyoFile's goal is to provide readers with information and ideas that foster constructive conversations about the issues and opportunities our communities face. One small piece of how we do that is by offering a space below each story for readers to share perspectives, experiences and insights. For this to work, we need your help.

What we're looking for: 

  • Your real name — first and last. 
  • Direct responses to the article. Tell us how your experience relates to the story.
  • The truth. Share factual information that adds context to the reporting.
  • Thoughtful answers to questions raised by the reporting or other commenters.
  • Tips that could advance our reporting on the topic.
  • No more than three comments per story, including replies. 

What we block from our comments section, when we see it:

  • Pseudonyms. WyoFile stands behind everything we publish, and we expect commenters to do the same by using their real name.
  • Comments that are not directly relevant to the article. 
  • Demonstrably false claims, what-about-isms, references to debunked lines of rhetoric, professional political talking points or links to sites trafficking in misinformation.
  • Personal attacks, profanity, discriminatory language or threats.
  • Arguments with other commenters.

Other important things to know: 

  • Appearing in WyoFile’s comments section is a privilege, not a right or entitlement. 
  • We’re a small team and our first priority is reporting. Depending on what’s going on, comments may be moderated 24 to 48 hours from when they’re submitted — or even later. If you comment in the evening or on the weekend, please be patient. We’ll get to it when we’re back in the office.
  • We’re not interested in managing squeaky wheels, and even if we wanted to, we don't have time to address every single commenter’s grievance. 
  • Try as we might, we will make mistakes. We’ll fail to catch aliases, mistakenly allow folks to exceed the comment limit and occasionally miss false statements. If that’s going to upset you, it’s probably best to just stick with our journalism and avoid the comments section.
  • We don’t mediate disputes between commenters. If you have concerns about another commenter, please don’t bring them to us.

The bottom line:

If you repeatedly push the boundaries, make unreasonable demands, get caught lying or generally cause trouble, we will stop approving your comments — maybe forever. Such moderation decisions are not negotiable or subject to explanation. If civil and constructive conversation is not your goal, then our comments section is not for you. 

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

  1. “”Kelver began walking toward Durham and his two companions with her right hand near a satchel at her hip””

    This is where the problem lies.

    Stand your ground and no duty to retreat does not include advancing towards/escalating a confrontation.